Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Judge St Eve issued her decision this morning in the case brought
against the Orthodox Baha'is and others by the Wilmette NSA, finding
that the OBF was not in privity with the NSA under the Hereditary
Guardianship (Mason Remey's organization) and therefore the Judgment
is not binding upon the OBF and it could not be held in contempt of
court.
I will have the Judge's opinion posted shortly and will notify you.
Jeffrey

http://trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court_case.html
Jeffrey

Jeffrey,

Thank you for letting us know the good news! And congratulations!

I've just read both the Opinion and Motion. Here are my highlights
for anyone interested in avoiding a lot of the legalese, admittedly
beyond my comprehesion:



Contempt Motion by Wilmette NSA
& Response by Orthodox Bahá'í Faith
http://trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court_case.html

http://www.truebahai.com/court/139-opinion.pdf

http://www.truebahai.com/court/140-judgment.pdf


"[T]he chain of successorship lacks a link," wrote the Honorable Amy J. St Eve, United States District Court Judge,
in her Judgment in favor of theChicago_trial_january_7_2008_006 Orthodox Bahai Faith and the Baha'i Publishers
Under the Provisions of the Covenant. The Court ruled on April 23, 2008 after holding an evidentiary hearing last
January 7, 2008 in Chicago, Illinois on the contempt motion brought by the National Spiritual Assembly of the
Baha'is of the United States (Wilmette NSA).

Click here for courtroom art images of the hearing

In her decision, the Court stated that: "the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that
there was a significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership
varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate
the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no
substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella,
and the PNBC have not violated the injunction."


Click Here for Judge's Opinion

Click Here for Judgment

Excerpts:

p: 12
II. Application To The Court's Findings of Fact
Applying the above-stated principles here, none of the Alleged Contemnors is in privity
with the bound entity, and thus none has violated the injunction. In rendering this finding, the
Court has carefully and deliberately weighed all of the evidence adduced at the hearing and
otherwise submitted by the parties. The Court closely assessed the demeanor of each testifying
witness, including his or her body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, mannerisms, and
other factors indicative of credibility.

p. 27
Rather,
the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant
doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied
materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent
to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction.
Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a
result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction.

p. 31
After considering the full record in this case, the Court finds that SIBC and the BPUPC
are not in privity with the NSA-UHG....

p. 32
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court finds that the Alleged Contemnors are not in privity
with the NSA-UHG and, in turn, that they are not in contempt of the injunction.

Jugde Amy J. St. Eve
April 23, 2008

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Until the Judgment becomes final, I am afraid I cannot comment on
those questions.
Thank you all for your congratulations. I am of course very happy with
Judge St Eve's impressive opinion and all of the Orthodox Baha'is look
forward to the day when we can continue to publicly practice our
religion without interference from the violating Wilmette NSA.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I'd urge you to consider the history of the nsa, whether from your
perspective, the last fifty years, or over eighty years, from view. It has
incessantly harassed and hounded people for matters of conscience,
deeply injured countless individuals and families, schemed and
conspired, coerced and deceived, used the most despicable tactics,
to deprive fellow citizens of their Constitutional right to freedom of
religious belief and conviction.

Such criminals should now be shown no mercy whatsoever, but
prosecuted to the fullest extent of American law. They would have shown
Orthodox Baha'is no mercy or tolerance if they had prevailed in deceiving
the Court. Indeed, the obvious purpose of their lawsuit was to strip you of
your civil rights, while pretending to be a mere corporation. Anything less
than many tens of millions of dollars will fail to penetrate their corrupt
mentality and fail to protect present and future Bahais, of all persuasions,
from their sick, complacent self-righteousness. It is just to expose them for
what they have become and are. "The best of all to Me is Justice." --Baha'u'llah

There's a very long and detailed historical record of their criminal acts,
in numerous books and on the Internet. As you're probably aware,
there also exists a large number of people most likely eager to testify in
court to defend the civilized values that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught,
which the corrupt "administration" left behind so many long decades ago.

Congratulations, again. You fought an arduous and noble battle, virtually
alone, out spent, yet won. It must be a gratifying feeling to know you have
successfully defended the most precious values of a civilized society
and of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. You can rightly be proud of that.

My deepest, sincere respect.

[Jeffrey]

On Apr 25, 6:13 am, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website

Until the Judgment becomes final, I am afraid I cannot comment on
those questions.
Thank you all for your congratulations. I am of course very happy with
Judge St Eve's impressive opinion and all of the Orthodox Baha'is look
forward to the day when we can continue to publicly practice our
religion without interference from the violating Wilmette NSA.
Jeffrey

--
Jeffrey,
I'd urge you to consider the history of the nsa, whether from your
perspective, the last fifty years, or over eighty years, from view. It has
incessantly harassed and hounded people for matters of conscience,
deeply injured countless individuals and families, schemed and
conspired, coerced and deceived, used the most despicable tactics,
to deprive fellow citizens of their Constitutional right to freedom of
religious belief and conviction.
Such criminals should now be shown no mercy whatsoever, but
prosecuted to the fullest extent of American law. They would have shown
Orthodox Baha'is no mercy or tolerance if they had prevailed in deceiving
the Court. Indeed, the obvious purpose of their lawsuit was to strip you of
your civil rights, while pretending to be a mere corporation. Anything less
than many tens of millions of dollars will fail to penetrate their corrupt
mentality and fail to protect present and future Bahais, of all persuasions,
from their sick, complacent self-righteousness. It is just to expose them for
what they have become and are. "The best of all to Me is Justice." --Baha'u'llah
There's a very long and detailed historical record of their criminal acts,
in numerous books and on the Internet. As you're probably aware,
there also exists a large number of people most likely eager to testify in
court to defend the civilized values that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught,
which the corrupt "administration" left behind so many long decades ago.
Congratulations, again. You fought an arduous and noble battle, virtually
alone, out spent, yet won. It must be a gratifying feeling to know you have
successfully defended the most precious values of a civilized society
and of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. You can rightly be proud of that.
My deepest, sincere respect.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.

Jeffrey

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Post by Jeffrey
Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I would think, given their harassment and attempt to deprive
Orthodox Baha'is, and other denominations, of their and our
first admendment rights, you might want to consider suing the
Haifan Baha'is for costs and damages. All of your lives were
severely impacted by their deceptive and fraudulent lawsuit,
forcing many older people to travel long distances and forage
through numerous documents under what had to be extremely
stressful and emotional duress attempting to protect themselves.
It would only be just for you to sue them back in self-defense.
They're not going to be leaving you and others alone otherwise.
The underlings here have already been immediately sneering
at the Judge Amy St. Eve's Opinion. You know they're doing it
elsewhere.

I would suggest punitive damages of $50 to $100 million. The
more the better, given the criminals you're dealing with and
the tactics they've regularly used, which you can easily prove
and document. Many six-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers will work
pro-bono for serious settlements in that range, though go for
more if they think you can get it. Issues of first admendment
rights, and intentionally and criminally infringing on them, have
historically proven highly lucrative for lawyers. That's what the
lawyers I've consulted with tell me.

If you don't teach them the lesson they need to learn now, they
will only continue their harassment of Orthodox Baha'is other
Baha'i denominations and their associated criminal activities.
Of course, I'm not so naive as to imagine, though, that they'll
ever fully reform. It's more about self-defense than doing them
a good turn. The fanatics and criminals among the Haifan
Baha'is are beyond redemption, but you would be giving
the more practical heads a reason for considering various
changes of behavior.

They'll never be content with "an inability to silence" you. I am
speaking from over 12 years of dealing with the fanatics online,
since 1996.... I would suggest you need another judgement or
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.

That's my view.

[Jeffrey]

On Apr 26, 7:07 am, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website

Post by Jeffrey
Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.
Jeffrey

--
Jeffrey,
I would think, given their harassment and attempt to deprive
Orthodox Baha'is, and other denominations, of their and our
first admendment rights, you might want to consider suing the
Haifan Baha'is for costs and damages. All of your lives were
severely impacted by their deceptive and fraudulent lawsuit,
forcing many older people to travel long distances and forage
through numerous documents under what had to be extremely
stressful and emotional duress attempting to protect themselves.
It would only be just for you to sue them back in self-defense.
They're not going to be leaving you and others alone otherwise.
The underlings here have already been immediately sneering
at the Judge Amy St. Eve's Opinion. You know they're doing it
elsewhere.
I would suggest punitive damages of $50 to $100 million. The
more the better, given the criminals you're dealing with and
the tactics they've regularly used, which you can easily prove
and document. Many six-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers will work
pro-bono for serious settlements in that range, though go for
more if they think you can get it. Issues of first admendment
rights, and intentionally and criminally infringing on them, have
historically proven highly lucrative for lawyers. That's what the
lawyers I've consulted with tell me.
If you don't teach them the lesson they need to learn now, they
will only continue their harassment of Orthodox Baha'is other
Baha'i denominations and their associated criminal activities.
Of course, I'm not so naive as to imagine, though, that they'll
ever fully reform. It's more about self-defense than doing them
a good turn. The fanatics and criminals among the Haifan
Baha'is are beyond redemption, but you would be giving
the more practical heads a reason for considering various
changes of behavior.
They'll never be content with "an inability to silence" you. I am
speaking from over 12 years of dealing with the fanatics online,
since 1996.... I would suggest you need another judgement or
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.
That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

Frederick,

I have not seen any posts where they are snickering about the Judge's
opinion. It certainly was a well-reasoned opinion. But they paid
alot of money to get that Judgment, so if they want to snicker over
it, let them.

Jeffrey

[H***@aol.com]

I would suggest you need another judgement or

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.

It was Mason Remey's attempt to get a judgement against the NSA that
created all of these legal problems to begin with. Now Jeffrey wants
to argue that such court cases are contrary to the Teachings. He can
do that, of course, but he is thereby contradicting the actions of a
man he claims to have been the rightful Guardian. And according to
Shoghi Effendi Guardians are supposed to be infallible in matters of
protection.

I'm not sure I agree with the Judge's finding that the subsequent
Remeyite organizations were not formed to avoid the court order. I
think it likely that Joel M.'s split with Mason Remey was in part a
response to Remey's refusal to appeal the court order against them. If
you read the court documents it is pretty clear that this court order
made it virtually impossible for Remeyites to function in the US. I'm
sure that caused Joel M. and Fred S. no end of frustration. But of
course this is hard to prove and would only apply to the so-called
Orthodox Baha'is and not the BUPC.

[Jeffrey]

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
I would suggest you need another judgement or

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.

It was Mason Remey's attempt to get a judgement against the NSA that
created all of these legal problems to begin with. Now Jeffrey wants
to argue that such court cases are contrary to the Teachings. He can
do that, of course, but he is thereby contradicting the actions of a
man he claims to have been the rightful Guardian. And according to
Shoghi Effendi Guardians are supposed to be infallible in matters of
protection.
I'm not sure I agree with the Judge's finding that the subsequent
Remeyite organizations were not formed to avoid the court order. I
think it likely that Joel M.'s split with Mason Remey was in part a
response to Remey's refusal to appeal the court order against them. If
you read the court documents it is pretty clear that this court order
made it virtually impossible for Remeyites to function in the US. I'm
sure that caused Joel M. and Fred S. no end of frustration. But of
course this is hard to prove and would only apply to the so-called
Orthodox Baha'is and not the BUPC.

I don't believe the NSA-UHG's decision to sue the Wilmette NSA was a
good one.

What are you suggesting? That because Remey allowed his NSA to file a
lawsuit, that it is alright for us to engage in contention in the
courts? Or should we learn from the mistakes of the past on all
sides, turn to the Writings, and cease contention and conflict.

That is: cease all coercion and force, violence, and threats, legal or
otherwise, as a means of carrying forward our Faith. Are you really
going to argue against that?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Post by Jeffrey
That is: cease all coercion and force, violence, and threats, legal or
otherwise, as a means of carrying forward our Faith. Are you really
going to argue against that?
Jeffrey

--

Your're addressing Susan Maneck hiding behind one of her false identities....

Given the Opinion, she has a history well worth reflecting on....

Susan Maneck, Baha'i scholar:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck8.htm

Further details on Baha'i scholar Susan Maneck at
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm

[H***@aol.com]

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Given the Opinion, she has a history well worth reflecting on....

Which has what to do with the fact that it was Mason Remey who first
had a lawsuit filed on his behalf against the NSA. He didn't just
'allow' it, he ordered it.

It's the Guardian who is supposed to be the authorized interpreter of
the Writings. According to Shoghi Effendi he is infallible in this
function as well as in protecting the Faith. If one argues, as Jeffrey
does that that such court case was misguided and contrary to the
Teachings one is effectively arguing that either:

1) That Shoghi Effendi was wrong when we stated that the Guardian was
infallible in these two areas.

or

2) Mason Remey was no Guardian.

Of course, from your standpointthere was never a legitimate Guardian
to begin with since you don't believe in the Will and Testament. Which
makes your support of the Remeyites seem rather strange.

[Asparagus]

Post by H***@aol.com

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Given the Opinion, she has a history well worth reflecting on....

Which has what to do with the fact that it was Mason Remey who first
had a lawsuit filed on his behalf against the NSA. He didn't just
'allow' it, he ordered it.
It's the Guardian who is supposed to be the authorized interpreter of
the Writings. According to Shoghi Effendi he is infallible in this
function as well as in protecting the Faith. If one argues, as Jeffrey
does that that such court case was misguided and contrary to the
1) That Shoghi Effendi was wrong when we stated that the Guardian was
infallible in these two areas.
or
2) Mason Remey was no Guardian.

So where does Shoghi's infallibility hang in the case against Sohrab ....
which was lost?

Post by H***@aol.com
Of course, from your standpointthere was never a legitimate Guardian
to begin with since you don't believe in the Will and Testament. Which
makes your support of the Remeyites seem rather strange.

Not in the least ... it has to do with respect for the beliefs of others and
their freedom to believe as they do irrespective of how idiotic their
beliefs are ... which explains why you are permitted to hang loose around
here (and elsewhere) and attempt to convince a gullible readership that your
views are not idiotic.

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus
Not in the least ... it has to do with respect for the beliefs of others and
their freedom to believe as they do irrespective of how idiotic their
beliefs are ... which explains why you are permitted to hang loose around
here (and elsewhere) and attempt to convince a gullible readership that your
views are not idiotic.

Pot, kettle, black! Well, well, well. One of the biggest sectarian
biggest around these parts obviously knows which the way the wind has
begun blowing and has changed his tune. And this is the same gobshite
who uttered the following,

1) When lying about his identity:

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/bd7e852c70316c9/d146728618637ab4?
lnk=st&q=Guardian&rnum=3#d146728618637ab4
"The Beloved Guardian assured us that those diseased people who
attacked the Cause of God would deservedly suffer and be destroyed
and behold, this vicious one was struck down exactly as you will be
destroyed for your wanton and outrageous lies and calumnies."

When advocating a nuclear preemptive strike against Iran:

"A better reason for a pre-emptive nuclear attack we have yet to see.
The removal of 78 million plus 2 mental defectives from the planet
would be a mighty blessing and nuclear is obviously the most economic
method."
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/a932e8641bd58d85/92c8eee257d6e5c5

I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist, given that I have
a taped confession from you circa 2000 unequivocally suggesting that
you had sympathized with the Irish Republican Army.

W

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus
Not in the least ... it has to do with respect for the beliefs of others and
their freedom to believe as they do irrespective of how idiotic their
beliefs are ... which explains why you are permitted to hang loose around
here (and elsewhere) and attempt to convince a gullible readership that your
views are not idiotic.

Pot, kettle, black! Well, well, well. One of the biggest sectarian
biggots around these parts obviously knows which the way the wind has
begun blowing and has changed his tune. And this is the same gobshite
who uttered the following,

1) When lying about his identity:

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/bd7e852c70316c9/d146728618637ab4?
lnk=st&q=Guardian&rnum=3#d146728618637ab4
"The Beloved Guardian assured us that those diseased people who
attacked the Cause of God would deservedly suffer and be destroyed
and behold, this vicious one was struck down exactly as you will be
destroyed for your wanton and outrageous lies and calumnies."

When advocating a nuclear preemptive strike against Iran:

"A better reason for a pre-emptive nuclear attack we have yet to see.
The removal of 78 million plus 2 mental defectives from the planet
would be a mighty blessing and nuclear is obviously the most economic
method."
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/a932e8641bd58d85/92c8eee257d6e5c5

I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist, given that I have
a taped confession from you circa 2000 unequivocally suggesting that
you had sympathized with the Irish Republican Army.

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist,

It's usually the Police who initiate criminal proceedings. If you break the
criminal law then they come down upon you like a ton of bricks!

given that I have

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
a taped confession from you circa 2000 unequivocally suggesting that
you had sympathized with the Irish Republican Army.

I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

Of course, that was the IRA and/or the IRB, not the PIRA or CIRA or RIRA and
that was the IRA under Collins, Brugha, Griffith, Mulcahy, Barry, Breen et
al that, though few in numbers, fought the British Empire to a standstill
and led to the establishment of Saorstat Eireann in 1922. That's a far cry
from more recent events ... which you may realise ... though I doubt it.

If you recall I did note that this was the first of the wars of liberation
in which an oppressed population could and did politically defeat a major
power by military means. Others have copied .... though not quite as well!

You obviously thought long and hard about this. Your cogitations resulted
in the formation of your current Bayanic revolutionary movement in which you
seek, as leader of a fanatical few, to overthrow the Grumpies and their
clingons. Unlike you, Collins had a semblance of intelligence and knew when
the fighting had to stop and the politicking begin. He also recognised the
limitations of victory that the war of independence did not result in great
bitterness or estrangement between the newly emergent Saorstat Eireann and
the English.

You could learn much of personal profit from a study of this period ...
though I expect you'll do neither! It's nigh impossible to convince 78
million wee white mice that their Fuhrer has anything to learn.

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
W

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist,

It's usually the Police who initiate criminal proceedings. If you break the
criminal law then they come down upon you like a ton of bricks!

You're backtracking - as usual. You are on tape confessing to being a
sympathizer of the Irish Republican Army. I have the tape to prove it.
You threatened to go to the police here - as if there is a cause. I
have called your bluff and given you more cause to consult your
failing heart medication. I challenged you to throw your best shot,
and you have come up short...as always.

And more reminder - as if any more was needed - about your shifty,
opportunistic and two-faced duplicity:

1) When lying about his identity:

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/bd7e852c70316c9/d146728618637ab4?
lnk=st&q=Guardian&rnum=3#d146728618637ab4
"The Beloved Guardian assured us that those diseased people who
attacked the Cause of God would deservedly suffer and be destroyed
and behold, this vicious one was struck down exactly as you will be
destroyed for your wanton and outrageous lies and calumnies."

When advocating a nuclear preemptive strike against Iran:

"A better reason for a pre-emptive nuclear attack we have yet to see.
The removal of 78 million plus 2 mental defectives from the planet
would be a mighty blessing and nuclear is obviously the most economic
method."
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/
thread/a932e8641bd58d85/92c8eee257d6e5c5

I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist, given that I have
a taped confession from you circa 2000 unequivocally suggesting that
you had sympathized with the Irish Republican Army.

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist,

It's usually the Police who initiate criminal proceedings. If you break the
criminal law then they come down upon you like a ton of bricks!

You're backtracking - as usual. You are on tape confessing to being a
sympathizer of the Irish Republican Army. I have the tape to prove it.
You threatened to go to the police here - as if there is a cause.

If you publish a sound recording of a telephone conversation without the
permission of the other party or parties to the conversation, you commit a
criminal offence in Queensland. I cannot report a crime that has not
happened. You go ahead and commit the crime and I'll report it.

I

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
have called your bluff and given you more cause to consult your
failing heart medication. I challenged you to throw your best shot,
and you have come up short...as always.

Wrong again! I am not on any medication, prescribed or otherwise, for heart
or other health problems.

BTW you omitted to respond to this: -

"I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

Of course, that was the IRA and/or the IRB, not the PIRA or CIRA or RIRA and
that was the IRA under Collins, Brugha, Griffith, Mulcahy, Barry, Breen et
al that, though few in numbers, fought the British Empire to a standstill
and led to the establishment of Saorstat Eireann in 1922. That's a far cry
from more recent events ... which you may realise ... though I doubt it.

If you recall I did note that this was the first of the wars of liberation
in which an oppressed population could and did politically defeat a major
power by military means. Others have copied .... though not quite as well!"

And while we are on the subject of telephone conversations, is there any
fear that you taped the call you made to me in which you were messing your
pants as the "word was on the street" you were about to be declared a CB by
the Grumpies.

A wee word of advice - you acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard. I
acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard ... indeed, I'm proud to be one.
Don't assume that I didn't record certain conversations (as sneaky bastards
are wont to do)... especially a very enjoyable one with a certain lady (who
shall remain nameless but is forever in your thoughts) and you.

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
I am also still waiting for those criminal charges you were
threatening to bring against me here, Mr terrorist,

It's usually the Police who initiate criminal proceedings. If you break the
criminal law then they come down upon you like a ton of bricks!

You're backtracking - as usual. You are on tape confessing to being a
sympathizer of the Irish Republican Army. I have the tape to prove it.
You threatened to go to the police here - as if there is a cause.

If you publish a sound recording of a telephone conversation without the
permission of the other party or parties to the conversation, you commit a
criminal offence in Queensland. I cannot report a crime that has not
happened. You go ahead and commit the crime and I'll report it.

Sounds like backtracking and cold feet to me. And do not deign to
pontificate on QLD law, which you know nothing about. Go and battle
your usual welfare phantoms in Northern Ireland instead. That is all
you are worthy of...

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
If you publish a sound recording of a telephone conversation without the
permission of the other party or parties to the conversation, you commit a
criminal offence in Queensland. I cannot report a crime that has not
happened. You go ahead and commit the crime and I'll report it.

Sounds like backtracking and cold feet to me. And do not deign to
pontificate on QLD law, which you know nothing about. Go and battle
your usual welfare phantoms in Northern Ireland instead. That is all
you are worthy of...
W

So I must assume therefore that this link is an inaccurate representation of
the law in Queensland: -

http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/Legal+Information/Living+in+the+community/Your+rights/Privacy.htm#record

or is it you who knows nothing about it?

I think we should be told.

[Asparagus]

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
If you publish a sound recording of a telephone conversation without the
permission of the other party or parties to the conversation, you commit a
criminal offence in Queensland. I cannot report a crime that has not
happened. You go ahead and commit the crime and I'll report it.

Sounds like backtracking and cold feet to me. And do not deign to
pontificate on QLD law, which you know nothing about. Go and battle
your usual welfare phantoms in Northern Ireland instead. That is all
you are worthy of...
W

So I must assume therefore that this link is an inaccurate representation
of the law in Queensland: -
http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/Legal+Information/Living+in+the+community/Your+rights/Privacy.htm#record
or is it you who knows nothing about it?
I think we should be told.

Oh I am a sneaky bastard ... and absent-minded too.

You forgot this: -

"BTW you omitted to respond to this: -

"I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

Of course, that was the IRA and/or the IRB, not the PIRA or CIRA or RIRA and
that was the IRA under Collins, Brugha, Griffith, Mulcahy, Barry, Breen et
al that, though few in numbers, fought the British Empire to a standstill
and led to the establishment of Saorstat Eireann in 1922. That's a far cry
from more recent events ... which you may realise ... though I doubt it.

If you recall I did note that this was the first of the wars of liberation
in which an oppressed population could and did politically defeat a major
power by military means. Others have copied .... though not quite as well!"

And while we are on the subject of telephone conversations, is there any
fear that you taped the call you made to me in which you were messing your
pants as the "word was on the street" you were about to be declared a CB by
the Grumpies.

A wee word of advice - you acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard. I
acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard ... indeed, I'm proud to be one.
Don't assume that I didn't record certain conversations (as sneaky bastards
are wont to do)... especially a very enjoyable one with a certain lady (who
shall remain nameless but is forever in your thoughts) and you."

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
If you publish a sound recording of a telephone conversation without the
permission of the other party or parties to the conversation, you commit a
criminal offence in Queensland. I cannot report a crime that has not
happened. You go ahead and commit the crime and I'll report it.

Sounds like backtracking and cold feet to me. And do not deign to
pontificate on QLD law, which you know nothing about. Go and battle
your usual welfare phantoms in Northern Ireland instead. That is all
you are worthy of...
W

So I must assume therefore that this link is an inaccurate representation
of the law in Queensland: -
http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/Legal+Information/Living+in+the+commun...
or is it you who knows nothing about it?
I think we should be told.

Oh I am a sneaky bastard ... and absent-minded too.
You forgot this: -
"BTW you omitted to respond to this: -
"I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

There you go! Your own words...

<BS snip>

Post by Asparagus
A wee word of advice - you acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard.

A bastard, yes indeed. But a *fat stupid bastard*!

W

[All Bad]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
"I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

There you go! Your own words...

He certainly tried to help you out by pointing out that the group which
successfully fought for the liberation of much of Ireland in the early 20th
centry was the Irish Republican Army. Though they may have been considered
a terrorist organization back then, by the UK, they are considered patriots
in the Republic of Ireland, and are not held as terrorists today in the UK.
They are also known as "the Old IRA" to distinguish them from the IRA of
Northern Ireland today.

When most of Ireland separated from the UK, there was a civil war in the
separated part, between the group that wanted to build an Irish Ireland, and
discontinue the armed warfare with the UK (the treaty Irish), and those who
wanted to continue the fight, the Anti Treat Irish. The Anti Treaty Irish
called themselves the IRA, even though those they opposed were also from the
Old IRA. As the Free State evolved under the treaty and beyond, via elected
government, a dissatisfied minority faction continued, and gradually
diminished south of the border. North of the border, the faction may have
waxed and waned but it persisted. These post treaty dead-enders, are the
IRA which is widely considered terrorist.

- All Bad

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by All Bad

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
"I remember that conversation! You are quite right! I did sympathise,
empathise with and express admiration for the IRA!

There you go! Your own words...

He certainly tried to help you out by pointing out that the group which
successfully fought for the liberation of much of Ireland in the early 20th
centry was the Irish Republican Army.

Bullshit! That was an after-the-fact gratuitous, transparent and wimpy
effort to try to deflect from his clear and unmistakable admission to
having supported the Irish Republican Army. In the taped conversation
the context and subtext, and the clear and unmistakable words uttered
by Mr Ryder, leave no room for doubt or speculation as to which
organization he is referring to. If he believes otherwise, like I have
challenged him already, he is welcome to come and face me on the other
side of a courtroom, any time and any place.

<bahaim sleight of handing and misdirection snipped>

The hubristic lengths to which Dead Weed himself is now going through
and the efforts that you his colleagues in the IT bahaim committee are
going to in order to defend him from the admittedly indefensible, also
raises further questions as to 1) [collective] motive(s) and 2) the
clear unassailability of the facts pertaining to the allegation. As
well, Mr Ryder could have raised a silly defense such as this at the
very beginning when this allegation-now-based-in-fact was made, not
wait well over a month and a half and well into the episode, which
further goes to credibility - that Mr Ryder has now lost. With a
defense such as this, who needs a conviction or admission of guilt!

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by All Bad
He certainly tried to help you out by pointing out that the group which
successfully fought for the liberation of much of Ireland in the early 20th
centry was the Irish Republican Army.

Bullshit! That was an after-the-fact gratuitous, transparent and wimpy
effort to try to deflect from his clear and unmistakable admission to
having supported the Irish Republican Army. In the taped conversation
the context and subtext, and the clear and unmistakable words uttered
by Mr Ryder, leave no room for doubt or speculation as to which
organization he is referring to.

So which organisation is it: -

The IRA pre-Treaty
The IRA post-Treaty
The Official IRA
The Provisional IRA
The Continuity IRA
The Real IRA

or some other one which only you know about.?

As

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً
well, Mr Ryder could have raised a silly defense such as this at the
very beginning when this allegation-now-based-in-fact was made, not
wait well over a month and a half and well into the episode, which
further goes to credibility - that Mr Ryder has now lost. With a
defense such as this, who needs a conviction or admission of guilt!

Nobody has seen evidence coming from you ...

I have clearly indicated, here and elsewhere, that only one of these
organisations has earned any respect from me.

You alleged that I have terrorist leanings and that you have evidence for
this. Yet you have failed to do what any decent law-abiding citizen would
do and tender your evidence to the Police.

Keep it rolling ... I'm really enjoying watching you try to annoy me!

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus
So which organisation is it: -

Per your own words, the IRA = Irish Republican Army.

<snp>

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
So which organisation is it: -

Per your own words, the IRA = Irish Republican Army.

Indeed ... but which brand?

[All Bad]

Asparagus,

Obviously he is not reading the axscents on the right sill obles.

If it were just Provos, Real, or the first one in the movie "Michael
Collins" (not the later ones in the same movie), he might sort it out. He
just can't seem to sort out that one IRA is not just the same as any other
IRA.

How many Islamic Revolutionary Councils did it take to displace the Shah?
It was just the one!

Chickenhead,

Play the tape!

- All Bad

Post by Asparagus

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
So which organisation is it: -

Per your own words, the IRA = Irish Republican Army.

Indeed ... but which brand?

[PaulHammond]

Post by Asparagus
A wee word of advice - you acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard. I
acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard ... indeed, I'm proud to be one.
Don't assume that I didn't record certain conversations (as sneaky bastards
are wont to do)... especially a very enjoyable one with a certain lady (who
shall remain nameless but is forever in your thoughts) and you."

So, are you going to tell us, Dermod? Who is the lady in question?

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by PaulHammond
So, are you going to tell us, Dermod? Who is the lady in question?

A certain conversation with a certain lady is a brief telephone
conversation Starr Saffa and I had with Dead Weed when she was
visiting/spying on me and my family in December 2002. I said nothing
incriminating in it. Starrshite might have. In fact it would be good
for Dead Weed to release this conversation publicly because it would
help my cause in unmasking the crook Starr Saffa even further. G'head
Dead Weed release it...

W

[Asparagus]

Post by PaulHammond

Post by Asparagus
A wee word of advice - you acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard. I
acknowledge that I'm a sneaky bastard ... indeed, I'm proud to be one.
Don't assume that I didn't record certain conversations (as sneaky bastards
are wont to do)... especially a very enjoyable one with a certain lady (who
shall remain nameless but is forever in your thoughts) and you."

So, are you going to tell us, Dermod? Who is the lady in question?

'Twas the poor old Starr.

The silly girl came on the phone, along with wonderboy, trying to persuade
me to support him as a "letter." or some other meaningless frivolity, of his
claim to divine prophethood. Apparently it was all a practical joke to piss
off the Grumpies.

The boy wonder doesn't do practical jokes ... he lacks the required sense of
humour. Now if he had suggested that I had the divine hand upon me (as a
practical joke) and that he and Starr would have been my acolytes ... I
could have been tempted. But he didn't ... and I didn't either!

It's quite a while ago but I do recall that Starr was a very pleasant person
with whom to share a conversation. She had a great sense of humour and, I
think, realised, early in the conversation, that I was not stupid enough to
support the plonker's divine aspirations. Given her well intentioned
support of the boy wonder, I do think he treated her very shabbily ... but
he tries to do that to anybody who dares disagree with him.

Of course Nimikins knows as much about UK law as he does about Queensland
law. If he had the knowledge he would not have asked me to publish the
content of the conversation as he would have known that it is illegal here
to record telephone conversations without prior consent.

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by Asparagus
So I must assume therefore that this link is an inaccurate representation of
the law in Queensland: -

In this case, absolutely!

W

[Asparagus]

Post by لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً

Post by Asparagus
So I must assume therefore that this link is an inaccurate representation of
the law in Queensland: -

In this case, absolutely!

And this explains why nobody in their mind would avail of your legal
research skills.

[Viv]

On 27 Apr, 12:56, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Your're addressing Susan Maneck hiding behind one of her false identities....

This is well known as the e-dress Susan uses on this list, Fred, no
secret to it, she's no more hiding than you are when you post as
"Baha'i Censorship" or "Reform Baha'i Faith".

After this display of double standards you go on to unleash on Susan a
vicious and extended ad hominem, you who regulalry post about the way
that Baha'is regularly use slandar, vilification, ad hominem, etc.

What a hypocrite you are, Frederick Glaysher.

Viv.

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Dear Non-Bahai Observers,

Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.

Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
documenting these tactics, spanning decades, may be found below:

"The Bahai Technique":
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm

Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm

Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.

The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.

[Viv]

On 29 Apr, 11:41, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"

Of course Fred didn't reply directly, that would be too big a breach
of his "shunning is bad, only I am allowed to do it, I do it to anyone
I don't like" rule. But look at the way, after his hypocrisy and
double standards were pointed out, he moved to change the header and
and try to hide it with a reissue of some of his previous comments.
Could it be that the man is, after all, capable of a touch of
embarrassment?

Viv.

[Asparagus]

Post by Viv
On 29 Apr, 11:41, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"
Of course Fred didn't reply directly, that would be too big a breach
of his "shunning is bad, only I am allowed to do it, I do it to anyone
I don't like" rule. But look at the way, after his hypocrisy and
double standards were pointed out, he moved to change the header

He actually restored it ... after you had changed it and ..... you've
changed it again.

So much for hypocrisy!

[Viv]

Post by Asparagus

Post by Viv
On 29 Apr, 11:41, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"
Of course Fred didn't reply directly, that would be too big a breach
of his "shunning is bad, only I am allowed to do it, I do it to anyone
I don't like" rule. But look at the way, after his hypocrisy and
double standards were pointed out, he moved to change the header

He actually restored it ... after you had changed it and ..... you've
changed it again.
So much for hypocrisy!

As you know very well, not being stupid, the charge of hypocrisy was
against Fred complaining of Susan using a "false" e-mail identity in
the same way he does, and his going on about the Baha'is using "libel,
defamataion, ad-hom, all the rest of it" while he launches an
extensive ad hominem against Susan virtually every time she posts.

V.

[Asparagus]

Post by Viv

Post by Asparagus

Post by Viv
On 29 Apr, 11:41, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"
Of course Fred didn't reply directly, that would be too big a breach
of his "shunning is bad, only I am allowed to do it, I do it to anyone
I don't like" rule. But look at the way, after his hypocrisy and
double standards were pointed out, he moved to change the header

He actually restored it ... after you had changed it and ..... you've
changed it again.
So much for hypocrisy!

As you know very well, not being stupid, the charge of hypocrisy was
against Fred complaining of Susan using a "false" e-mail identity in
the same way he does, and his going on about the Baha'is using "libel,
defamataion, ad-hom, all the rest of it" while he launches an
extensive ad hominem against Susan virtually every time she posts.

Your charge was against Fred; his charge was against Susie!

To a neutral observer it could look like it all square - the entire kit and
caboodle is composed of and inhabited by religious freaks intent not so much
on acquisition of the divine fragrances but on knocking several shades of
shit out of each other. So much for Bahai as the universal religion of
tolerance, understanding and universal brotherhood when its various factions
tapdance on each other.

Good tip for around here is not to play to the gallery but attempt to win
the neutral observer, if indeed there is one herabouts.

[Jeffrey]

On Apr 29, 4:41 am, "Baha'i Censorship - See Website"

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Dear Non-Bahai Observers,
Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.
Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
"The Bahai Technique":http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm
Shunning & Slander > Menuhttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm
Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.
The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Consciencehttp://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

I just wish everyone would stop the practice of changing the subject
lines because it makes it hard to follow the threads.

Jeffrey

[All Bad]

Dear Non-Baha'i,

Fred is changing the issue of those advocating that there has been a
succession of Guardianship and who are now disavowing their second Guardian,
to Susan Maneck using a handle, much as Fred does, as well as an ad hominem
attack on her. When the obvious layers of hypocrisy were pointed out to
him, he wants to accuse my religious organization of suing to deprive US
citizens of their constitional rights, as if that has something to do w/
anything, and then it is off to the demonization races!

- All Bad

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Dear Non-Bahai Observers,
Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.
Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm
Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm
Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.
The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

[Asparagus]

Post by All Bad
Dear Non-Baha'i,
Fred is changing the issue of those advocating that there has been a
succession of Guardianship and who are now disavowing their second
Guardian, to Susan Maneck using a handle, much as Fred does, as well as an
ad hominem attack on her. When the obvious layers of hypocrisy were
pointed out to him, he wants to accuse my religious organization of suing
to deprive US citizens of their constitional rights, as if that has
something to do w/ anything, and then it is off to the demonization races!

Well ..... ! Your religious organisation did sue a similarly named
religious organisation with a view to having that latter organisation cease
and desist from using various symbols (common to both organisations) for
which your religious organisation claims exclusive ownership.

Post by All Bad
- All Bad

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Dear Non-Bahai Observers,
Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.
Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm
Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm
Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.
The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

[H***@aol.com]

Well ..... !  Your religious organisation did sue a similarly named
religious organisation with a view to having that latter organisation cease
and desist from using various symbols (common to both organisations) for
which your religious organisation claims exclusive ownership.

The suit was filed by the Remeyites. The NSA was merely seeking to
have the decision made on that occassion enforced. The judge ruled
that the Orthodox Baha'is and the BUPC are not legitimate successors
to Mason Remey.

[Ron House]

Post by H***@aol.com

Post by Asparagus
Well ..... ! Your religious organisation did sue a similarly named
religious organisation with a view to having that latter organisation cease
and desist from using various symbols (common to both organisations) for
which your religious organisation claims exclusive ownership.

The suit was filed by the Remeyites. The NSA was merely seeking to
have the decision made on that occassion enforced. The judge ruled
that the Orthodox Baha'is and the BUPC are not legitimate successors
to Mason Remey.

And unless you have become far too stupid to hold down a job at a
university, you know perfectly well the decision said nothing of the sort.

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Amici curiae, Reform Bahai Faith
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USDistrictCourt07.htm



US District Court of Northern Illinois rules against Haifan Baha'is
April 23, 2008


In the 2007 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform Bahai Faith submitted three letters as amici curiae to Judge
Amy J. St. Eve:



Here are highlights from both the April 23, 2008 Opinion and Motion. Further comments at bottom:


Original documents at Contempt Motion by Wilmette NSA
& Response by Orthodox Bahá'í Faith
http://trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court_case.html

http://www.truebahai.com/court/139-opinion.pdf

http://www.truebahai.com/court/140-judgment.pdf


"[T]he chain of successorship lacks a link," wrote the Honorable Amy J. St Eve, United States District Court Judge, in her Judgment
in favor of theChicago_trial_january_7_2008_006 Orthodox Bahai Faith and the Baha'i Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant.
The Court ruled on April 23, 2008 after holding an evidentiary hearing last January 7, 2008 in Chicago, Illinois on the contempt
motion brought by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States (Wilmette NSA).

In her decision, the Court stated that: "the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a
significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of
the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created
to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a
result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction."


Excerpts:

p: 12
II. Application To The Court's Findings of Fact Applying the above-stated principles here, none of the Alleged Contemnors is in
privity with the bound entity, and thus none has violated the injunction. In rendering this finding, the Court has carefully and
deliberately weighed all of the evidence adduced at the hearing and otherwise submitted by the parties. The Court closely assessed
the demeanor of each testifying witness, including his or her body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, mannerisms, and
other factors indicative of credibility.

p. 27
Rather, the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant doctrinal rift on a
critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further
reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the
injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr.
Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction.

p. 31
After considering the full record in this case, the Court finds that SIBC and the BPUPC are not in privity with the NSA-UHG....

p. 32
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court finds that the Alleged Contemnors are not in privity with the NSA-UHG and, in turn, that they are
not in contempt of the injunction.

Judge Amy J. St. Eve
April 23, 2008




--



January 7, 2008 - Letter to Judge Amy J. St. Eve

FYI


Reform Bahai Faith
www.reformbahai.org


January 7, 2008

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dear Judge St. Eve:

The Reform Bahai Faith submits to the Court that the NSA of Wilmette, while publicly hiding behind a facade of liberalism, is
essentially practicing Islamic "takfir," in the words of the scholar of Islam Bernard Lewis, "recognizing and denouncing apostasy,"
labeling people "kafir" or infidels, and issuing "fatwas" or decrees, denying the very existence of other Bahais and denominations,
all indicative of the worst in the Shiite Islamic heritage of the Bahai Faith-practices Baha'u'llah specifically rejected, teaching
tolerance of different religious views congruent with modern Western custom and practice. Nothing could be more diametrically
opposed to the democracy of our civic and legal order. The NSA of Wilmette is essentially seeking to use the Court in a type of
jihad.

Although the Reform Bahai Faith is not a party to Civil Action No. 64 C 1878, we have knowledge of what we believe are malicious and
slanderous misrepresentations made to the Court on behalf of the NSA of Wilmette in Document 49-2:

"14. The Web site at 'reformbahai.org' is the site of an outspoken critic of NSA named Frederick Glaysher. While the Web site gives
the impression that an organization is associated with Mr. Glaysher, there is no such organization. On information and belief, Mr.
Glaysher's claims are simply not taken seriously by any one. The Web site is merely a stage, in a comer of the Web, for Mr.
Glaysher's unusual fixation upon, and animus toward, NSA. This, of course, is not evidence of a Baha'i Faith denomination. The
attached affidavit of Tracey Giertz indicates there was no content at this site until September 3, 2004. See id at ¶ 18."

The NSA of Wilmette offers the Court no "information" but ad hominem and slanderous vilification, which it has routinely used
against other Bahai denominations since as early as the 1930s. Tracey Giertz, in her affidavit ends with Paragraph 16, making no
mention of the Reform Bahai Faith or www.reformbahai.org, only the Free Bahais. Neither I nor the Reform Bahai Faith has ever had
any interest in, or ownership of, the Free Bahais and their website. Nor have I or the Reform Bahai Faith ever been involved in any
way with the Unitarian Bahais and their website. Our website was available online beginning August 19, 2004. By chance, the Reform
Bahai website is registered through the same registration service as the Free Bahais, GoDaddy.com, one of the least expensive, used
by over 25 million people, and which protects personal information from identity thieves. The Archive service Tracey Giertz used
often takes a week or two to find and document new websites.

With approximately [deleted] members, most of whom are US citizens, Reform Bahais indeed do exist and are actively seeking to grow
and develop in accordance with the rights and obligations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The NSA is seeking to use the
ruling of a US Court against Bahai denominations who hold other religious opinions and thereby prohibit the "free exercise"of their
and our First Amendment rights.

I also wish to inform the Court that the Reform Bahai Press has just published its first book of Bahai writings, The Universal
Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith, available for sale throughout the country and much of the world since December 14, 2007. I
have enclosed a copy of the book for the Court as further evidence of our existence as a growing, independent Bahai denomination.

The Reform Bahai Faith does not use either an apostrophe nor diacritical marks in the generic word Bahai, a spelling widely used in
the USA since as early as 1900.

The Reform Bahai Faith emphatically presents before the Court the fact that it does not look to other Bahai denominations for its
understanding of the Teachings of Baha'u'llah, especially all those denominations who are named parties, all of which we believe are
based upon a fraudulent will and testament, purporting to be that of Abdu'l-Baha, and which document gave birth to the
fundamentalist religious organization that has initiated the lawsuit before the Court, pretending to be a mere corporation. We
provided the Court with a certified copy from the Library of Congress of Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's Report on the Writing Shown on
the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha on March 8, 2007.

The animus of the NSA of Wilmette against the Reform Bahai Faith stems, among those reasons already alluded to, from the fact that
the Reform Bahai Faith does not believe in an eventual Bahai theocracy; but a separation of church and state; rejects the
infallibility of any Bahai Universal House of Justice; accepts that women can serve at all elected levels, including someday on a
properly elected Bahai Universal House of Justice, unlike the corrupt one now located in Haifa, Israel.

We draw the attention of the Court to twenty-six pages of selections from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab's Broken Silence: The Story of Today's
Struggle for Religious Freedom (1942), documenting the attempts by the NSA of Wilmette to trademark and copyright the generic term
Bahai in 1928, though Bahais of different belief already existed at that time in Ruth White and others; the 1941 case before Judge
Valente of the New York Supreme Court, in New York County; both revealing the unmitigated viciousness that the NSA has directed in
the past against American citizens who were Bahais holding different religious convictions. Available via the Internet, Excerpts
regarding the 1941 New York Supreme Court Case before Judge Valente:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/BrokenSilence,CourtCase.pdf

We again appeal to the Court to protect our Constitutional rights to religious freedom and liberty.

Most respectfully yours,



Reform Bahai Faith



Enclosure: The Universal Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith. Reform Bahai Press, 2008. 148 pages.






June 18, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our denomination.

The lawyer [delete] has reported to us that the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination has claimed in Court that the Reform Bahai
Faith does not exist. I am writing to inform you that there are approximately [delete] members of the Reform Bahai Faith, most of
whom are citizens of the United States of America. The Reform Bahai Press is a legally registered entity in Oakland County, Michigan
and will publish its first book in 2008.

As mentioned in my March 8, 2007 amici curiae letter to you, while members of the Reform Bahai Faith believe the will and testament
of Abdu'l-Baha was a fraudulent document, the Reform Bahai Faith looks to the beginning of our denomination in the numerous books
and writings of Ruth White, Julie Chanler, and Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, from 1928 through the 1950s. The latter two were both described
in New York Times obituaries as members of the Reform Bahai Movement, and I herewith provide documentation.

In our view, the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination is hiding behind and using, indeed manipulating corporate law to conduct what
is essentially a doctrinal struggle with the several Bahai denominations that have evolved and have existed since as early as 1928
in the case of Ruth White. The nsa has done this repeatedly through the US courts and legal system: in 1928 through
misrepresentation and fraud it copyrighted and trademarked the word Bahai; in 1941, it sued unsuccessfully Chanler and Sohrab twice;
it sued Mason Remey in 1966 but he was reportedly too old and feeble to show up and defend himself being out of the country; it is
now attempting to use the US District Court of Northern Illinois to silence the several active and existing Bahai denominations with
which it differs on religious doctrine and interpretation. For decades, in and out of the courts, the nsa has used such
reprehensible tactics as slander, ad hominem, shunning, and intimidation, and the like, to muzzle and discredit dissenters and other
denominations.

We ask the Court to protect both our Constitutional right to religious freedom and conscience and to protect us from having to
choose between our loyalty to our government and legal system and the integrity of our beliefs. Though small in number from our
beginning in 2004, we are sincere in our religious convictions, and ask the Court to protect our right to grow and develop
unharassed by those who under the guise of corporate law seek to destroy us.

Respectfully,


The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org



Mirza Ahamd Sohrab died Apr 20, 1958. In his obituary he is described as "leader of the Reform Bahá'í Movement in the United
States". The New York Times, Apr 22, 1958; p. 33 "Obituary."
New York Times Preview attached as documentation:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70B11F73D59107B93C0AB178FD85F4C8585F9
Wikipedia biography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Ahmad_Sohrab

Julie Olin Chanler. She died on March 11, 1961, in her obituary she was described as "spiritual leader of the Reform Baha'i
movement...." The New York Times, Mar 12, 1961; pg 86. Her husband was Lewis Stuyvesant Chanler, an ex-Lieutenant Governor of New
York (1907-08) and a former Democratic candidate for Governor.
Wikipedia biography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Lynch_Olin



Given the recent attempt (April 07) to suppress discussion on Google Groups, apparently about Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's impeccable
qualifications to judge the authenticity of Abdu'l-Baha's purported will and testament, here is the letter that the Reform Bahai
Faith, as amici curiae, submitted to Judge Amy St. Eve on March 8, 2007:



March 8, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are concerned about the impact of the present lawsuit upon our denomination,
though differing in view from all named parties. Religious liberty is not only involved but is the issue before the Court.

While all named parties essentially differ over their interpretation of the purported will and testament of Abdu'l-Baha, members of
the Reform Bahai Faith agree with the 1929 opinion of Bahai Ruth White and the 1930 Report of Dr. Charles Ainsworth Mitchell that
the will is a fraudulent document.

Dr. Mitchell was a leading forensic researcher of the time at the British Museum and his work is still cited in academic sources.
His Report is deposited with the Library of Congress (LC Control No.: mm 81000871) and a recently obtained certified copy is
herewith provided to the Court.

The key passage of Dr. Mitchell's Report, on the last page, second to the last paragraph, reads, "A minute comparison of the
authenticated writing with the writing on every page of the alleged will . . . has failed to detect in any part of the will the
characteristics of the writing of Abdu'l-Baha, as shown in the authenticated specimens."

Respectfully,

Frederick Glaysher

The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org

[original certified copy enclosed to Judge Amy St. Eve]


--
A SCANNED COPY of Dr. Mitchell's certified Report may be examined at the link below:

Dr. C. (Charles) Ainsworth Mitchell - Certified Copy from the Library of Congress
Report on the Writing Shown on the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha. 1930.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/CAMitchell_Report.htm



Further comments:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"

Jeffrey,

I agree with and share your regard for Baha'u'llah's admonition
forbidding contention. To my mind, is it applicable in this case?
Abdu'l-Baha spoke forcefully about confronting evil doers, not
forgiving them, lest they only continue in their treachery. Further,
you're referring to a Baha'i denomination that has knowingly
based in its claim to authority on a fraudulent will and testament,
while harassing and destroying the lives of countless Baha'is
and families throughout the decades. Baha'u'llah Himself
confronted the Son of the Wolf and others in unequivocal
language and terms. I don't believe the quotation quite fits the
conditions.

Reflecting on how the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj have reacted
to and treated such set backs in the past, I highly doubt you'll
see much change in them. They will continue as they have, with
you and other Baha'i denominations. Consider that Judge Valente,
of the Supreme Court of New York in no uncertain terms ruled
against them in their lawsuit against Sohrab and Chanler, pointing
out the word Bahai was a generic term that couldn't not be
copyrighted or monopolized by one denomination. Time went by,
everyone was looking in a different direction. They took out another
bogus copyright with the patent office, adding diacritics and an
apostrophe, but none the less the same game. A Constitutional
lawyer I spoke with about it just laughed, saying it would never
stand up in court and that anyone can copyright anything with the
government clerks, which is utterly meaningless. But the purpose
is to intimidate other Bahais into thinking it means something,
as though they own it....

Their thinking isn't based on the reason and rational constructs
that make sense in a Western court of law. Sohrab understood
quite well that Shoghi Effendi had gone back to the medieval
frame of reference, creating a system more resonant with the
Shiite worldview. I'm afraid that's the case and why so many
of our fellow Bahais are trapped in an iron cage of tyranny and
fanaticism. One more Western judge who's a *kafir* won't make
a difference in Haifa, or, here's the fact difficult to appreciate,
in Wilmette.... They simply aren't going to change as result of
this lawsuit. It's hoping for too much from a pernicious system
that has demonstrated for so long that it's incapable of change.

It's only a matter of time until they trump up some other bogus
lawsuit to justify to themselves their fanaticism. Abdu'l-Baha
spoke of defending people threatened. All Orthodox Baha'is
are still under threat. As all denominations are. I doubt the Haifan
administration will learn anything from this lawsuit. They've never
learned anything from the past but have only intensified their
fanaticism at ever turn.

As damaged parties you have legal rights. If they appeal
Judge St. Eve's ruling, which they probably will, all the better,
because your damages will be all the more undeniable to
another judge, or, preferably, a jury. I don't believe a jury of
Americans would fail to see through the contemptible tactics
of Haifan "administrators." After hearing the whole story, they
would eagerly award very high punitive damages to the
innocent. Constitutional issues are involved. That puts the
entire matter into a different and higher realm of importance.

It's the Haifans who have dragged the Faith through the mud
in public. A successful lawsuit against them would help Americans,
including people in Chicago, wake up to what kind of
organization they really are. That would help cleanse the Faith
of the mire that now bogs it down in every way. Eventually, it will
happen.

That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"

Jeffrey,

Upon further reflection this morning, I would emphasize that
what is of concern is not vengance nor money but justice--
and defending the weak, the vulnerable, the uninformed,
the deceived, the simple, the trusting, the unsuspecting
from such trauma as many thousands, if not tens of thousands,
of American citizens have been subjected to in one way or
another by the spiritually sick and corrupt organization that has
imposed itself upon Baha'u'llah's Faith, subverting it into a fanatical
system of oppression almost beyond what the average person can
imagine, as recounted below in your own words in the court documents:


http://www.truebahai.com/court/obf-goldberg.pdf

"26. On May 27, 1997, my wife and I were declared to be covenant-breakers
and all of my friends in the Faith were instructed to shun me entirely and
never to have any contact with me or face the same expulsion themselves. A
true and correct copy of the NSA's letter of May 27, 1997, and the front page
of The American Bahá'í for June 24, 1997, are attached as Exhibit 5).

27. My wife did not join the OBF at that time but she was also expelled and
shunned because she refused to take my children and divorce me as they had
insisted she must.

28. The NSA organization claims that shunning us as covenant-breakers is
required to maintain the unity of the Faith. The OBF believe, on the other
hand, that unity in the Faith is achieved and maintained by obedience to the
Center of the Cause, the living Guardian, and that a
covenant-breaker is one who rejects the authority of the Guardian.

29. Only one member of my former community, the Bahá'ís of Barrington,
Illinois, was willing to speak with me (Janice Franco). At first, I was
reluctant to tell Ms. Franco what I had learned because I did not want her
to face the same dilemma that I now faced. She insisted,
however, that I explain to her what I discovered. I then carefully explained
the situation using only materials officially accepted by the NSA to show
her my belief that the Hands wrongfully usurped authority and that their
Universal House of Justice should have the Guardian as its head. Ms. Franco
was declared to be a covenant-breaker and shunned after she dared to share
these arguments with the rest of the community. The other community members
rejected these arguments after they were threatened by a representative of
the NSA's organization that they too would be shunned and cut off forever
from many of their friends and family unless they rejected these ideas and
shunned my family and I, and Ms. Franco.

30. Just before I had declared my acceptance of the Guardianship, my
brother, who was not a Bahá'í at all, coincidentally became engaged to marry
a believer under the NSA's organization.

31. I was not permitted to attend my brother's wedding, and my family
thereafter had to hold separate family functions so that I would not be
present at the same time as brother's wife who literally held the belief
that I was satanic and my breath was poisonous so that mere contact with me
would be dangerous.

32. After the birth of my nephew, I was not allowed to see him at all, nor
does he even know of the existence of his uncle and the rest of my family.

33. My story is by no means unique. Many of my fellow believers within the
OBF report similar experiences. Juan Cole, a professor of modern Middle East
and Southeastern Asian history for the History department of the University
of Michigan has written about the fanatical shunning behavior exhibited by the
NSA and its organization, characterizing it as "cultlike." Attached as Exhibit 6
are emails written by Dr. Cole. Attached as Exhibit 7 is an article by Dr Cole
detailing the shunning practices."

http://www.truebahai.com/court/ Related documents regarding nsa lawsuit in
2007 against the Orthodox Baha'i Faith


In a different context, Baha'u'llah wrote "crush the oppressor who flourisheth with
the rod of the commandments of your Lord," addressing the leaders of the
United States. Admittedly referring to international conflict, he nevertheless
allowed and presupposed there are times when force must be used for
the benefit of social order and preservation of the values of a humane
society. There are despots in this world who understand nothing but force.
The perverted organization of the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj has beyond
doubt demonstrated for many decades its toxic corruption to the body
politic and its own members for whom it has very little regard.

In my view, it would be a mistake to treat it in a manner better than it deserves,
for it will only continue to malign and persecute other innocents if not brought
to bar of justice under the full force of the law. The heavy burden Baha'u'llah
places on secular and religious leaders is to understand the widsom that
there are times when they must "crush the oppressor who flourisheth," for
the common good.

If you didn't notice the sneering and contempt, I would say you either missed it
or misread it.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/




----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Until the Judgment becomes final, I am afraid I cannot comment on
those questions.
Thank you all for your congratulations. I am of course very happy with
Judge St Eve's impressive opinion and all of the Orthodox Baha'is look
forward to the day when we can continue to publicly practice our
religion without interference from the violating Wilmette NSA.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I'd urge you to consider the history of the nsa, whether from your
perspective, the last fifty years, or over eighty years, from view. It has
incessantly harassed and hounded people for matters of conscience,
deeply injured countless individuals and families, schemed and
conspired, coerced and deceived, used the most despicable tactics,
to deprive fellow citizens of their Constitutional right to freedom of
religious belief and conviction.

Such criminals should now be shown no mercy whatsoever, but
prosecuted to the fullest extent of American law. They would have shown
Orthodox Baha'is no mercy or tolerance if they had prevailed in deceiving
the Court. Indeed, the obvious purpose of their lawsuit was to strip you of
your civil rights, while pretending to be a mere corporation. Anything less
than many tens of millions of dollars will fail to penetrate their corrupt
mentality and fail to protect present and future Bahais, of all persuasions,
from their sick, complacent self-righteousness. It is just to expose them for
what they have become and are. "The best of all to Me is Justice." --Baha'u'llah

There's a very long and detailed historical record of their criminal acts,
in numerous books and on the Internet. As you're probably aware,
there also exists a large number of people most likely eager to testify in
court to defend the civilized values that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught,
which the corrupt "administration" left behind so many long decades ago.

Congratulations, again. You fought an arduous and noble battle, virtually
alone, out spent, yet won. It must be a gratifying feeling to know you have
successfully defended the most precious values of a civilized society
and of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. You can rightly be proud of that.

My deepest, sincere respect.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I would think, given their harassment and attempt to deprive
Orthodox Baha'is, and other denominations, of their and our
first admendment rights, you might want to consider suing the
Haifan Baha'is for costs and damages. All of your lives were
severely impacted by their deceptive and fraudulent lawsuit,
forcing many older people to travel long distances and forage
through numerous documents under what had to be extremely
stressful and emotional duress attempting to protect themselves.
It would only be just for you to sue them back in self-defense.
They're not going to be leaving you and others alone otherwise.
The underlings here have already been immediately sneering
at the Judge Amy St. Eve's Opinion. You know they're doing it
elsewhere.

I would suggest punitive damages of $50 to $100 million. The
more the better, given the criminals you're dealing with and
the tactics they've regularly used, which you can easily prove
and document. Many six-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers will work
pro-bono for serious settlements in that range, though go for
more if they think you can get it. Issues of first admendment
rights, and intentionally and criminally infringing on them, have
historically proven highly lucrative for lawyers. That's what the
lawyers I've consulted with tell me.

If you don't teach them the lesson they need to learn now, they
will only continue their harassment of Orthodox Baha'is other
Baha'i denominations and their associated criminal activities.
Of course, I'm not so naive as to imagine, though, that they'll
ever fully reform. It's more about self-defense than doing them
a good turn. The fanatics and criminals among the Haifan
Baha'is are beyond redemption, but you would be giving
the more practical heads a reason for considering various
changes of behavior.

They'll never be content with "an inability to silence" you. I am
speaking from over 12 years of dealing with the fanatics online,
since 1996.... I would suggest you need another judgement or
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.

That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Dear Non-Bahai Observers,

Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.

Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
documenting these tactics, spanning decades, may be found below:

"The Bahai Technique":
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm

Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm

Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.

The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/




2007 - Lawsuit by Wilmette NSA against Other Denominations

Orthodox Baha'i Faith Press Release

[H***@aol.com]

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
In the 2007 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform Bahai Faith submitted three letters as amici curiae to Judge

None of which appear in the court documents.

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our ...

What's a matter Freddie? Afraid you might get sued too?

[لا اله الا الله حقاً حقاً]

Post by H***@aol.com

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
In the 2007 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform Bahai Faith submitted three letters as amici curiae to Judge

None of which appear in the court documents.

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our ...

What's a matter Freddie? Afraid you might get sued too?

As a recent precedent exists against you, any suit brought by your
organization would rebound on you and Fred would stand to win, as did
the Remeyites. That said, I encourage Fred and all other splinter
Bahai organizations to sue your organization, pursue it mercilessly
within the legal system to thereby have the illegal and
unconstitutional 1927-28 patent formally rescinded in law.

DEATH TO HAIFAN BAHAISM!

W

[All Bad]

Does anyone have a scorecard on who are the following:

NSA-UHG
PNBC
SIBC
BPUPC

- All Bad

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
Amici curiae, Reform Bahai Faith
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USDistrictCourt07.htm
US District Court of Northern Illinois rules against Haifan Baha'is
April 23, 2008
In the 2007 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform
Bahai Faith submitted three letters as amici curiae to Judge Amy J. St.
Here are highlights from both the April 23, 2008 Opinion and Motion.
Original documents at Contempt Motion by Wilmette NSA
& Response by Orthodox Bahá'í Faith
http://trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court_case.html
http://www.truebahai.com/court/139-opinion.pdf
http://www.truebahai.com/court/140-judgment.pdf
"[T]he chain of successorship lacks a link," wrote the Honorable Amy J. St
Eve, United States District Court Judge, in her Judgment in favor of
theChicago_trial_january_7_2008_006 Orthodox Bahai Faith and the Baha'i
Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant. The Court ruled on April
23, 2008 after holding an evidentiary hearing last January 7, 2008 in
Chicago, Illinois on the contempt motion brought by the National Spiritual
Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States (Wilmette NSA).
In her decision, the Court stated that: "the vast weight of the record
(including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant
doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the
PNBC's membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record
further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction,
and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction.
Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the
PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have
not violated the injunction."
p: 12
II. Application To The Court's Findings of Fact Applying the above-stated
principles here, none of the Alleged Contemnors is in privity with the
bound entity, and thus none has violated the injunction. In rendering this
finding, the Court has carefully and deliberately weighed all of the
evidence adduced at the hearing and otherwise submitted by the parties.
The Court closely assessed the demeanor of each testifying witness,
including his or her body language, tone of voice, facial expressions,
mannerisms, and other factors indicative of credibility.
p. 27
Rather, the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony)
reflects that there was a significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet
of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially
from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack
of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to
avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial
continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr.
Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction.
p. 31
After considering the full record in this case, the Court finds that SIBC
and the BPUPC are not in privity with the NSA-UHG....
p. 32
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court finds that the Alleged Contemnors are not
in privity with the NSA-UHG and, in turn, that they are not in contempt of
the injunction.
Judge Amy J. St. Eve
April 23, 2008
--
January 7, 2008 - Letter to Judge Amy J. St. Eve
FYI
Reform Bahai Faith
www.reformbahai.org
January 7, 2008
Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878
The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
The Reform Bahai Faith submits to the Court that the NSA of Wilmette,
while publicly hiding behind a facade of liberalism, is essentially
practicing Islamic "takfir," in the words of the scholar of Islam Bernard
Lewis, "recognizing and denouncing apostasy," labeling people "kafir" or
infidels, and issuing "fatwas" or decrees, denying the very existence of
other Bahais and denominations, all indicative of the worst in the Shiite
Islamic heritage of the Bahai Faith-practices Baha'u'llah specifically
rejected, teaching tolerance of different religious views congruent with
modern Western custom and practice. Nothing could be more diametrically
opposed to the democracy of our civic and legal order. The NSA of Wilmette
is essentially seeking to use the Court in a type of jihad.
Although the Reform Bahai Faith is not a party to Civil Action No. 64 C
1878, we have knowledge of what we believe are malicious and slanderous
misrepresentations made to the Court on behalf of the NSA of Wilmette in
"14. The Web site at 'reformbahai.org' is the site of an outspoken critic
of NSA named Frederick Glaysher. While the Web site gives the impression
that an organization is associated with Mr. Glaysher, there is no such
organization. On information and belief, Mr. Glaysher's claims are simply
not taken seriously by any one. The Web site is merely a stage, in a comer
of the Web, for Mr. Glaysher's unusual fixation upon, and animus toward,
NSA. This, of course, is not evidence of a Baha'i Faith denomination. The
attached affidavit of Tracey Giertz indicates there was no content at this
site until September 3, 2004. See id at ¶ 18."
The NSA of Wilmette offers the Court no "information" but ad hominem and
slanderous vilification, which it has routinely used against other Bahai
denominations since as early as the 1930s. Tracey Giertz, in her affidavit
ends with Paragraph 16, making no mention of the Reform Bahai Faith or
www.reformbahai.org, only the Free Bahais. Neither I nor the Reform Bahai
Faith has ever had any interest in, or ownership of, the Free Bahais and
their website. Nor have I or the Reform Bahai Faith ever been involved in
any way with the Unitarian Bahais and their website. Our website was
available online beginning August 19, 2004. By chance, the Reform Bahai
website is registered through the same registration service as the Free
Bahais, GoDaddy.com, one of the least expensive, used by over 25 million
people, and which protects personal information from identity thieves. The
Archive service Tracey Giertz used often takes a week or two to find and
document new websites.
With approximately [deleted] members, most of whom are US citizens, Reform
Bahais indeed do exist and are actively seeking to grow and develop in
accordance with the rights and obligations of the Constitution and Bill of
Rights. The NSA is seeking to use the ruling of a US Court against Bahai
denominations who hold other religious opinions and thereby prohibit the
"free exercise"of their and our First Amendment rights.
I also wish to inform the Court that the Reform Bahai Press has just
published its first book of Bahai writings, The Universal Principles of
the Reform Bahai Faith, available for sale throughout the country and much
of the world since December 14, 2007. I have enclosed a copy of the book
for the Court as further evidence of our existence as a growing,
independent Bahai denomination.
The Reform Bahai Faith does not use either an apostrophe nor diacritical
marks in the generic word Bahai, a spelling widely used in the USA since
as early as 1900.
The Reform Bahai Faith emphatically presents before the Court the fact
that it does not look to other Bahai denominations for its understanding
of the Teachings of Baha'u'llah, especially all those denominations who
are named parties, all of which we believe are based upon a fraudulent
will and testament, purporting to be that of Abdu'l-Baha, and which
document gave birth to the fundamentalist religious organization that has
initiated the lawsuit before the Court, pretending to be a mere
corporation. We provided the Court with a certified copy from the Library
of Congress of Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's Report on the Writing Shown on
the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha on March 8, 2007.
The animus of the NSA of Wilmette against the Reform Bahai Faith stems,
among those reasons already alluded to, from the fact that the Reform
Bahai Faith does not believe in an eventual Bahai theocracy; but a
separation of church and state; rejects the infallibility of any Bahai
Universal House of Justice; accepts that women can serve at all elected
levels, including someday on a properly elected Bahai Universal House of
Justice, unlike the corrupt one now located in Haifa, Israel.
We draw the attention of the Court to twenty-six pages of selections from
Mirza Ahmad Sohrab's Broken Silence: The Story of Today's Struggle for
Religious Freedom (1942), documenting the attempts by the NSA of Wilmette
to trademark and copyright the generic term Bahai in 1928, though Bahais
of different belief already existed at that time in Ruth White and others;
the 1941 case before Judge Valente of the New York Supreme Court, in New
York County; both revealing the unmitigated viciousness that the NSA has
directed in the past against American citizens who were Bahais holding
different religious convictions. Available via the Internet, Excerpts
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/BrokenSilence,CourtCase.pdf
We again appeal to the Court to protect our Constitutional rights to
religious freedom and liberty.
Most respectfully yours,
Reform Bahai Faith
Enclosure: The Universal Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith. Reform
Bahai Press, 2008. 148 pages.
June 18, 2007
The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878
As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned
about the impact of this lawsuit upon our denomination.
The lawyer [delete] has reported to us that the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i
denomination has claimed in Court that the Reform Bahai Faith does not
exist. I am writing to inform you that there are approximately [delete]
members of the Reform Bahai Faith, most of whom are citizens of the United
States of America. The Reform Bahai Press is a legally registered entity
in Oakland County, Michigan and will publish its first book in 2008.
As mentioned in my March 8, 2007 amici curiae letter to you, while members
of the Reform Bahai Faith believe the will and testament of Abdu'l-Baha
was a fraudulent document, the Reform Bahai Faith looks to the beginning
of our denomination in the numerous books and writings of Ruth White,
Julie Chanler, and Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, from 1928 through the 1950s. The
latter two were both described in New York Times obituaries as members of
the Reform Bahai Movement, and I herewith provide documentation.
In our view, the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination is hiding behind
and using, indeed manipulating corporate law to conduct what is
essentially a doctrinal struggle with the several Bahai denominations that
have evolved and have existed since as early as 1928 in the case of Ruth
White. The nsa has done this repeatedly through the US courts and legal
system: in 1928 through misrepresentation and fraud it copyrighted and
trademarked the word Bahai; in 1941, it sued unsuccessfully Chanler and
Sohrab twice; it sued Mason Remey in 1966 but he was reportedly too old
and feeble to show up and defend himself being out of the country; it is
now attempting to use the US District Court of Northern Illinois to
silence the several active and existing Bahai denominations with which it
differs on religious doctrine and interpretation. For decades, in and out
of the courts, the nsa has used such reprehensible tactics as slander, ad
hominem, shunning, and intimidation, and the like, to muzzle and discredit
dissenters and other denominations.
We ask the Court to protect both our Constitutional right to religious
freedom and conscience and to protect us from having to choose between our
loyalty to our government and legal system and the integrity of our
beliefs. Though small in number from our beginning in 2004, we are sincere
in our religious convictions, and ask the Court to protect our right to
grow and develop unharassed by those who under the guise of corporate law
seek to destroy us.
Respectfully,
The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org
Mirza Ahamd Sohrab died Apr 20, 1958. In his obituary he is described as
"leader of the Reform Bahá'í Movement in the United States". The New York
Times, Apr 22, 1958; p. 33 "Obituary."
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70B11F73D59107B93C0AB178FD85F4C8585F9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Ahmad_Sohrab
Julie Olin Chanler. She died on March 11, 1961, in her obituary she was
described as "spiritual leader of the Reform Baha'i movement...." The New
York Times, Mar 12, 1961; pg 86. Her husband was Lewis Stuyvesant Chanler,
an ex-Lieutenant Governor of New York (1907-08) and a former Democratic
candidate for Governor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Lynch_Olin
Given the recent attempt (April 07) to suppress discussion on Google
Groups, apparently about Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's impeccable
qualifications to judge the authenticity of Abdu'l-Baha's purported will
and testament, here is the letter that the Reform Bahai Faith, as amici
March 8, 2007
The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878
As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are concerned about the
impact of the present lawsuit upon our denomination, though differing in
view from all named parties. Religious liberty is not only involved but is
the issue before the Court.
While all named parties essentially differ over their interpretation of
the purported will and testament of Abdu'l-Baha, members of the Reform
Bahai Faith agree with the 1929 opinion of Bahai Ruth White and the 1930
Report of Dr. Charles Ainsworth Mitchell that the will is a fraudulent
document.
Dr. Mitchell was a leading forensic researcher of the time at the British
Museum and his work is still cited in academic sources. His Report is
deposited with the Library of Congress (LC Control No.: mm 81000871) and a
recently obtained certified copy is herewith provided to the Court.
The key passage of Dr. Mitchell's Report, on the last page, second to the
last paragraph, reads, "A minute comparison of the authenticated writing
with the writing on every page of the alleged will . . . has failed to
detect in any part of the will the characteristics of the writing of
Abdu'l-Baha, as shown in the authenticated specimens."
Respectfully,
Frederick Glaysher
The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org
[original certified copy enclosed to Judge Amy St. Eve]
--
Dr. C. (Charles) Ainsworth Mitchell - Certified Copy from the Library of Congress
Report on the Writing Shown on the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha. 1930.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/CAMitchell_Report.htm
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"
Jeffrey,
I agree with and share your regard for Baha'u'llah's admonition
forbidding contention. To my mind, is it applicable in this case?
Abdu'l-Baha spoke forcefully about confronting evil doers, not
forgiving them, lest they only continue in their treachery. Further,
you're referring to a Baha'i denomination that has knowingly
based in its claim to authority on a fraudulent will and testament,
while harassing and destroying the lives of countless Baha'is
and families throughout the decades. Baha'u'llah Himself
confronted the Son of the Wolf and others in unequivocal
language and terms. I don't believe the quotation quite fits the
conditions.
Reflecting on how the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj have reacted
to and treated such set backs in the past, I highly doubt you'll
see much change in them. They will continue as they have, with
you and other Baha'i denominations. Consider that Judge Valente,
of the Supreme Court of New York in no uncertain terms ruled
against them in their lawsuit against Sohrab and Chanler, pointing
out the word Bahai was a generic term that couldn't not be
copyrighted or monopolized by one denomination. Time went by,
everyone was looking in a different direction. They took out another
bogus copyright with the patent office, adding diacritics and an
apostrophe, but none the less the same game. A Constitutional
lawyer I spoke with about it just laughed, saying it would never
stand up in court and that anyone can copyright anything with the
government clerks, which is utterly meaningless. But the purpose
is to intimidate other Bahais into thinking it means something,
as though they own it....
Their thinking isn't based on the reason and rational constructs
that make sense in a Western court of law. Sohrab understood
quite well that Shoghi Effendi had gone back to the medieval
frame of reference, creating a system more resonant with the
Shiite worldview. I'm afraid that's the case and why so many
of our fellow Bahais are trapped in an iron cage of tyranny and
fanaticism. One more Western judge who's a *kafir* won't make
a difference in Haifa, or, here's the fact difficult to appreciate,
in Wilmette.... They simply aren't going to change as result of
this lawsuit. It's hoping for too much from a pernicious system
that has demonstrated for so long that it's incapable of change.
It's only a matter of time until they trump up some other bogus
lawsuit to justify to themselves their fanaticism. Abdu'l-Baha
spoke of defending people threatened. All Orthodox Baha'is
are still under threat. As all denominations are. I doubt the Haifan
administration will learn anything from this lawsuit. They've never
learned anything from the past but have only intensified their
fanaticism at ever turn.
As damaged parties you have legal rights. If they appeal
Judge St. Eve's ruling, which they probably will, all the better,
because your damages will be all the more undeniable to
another judge, or, preferably, a jury. I don't believe a jury of
Americans would fail to see through the contemptible tactics
of Haifan "administrators." After hearing the whole story, they
would eagerly award very high punitive damages to the
innocent. Constitutional issues are involved. That puts the
entire matter into a different and higher realm of importance.
It's the Haifans who have dragged the Faith through the mud
in public. A successful lawsuit against them would help Americans,
including people in Chicago, wake up to what kind of
organization they really are. That would help cleanse the Faith
of the mire that now bogs it down in every way. Eventually, it will
happen.
That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"
Jeffrey,
Upon further reflection this morning, I would emphasize that
what is of concern is not vengance nor money but justice--
and defending the weak, the vulnerable, the uninformed,
the deceived, the simple, the trusting, the unsuspecting
from such trauma as many thousands, if not tens of thousands,
of American citizens have been subjected to in one way or
another by the spiritually sick and corrupt organization that has
imposed itself upon Baha'u'llah's Faith, subverting it into a fanatical
system of oppression almost beyond what the average person can
http://www.truebahai.com/court/obf-goldberg.pdf
"26. On May 27, 1997, my wife and I were declared to be covenant-breakers
and all of my friends in the Faith were instructed to shun me entirely and
never to have any contact with me or face the same expulsion themselves. A
true and correct copy of the NSA's letter of May 27, 1997, and the front page
of The American Bahá'í for June 24, 1997, are attached as Exhibit 5).
27. My wife did not join the OBF at that time but she was also expelled and
shunned because she refused to take my children and divorce me as they had
insisted she must.
28. The NSA organization claims that shunning us as covenant-breakers is
required to maintain the unity of the Faith. The OBF believe, on the other
hand, that unity in the Faith is achieved and maintained by obedience to the
Center of the Cause, the living Guardian, and that a
covenant-breaker is one who rejects the authority of the Guardian.
29. Only one member of my former community, the Bahá'ís of Barrington,
Illinois, was willing to speak with me (Janice Franco). At first, I was
reluctant to tell Ms. Franco what I had learned because I did not want her
to face the same dilemma that I now faced. She insisted,
however, that I explain to her what I discovered. I then carefully explained
the situation using only materials officially accepted by the NSA to show
her my belief that the Hands wrongfully usurped authority and that their
Universal House of Justice should have the Guardian as its head. Ms. Franco
was declared to be a covenant-breaker and shunned after she dared to share
these arguments with the rest of the community. The other community members
rejected these arguments after they were threatened by a representative of
the NSA's organization that they too would be shunned and cut off forever
from many of their friends and family unless they rejected these ideas and
shunned my family and I, and Ms. Franco.
30. Just before I had declared my acceptance of the Guardianship, my
brother, who was not a Bahá'í at all, coincidentally became engaged to marry
a believer under the NSA's organization.
31. I was not permitted to attend my brother's wedding, and my family
thereafter had to hold separate family functions so that I would not be
present at the same time as brother's wife who literally held the belief
that I was satanic and my breath was poisonous so that mere contact with me
would be dangerous.
32. After the birth of my nephew, I was not allowed to see him at all, nor
does he even know of the existence of his uncle and the rest of my family.
33. My story is by no means unique. Many of my fellow believers within the
OBF report similar experiences. Juan Cole, a professor of modern Middle East
and Southeastern Asian history for the History department of the University
of Michigan has written about the fanatical shunning behavior exhibited by the
NSA and its organization, characterizing it as "cultlike." Attached as Exhibit 6
are emails written by Dr. Cole. Attached as Exhibit 7 is an article by Dr Cole
detailing the shunning practices."
http://www.truebahai.com/court/ Related documents regarding nsa lawsuit in
2007 against the Orthodox Baha'i Faith
In a different context, Baha'u'llah wrote "crush the oppressor who flourisheth with
the rod of the commandments of your Lord," addressing the leaders of the
United States. Admittedly referring to international conflict, he nevertheless
allowed and presupposed there are times when force must be used for
the benefit of social order and preservation of the values of a humane
society. There are despots in this world who understand nothing but force.
The perverted organization of the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj has beyond
doubt demonstrated for many decades its toxic corruption to the body
politic and its own members for whom it has very little regard.
In my view, it would be a mistake to treat it in a manner better than it deserves,
for it will only continue to malign and persecute other innocents if not brought
to bar of justice under the full force of the law. The heavy burden Baha'u'llah
places on secular and religious leaders is to understand the widsom that
there are times when they must "crush the oppressor who flourisheth," for
the common good.
If you didn't notice the sneering and contempt, I would say you either missed it
or misread it.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Until the Judgment becomes final, I am afraid I cannot comment on
those questions.
Thank you all for your congratulations. I am of course very happy with
Judge St Eve's impressive opinion and all of the Orthodox Baha'is look
forward to the day when we can continue to publicly practice our
religion without interference from the violating Wilmette NSA.
Jeffrey

--
Jeffrey,
I'd urge you to consider the history of the nsa, whether from your
perspective, the last fifty years, or over eighty years, from view. It has
incessantly harassed and hounded people for matters of conscience,
deeply injured countless individuals and families, schemed and
conspired, coerced and deceived, used the most despicable tactics,
to deprive fellow citizens of their Constitutional right to freedom of
religious belief and conviction.
Such criminals should now be shown no mercy whatsoever, but
prosecuted to the fullest extent of American law. They would have shown
Orthodox Baha'is no mercy or tolerance if they had prevailed in deceiving
the Court. Indeed, the obvious purpose of their lawsuit was to strip you of
your civil rights, while pretending to be a mere corporation. Anything less
than many tens of millions of dollars will fail to penetrate their corrupt
mentality and fail to protect present and future Bahais, of all persuasions,
from their sick, complacent self-righteousness. It is just to expose them for
what they have become and are. "The best of all to Me is
Justice." --Baha'u'llah
There's a very long and detailed historical record of their criminal acts,
in numerous books and on the Internet. As you're probably aware,
there also exists a large number of people most likely eager to testify in
court to defend the civilized values that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught,
which the corrupt "administration" left behind so many long decades ago.
Congratulations, again. You fought an arduous and noble battle, virtually
alone, out spent, yet won. It must be a gratifying feeling to know you have
successfully defended the most precious values of a civilized society
and of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. You can rightly be proud of that.
My deepest, sincere respect.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.
Jeffrey

--
Jeffrey,
I would think, given their harassment and attempt to deprive
Orthodox Baha'is, and other denominations, of their and our
first admendment rights, you might want to consider suing the
Haifan Baha'is for costs and damages. All of your lives were
severely impacted by their deceptive and fraudulent lawsuit,
forcing many older people to travel long distances and forage
through numerous documents under what had to be extremely
stressful and emotional duress attempting to protect themselves.
It would only be just for you to sue them back in self-defense.
They're not going to be leaving you and others alone otherwise.
The underlings here have already been immediately sneering
at the Judge Amy St. Eve's Opinion. You know they're doing it
elsewhere.
I would suggest punitive damages of $50 to $100 million. The
more the better, given the criminals you're dealing with and
the tactics they've regularly used, which you can easily prove
and document. Many six-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers will work
pro-bono for serious settlements in that range, though go for
more if they think you can get it. Issues of first admendment
rights, and intentionally and criminally infringing on them, have
historically proven highly lucrative for lawyers. That's what the
lawyers I've consulted with tell me.
If you don't teach them the lesson they need to learn now, they
will only continue their harassment of Orthodox Baha'is other
Baha'i denominations and their associated criminal activities.
Of course, I'm not so naive as to imagine, though, that they'll
ever fully reform. It's more about self-defense than doing them
a good turn. The fanatics and criminals among the Haifan
Baha'is are beyond redemption, but you would be giving
the more practical heads a reason for considering various
changes of behavior.
They'll never be content with "an inability to silence" you. I am
speaking from over 12 years of dealing with the fanatics online,
since 1996.... I would suggest you need another judgement or
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.
That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is
Dear Non-Bahai Observers,
Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.
Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm
Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm
Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.
The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
2007 - Lawsuit by Wilmette NSA against Other Denominations
Orthodox Baha'i Faith Press Release

[Jeffrey]

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
NSA-UHG
PNBC
SIBC
BPUPC
- All Bad

NSA-UHG = The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United
States Under the Hereditary Guardianship. This was the entity against
whom the 1966 Judgment was entered -- the NSA under Mason Remey --.

PNBC = The Provisional National Baha'i Council of the United States -
the national governing body of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith (OBF) and one
of the entities the Wilmette NSA brought into court.

SIBC - This is the Second International Baha'i Council. Involved in
the action brought by the Wilmette NSA, the SIBC was the governing
body of the Jensen group. This has nothing to do with the OBF. The
SIBC also was the name of an unrelated body under Mason Remey of the
same name.

BPUPC - Baha'i Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant - One
of the entities the NSA brought contempt charges against and it is
related to the Jensen/ Chase group and not to the OBF.

Jeffrey

[Baha'i Censorship - See Website]

Amici curiae, Reform Bahai Faith
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USDistrictCourt07.htm



US District Court of Northern Illinois rules against Haifan Baha'is
April 23, 2008


In the 2007 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform Bahai Faith submitted three letters as amici curiae to Judge
Amy J. St. Eve:



Here are highlights from both the April 23, 2008 Opinion and Motion. Further comments at bottom:


Original documents at Contempt Motion by Wilmette NSA
& Response by Orthodox Bahá'í Faith
http://trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court_case.html

http://www.truebahai.com/court/139-opinion.pdf

http://www.truebahai.com/court/140-judgment.pdf


"[T]he chain of successorship lacks a link," wrote the Honorable Amy J. St Eve, United States District Court Judge, in her Judgment
in favor of theChicago_trial_january_7_2008_006 Orthodox Bahai Faith and the Baha'i Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant.
The Court ruled on April 23, 2008 after holding an evidentiary hearing last January 7, 2008 in Chicago, Illinois on the contempt
motion brought by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States (Wilmette NSA).

In her decision, the Court stated that: "the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a
significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of
the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created
to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a
result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction."


Excerpts:

p: 12
II. Application To The Court's Findings of Fact Applying the above-stated principles here, none of the Alleged Contemnors is in
privity with the bound entity, and thus none has violated the injunction. In rendering this finding, the Court has carefully and
deliberately weighed all of the evidence adduced at the hearing and otherwise submitted by the parties. The Court closely assessed
the demeanor of each testifying witness, including his or her body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, mannerisms, and
other factors indicative of credibility.

p. 27
Rather, the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant doctrinal rift on a
critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further
reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the
injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr.
Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction.

p. 31
After considering the full record in this case, the Court finds that SIBC and the BPUPC are not in privity with the NSA-UHG....

p. 32
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court finds that the Alleged Contemnors are not in privity with the NSA-UHG and, in turn, that they are
not in contempt of the injunction.

Judge Amy J. St. Eve
April 23, 2008




--



January 7, 2008 - Letter to Judge Amy J. St. Eve

FYI


Reform Bahai Faith
www.reformbahai.org


January 7, 2008

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dear Judge St. Eve:

The Reform Bahai Faith submits to the Court that the NSA of Wilmette, while publicly hiding behind a facade of liberalism, is
essentially practicing Islamic "takfir," in the words of the scholar of Islam Bernard Lewis, "recognizing and denouncing apostasy,"
labeling people "kafir" or infidels, and issuing "fatwas" or decrees, denying the very existence of other Bahais and denominations,
all indicative of the worst in the Shiite Islamic heritage of the Bahai Faith-practices Baha'u'llah specifically rejected, teaching
tolerance of different religious views congruent with modern Western custom and practice. Nothing could be more diametrically
opposed to the democracy of our civic and legal order. The NSA of Wilmette is essentially seeking to use the Court in a type of
jihad.

Although the Reform Bahai Faith is not a party to Civil Action No. 64 C 1878, we have knowledge of what we believe are malicious and
slanderous misrepresentations made to the Court on behalf of the NSA of Wilmette in Document 49-2:

"14. The Web site at 'reformbahai.org' is the site of an outspoken critic of NSA named Frederick Glaysher. While the Web site gives
the impression that an organization is associated with Mr. Glaysher, there is no such organization. On information and belief, Mr.
Glaysher's claims are simply not taken seriously by any one. The Web site is merely a stage, in a comer of the Web, for Mr.
Glaysher's unusual fixation upon, and animus toward, NSA. This, of course, is not evidence of a Baha'i Faith denomination. The
attached affidavit of Tracey Giertz indicates there was no content at this site until September 3, 2004. See id at ¶ 18."

The NSA of Wilmette offers the Court no "information" but ad hominem and slanderous vilification, which it has routinely used
against other Bahai denominations since as early as the 1930s. Tracey Giertz, in her affidavit ends with Paragraph 16, making no
mention of the Reform Bahai Faith or www.reformbahai.org, only the Free Bahais. Neither I nor the Reform Bahai Faith has ever had
any interest in, or ownership of, the Free Bahais and their website. Nor have I or the Reform Bahai Faith ever been involved in any
way with the Unitarian Bahais and their website. Our website was available online beginning August 19, 2004. By chance, the Reform
Bahai website is registered through the same registration service as the Free Bahais, GoDaddy.com, one of the least expensive, used
by over 25 million people, and which protects personal information from identity thieves. The Archive service Tracey Giertz used
often takes a week or two to find and document new websites.

With approximately [deleted] members, most of whom are US citizens, Reform Bahais indeed do exist and are actively seeking to grow
and develop in accordance with the rights and obligations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The NSA is seeking to use the
ruling of a US Court against Bahai denominations who hold other religious opinions and thereby prohibit the "free exercise"of their
and our First Amendment rights.

I also wish to inform the Court that the Reform Bahai Press has just published its first book of Bahai writings, The Universal
Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith, available for sale throughout the country and much of the world since December 14, 2007. I
have enclosed a copy of the book for the Court as further evidence of our existence as a growing, independent Bahai denomination.

The Reform Bahai Faith does not use either an apostrophe nor diacritical marks in the generic word Bahai, a spelling widely used in
the USA since as early as 1900.

The Reform Bahai Faith emphatically presents before the Court the fact that it does not look to other Bahai denominations for its
understanding of the Teachings of Baha'u'llah, especially all those denominations who are named parties, all of which we believe are
based upon a fraudulent will and testament, purporting to be that of Abdu'l-Baha, and which document gave birth to the
fundamentalist religious organization that has initiated the lawsuit before the Court, pretending to be a mere corporation. We
provided the Court with a certified copy from the Library of Congress of Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's Report on the Writing Shown on
the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha on March 8, 2007.

The animus of the NSA of Wilmette against the Reform Bahai Faith stems, among those reasons already alluded to, from the fact that
the Reform Bahai Faith does not believe in an eventual Bahai theocracy; but a separation of church and state; rejects the
infallibility of any Bahai Universal House of Justice; accepts that women can serve at all elected levels, including someday on a
properly elected Bahai Universal House of Justice, unlike the corrupt one now located in Haifa, Israel.

We draw the attention of the Court to twenty-six pages of selections from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab's Broken Silence: The Story of Today's
Struggle for Religious Freedom (1942), documenting the attempts by the NSA of Wilmette to trademark and copyright the generic term
Bahai in 1928, though Bahais of different belief already existed at that time in Ruth White and others; the 1941 case before Judge
Valente of the New York Supreme Court, in New York County; both revealing the unmitigated viciousness that the NSA has directed in
the past against American citizens who were Bahais holding different religious convictions. Available via the Internet, Excerpts
regarding the 1941 New York Supreme Court Case before Judge Valente:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/BrokenSilence,CourtCase.pdf

We again appeal to the Court to protect our Constitutional rights to religious freedom and liberty.

Most respectfully yours,



Reform Bahai Faith



Enclosure: The Universal Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith. Reform Bahai Press, 2008. 148 pages.






June 18, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our denomination.

The lawyer [delete] has reported to us that the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination has claimed in Court that the Reform Bahai
Faith does not exist. I am writing to inform you that there are approximately [delete] members of the Reform Bahai Faith, most of
whom are citizens of the United States of America. The Reform Bahai Press is a legally registered entity in Oakland County, Michigan
and will publish its first book in 2008.

As mentioned in my March 8, 2007 amici curiae letter to you, while members of the Reform Bahai Faith believe the will and testament
of Abdu'l-Baha was a fraudulent document, the Reform Bahai Faith looks to the beginning of our denomination in the numerous books
and writings of Ruth White, Julie Chanler, and Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, from 1928 through the 1950s. The latter two were both described
in New York Times obituaries as members of the Reform Bahai Movement, and I herewith provide documentation.

In our view, the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination is hiding behind and using, indeed manipulating corporate law to conduct what
is essentially a doctrinal struggle with the several Bahai denominations that have evolved and have existed since as early as 1928
in the case of Ruth White. The nsa has done this repeatedly through the US courts and legal system: in 1928 through
misrepresentation and fraud it copyrighted and trademarked the word Bahai; in 1941, it sued unsuccessfully Chanler and Sohrab twice;
it sued Mason Remey in 1966 but he was reportedly too old and feeble to show up and defend himself being out of the country; it is
now attempting to use the US District Court of Northern Illinois to silence the several active and existing Bahai denominations with
which it differs on religious doctrine and interpretation. For decades, in and out of the courts, the nsa has used such
reprehensible tactics as slander, ad hominem, shunning, and intimidation, and the like, to muzzle and discredit dissenters and other
denominations.

We ask the Court to protect both our Constitutional right to religious freedom and conscience and to protect us from having to
choose between our loyalty to our government and legal system and the integrity of our beliefs. Though small in number from our
beginning in 2004, we are sincere in our religious convictions, and ask the Court to protect our right to grow and develop
unharassed by those who under the guise of corporate law seek to destroy us.

Respectfully,


The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org



Mirza Ahamd Sohrab died Apr 20, 1958. In his obituary he is described as "leader of the Reform Bahá'í Movement in the United
States". The New York Times, Apr 22, 1958; p. 33 "Obituary."
New York Times Preview attached as documentation:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70B11F73D59107B93C0AB178FD85F4C8585F9
Wikipedia biography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Ahmad_Sohrab

Julie Olin Chanler. She died on March 11, 1961, in her obituary she was described as "spiritual leader of the Reform Baha'i
movement...." The New York Times, Mar 12, 1961; pg 86. Her husband was Lewis Stuyvesant Chanler, an ex-Lieutenant Governor of New
York (1907-08) and a former Democratic candidate for Governor.
Wikipedia biography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Lynch_Olin



Given the recent attempt (April 07) to suppress discussion on Google Groups, apparently about Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's impeccable
qualifications to judge the authenticity of Abdu'l-Baha's purported will and testament, here is the letter that the Reform Bahai
Faith, as amici curiae, submitted to Judge Amy St. Eve on March 8, 2007:



March 8, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are concerned about the impact of the present lawsuit upon our denomination,
though differing in view from all named parties. Religious liberty is not only involved but is the issue before the Court.

While all named parties essentially differ over their interpretation of the purported will and testament of Abdu'l-Baha, members of
the Reform Bahai Faith agree with the 1929 opinion of Bahai Ruth White and the 1930 Report of Dr. Charles Ainsworth Mitchell that
the will is a fraudulent document.

Dr. Mitchell was a leading forensic researcher of the time at the British Museum and his work is still cited in academic sources.
His Report is deposited with the Library of Congress (LC Control No.: mm 81000871) and a recently obtained certified copy is
herewith provided to the Court.

The key passage of Dr. Mitchell's Report, on the last page, second to the last paragraph, reads, "A minute comparison of the
authenticated writing with the writing on every page of the alleged will . . . has failed to detect in any part of the will the
characteristics of the writing of Abdu'l-Baha, as shown in the authenticated specimens."

Respectfully,

Frederick Glaysher

The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org

[original certified copy enclosed to Judge Amy St. Eve]


--
A SCANNED COPY of Dr. Mitchell's certified Report may be examined at the link below:

Dr. C. (Charles) Ainsworth Mitchell - Certified Copy from the Library of Congress
Report on the Writing Shown on the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdu'l-Baha. 1930.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/CAMitchell_Report.htm



Further comments:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"

Jeffrey,

I agree with and share your regard for Baha'u'llah's admonition
forbidding contention. To my mind, is it applicable in this case?
Abdu'l-Baha spoke forcefully about confronting evil doers, not
forgiving them, lest they only continue in their treachery. Further,
you're referring to a Baha'i denomination that has knowingly
based in its claim to authority on a fraudulent will and testament,
while harassing and destroying the lives of countless Baha'is
and families throughout the decades. Baha'u'llah Himself
confronted the Son of the Wolf and others in unequivocal
language and terms. I don't believe the quotation quite fits the
conditions.

Reflecting on how the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj have reacted
to and treated such set backs in the past, I highly doubt you'll
see much change in them. They will continue as they have, with
you and other Baha'i denominations. Consider that Judge Valente,
of the Supreme Court of New York in no uncertain terms ruled
against them in their lawsuit against Sohrab and Chanler, pointing
out the word Bahai was a generic term that couldn't not be
copyrighted or monopolized by one denomination. Time went by,
everyone was looking in a different direction. They took out another
bogus copyright with the patent office, adding diacritics and an
apostrophe, but none the less the same game. A Constitutional
lawyer I spoke with about it just laughed, saying it would never
stand up in court and that anyone can copyright anything with the
government clerks, which is utterly meaningless. But the purpose
is to intimidate other Bahais into thinking it means something,
as though they own it....

Their thinking isn't based on the reason and rational constructs
that make sense in a Western court of law. Sohrab understood
quite well that Shoghi Effendi had gone back to the medieval
frame of reference, creating a system more resonant with the
Shiite worldview. I'm afraid that's the case and why so many
of our fellow Bahais are trapped in an iron cage of tyranny and
fanaticism. One more Western judge who's a *kafir* won't make
a difference in Haifa, or, here's the fact difficult to appreciate,
in Wilmette.... They simply aren't going to change as result of
this lawsuit. It's hoping for too much from a pernicious system
that has demonstrated for so long that it's incapable of change.

It's only a matter of time until they trump up some other bogus
lawsuit to justify to themselves their fanaticism. Abdu'l-Baha
spoke of defending people threatened. All Orthodox Baha'is
are still under threat. As all denominations are. I doubt the Haifan
administration will learn anything from this lawsuit. They've never
learned anything from the past but have only intensified their
fanaticism at ever turn.

As damaged parties you have legal rights. If they appeal
Judge St. Eve's ruling, which they probably will, all the better,
because your damages will be all the more undeniable to
another judge, or, preferably, a jury. I don't believe a jury of
Americans would fail to see through the contemptible tactics
of Haifan "administrators." After hearing the whole story, they
would eagerly award very high punitive damages to the
innocent. Constitutional issues are involved. That puts the
entire matter into a different and higher realm of importance.

It's the Haifans who have dragged the Faith through the mud
in public. A successful lawsuit against them would help Americans,
including people in Chicago, wake up to what kind of
organization they really are. That would help cleanse the Faith
of the mire that now bogs it down in every way. Eventually, it will
happen.

That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbidden"

Jeffrey,

Upon further reflection this morning, I would emphasize that
what is of concern is not vengance nor money but justice--
and defending the weak, the vulnerable, the uninformed,
the deceived, the simple, the trusting, the unsuspecting
from such trauma as many thousands, if not tens of thousands,
of American citizens have been subjected to in one way or
another by the spiritually sick and corrupt organization that has
imposed itself upon Baha'u'llah's Faith, subverting it into a fanatical
system of oppression almost beyond what the average person can
imagine, as recounted below in your own words in the court documents:


http://www.truebahai.com/court/obf-goldberg.pdf

"26. On May 27, 1997, my wife and I were declared to be covenant-breakers
and all of my friends in the Faith were instructed to shun me entirely and
never to have any contact with me or face the same expulsion themselves. A
true and correct copy of the NSA's letter of May 27, 1997, and the front page
of The American Bahá'í for June 24, 1997, are attached as Exhibit 5).

27. My wife did not join the OBF at that time but she was also expelled and
shunned because she refused to take my children and divorce me as they had
insisted she must.

28. The NSA organization claims that shunning us as covenant-breakers is
required to maintain the unity of the Faith. The OBF believe, on the other
hand, that unity in the Faith is achieved and maintained by obedience to the
Center of the Cause, the living Guardian, and that a
covenant-breaker is one who rejects the authority of the Guardian.

29. Only one member of my former community, the Bahá'ís of Barrington,
Illinois, was willing to speak with me (Janice Franco). At first, I was
reluctant to tell Ms. Franco what I had learned because I did not want her
to face the same dilemma that I now faced. She insisted,
however, that I explain to her what I discovered. I then carefully explained
the situation using only materials officially accepted by the NSA to show
her my belief that the Hands wrongfully usurped authority and that their
Universal House of Justice should have the Guardian as its head. Ms. Franco
was declared to be a covenant-breaker and shunned after she dared to share
these arguments with the rest of the community. The other community members
rejected these arguments after they were threatened by a representative of
the NSA's organization that they too would be shunned and cut off forever
from many of their friends and family unless they rejected these ideas and
shunned my family and I, and Ms. Franco.

30. Just before I had declared my acceptance of the Guardianship, my
brother, who was not a Bahá'í at all, coincidentally became engaged to marry
a believer under the NSA's organization.

31. I was not permitted to attend my brother's wedding, and my family
thereafter had to hold separate family functions so that I would not be
present at the same time as brother's wife who literally held the belief
that I was satanic and my breath was poisonous so that mere contact with me
would be dangerous.

32. After the birth of my nephew, I was not allowed to see him at all, nor
does he even know of the existence of his uncle and the rest of my family.

33. My story is by no means unique. Many of my fellow believers within the
OBF report similar experiences. Juan Cole, a professor of modern Middle East
and Southeastern Asian history for the History department of the University
of Michigan has written about the fanatical shunning behavior exhibited by the
NSA and its organization, characterizing it as "cultlike." Attached as Exhibit 6
are emails written by Dr. Cole. Attached as Exhibit 7 is an article by Dr Cole
detailing the shunning practices."

http://www.truebahai.com/court/ Related documents regarding nsa lawsuit in
2007 against the Orthodox Baha'i Faith


In a different context, Baha'u'llah wrote "crush the oppressor who flourisheth with
the rod of the commandments of your Lord," addressing the leaders of the
United States. Admittedly referring to international conflict, he nevertheless
allowed and presupposed there are times when force must be used for
the benefit of social order and preservation of the values of a humane
society. There are despots in this world who understand nothing but force.
The perverted organization of the Wilmette nsa and Haifan uhj has beyond
doubt demonstrated for many decades its toxic corruption to the body
politic and its own members for whom it has very little regard.

In my view, it would be a mistake to treat it in a manner better than it deserves,
for it will only continue to malign and persecute other innocents if not brought
to bar of justice under the full force of the law. The heavy burden Baha'u'llah
places on secular and religious leaders is to understand the widsom that
there are times when they must "crush the oppressor who flourisheth," for
the common good.

If you didn't notice the sneering and contempt, I would say you either missed it
or misread it.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/




----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Until the Judgment becomes final, I am afraid I cannot comment on
those questions.
Thank you all for your congratulations. I am of course very happy with
Judge St Eve's impressive opinion and all of the Orthodox Baha'is look
forward to the day when we can continue to publicly practice our
religion without interference from the violating Wilmette NSA.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I'd urge you to consider the history of the nsa, whether from your
perspective, the last fifty years, or over eighty years, from view. It has
incessantly harassed and hounded people for matters of conscience,
deeply injured countless individuals and families, schemed and
conspired, coerced and deceived, used the most despicable tactics,
to deprive fellow citizens of their Constitutional right to freedom of
religious belief and conviction.

Such criminals should now be shown no mercy whatsoever, but
prosecuted to the fullest extent of American law. They would have shown
Orthodox Baha'is no mercy or tolerance if they had prevailed in deceiving
the Court. Indeed, the obvious purpose of their lawsuit was to strip you of
your civil rights, while pretending to be a mere corporation. Anything less
than many tens of millions of dollars will fail to penetrate their corrupt
mentality and fail to protect present and future Bahais, of all persuasions,
from their sick, complacent self-righteousness. It is just to expose them for
what they have become and are. "The best of all to Me is Justice." --Baha'u'llah

There's a very long and detailed historical record of their criminal acts,
in numerous books and on the Internet. As you're probably aware,
there also exists a large number of people most likely eager to testify in
court to defend the civilized values that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught,
which the corrupt "administration" left behind so many long decades ago.

Congratulations, again. You fought an arduous and noble battle, virtually
alone, out spent, yet won. It must be a gratifying feeling to know you have
successfully defended the most precious values of a civilized society
and of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. You can rightly be proud of that.

My deepest, sincere respect.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Thank you for your support. I am not sure what you think the OBF
should do to the NSA. It would appear that their inability to silence
us would be enough to punish them.
Jeffrey

--

Jeffrey,

I would think, given their harassment and attempt to deprive
Orthodox Baha'is, and other denominations, of their and our
first admendment rights, you might want to consider suing the
Haifan Baha'is for costs and damages. All of your lives were
severely impacted by their deceptive and fraudulent lawsuit,
forcing many older people to travel long distances and forage
through numerous documents under what had to be extremely
stressful and emotional duress attempting to protect themselves.
It would only be just for you to sue them back in self-defense.
They're not going to be leaving you and others alone otherwise.
The underlings here have already been immediately sneering
at the Judge Amy St. Eve's Opinion. You know they're doing it
elsewhere.

I would suggest punitive damages of $50 to $100 million. The
more the better, given the criminals you're dealing with and
the tactics they've regularly used, which you can easily prove
and document. Many six-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers will work
pro-bono for serious settlements in that range, though go for
more if they think you can get it. Issues of first admendment
rights, and intentionally and criminally infringing on them, have
historically proven highly lucrative for lawyers. That's what the
lawyers I've consulted with tell me.

If you don't teach them the lesson they need to learn now, they
will only continue their harassment of Orthodox Baha'is other
Baha'i denominations and their associated criminal activities.
Of course, I'm not so naive as to imagine, though, that they'll
ever fully reform. It's more about self-defense than doing them
a good turn. The fanatics and criminals among the Haifan
Baha'is are beyond redemption, but you would be giving
the more practical heads a reason for considering various
changes of behavior.

They'll never be content with "an inability to silence" you. I am
speaking from over 12 years of dealing with the fanatics online,
since 1996.... I would suggest you need another judgement or
two that further establishes the facts and protects the religious
rights of Orthodox Baha'is in clear and unequivocal terms. That's
what I would think you'd want to do.

That's my view.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Baha'i Censorship - See Website" <***@SeeWebsite.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: Court issues decision in NSA contempt case against Orthodox Baha'is

Dear Non-Bahai Observers,

Please consider that after spending over $100,000 trying to destroy
three Baha'i denominations of fewer than a 100 people, and after
Judge Amy St. Eve of the U. S. District Court of Northern Illinois has
ruled against the Wilmette nsa in its frivolous lawsuit, seeking to deprive
U. S. citizens of their Constitutional rights, the usual tactic of ignoring
and changing the issue is now being deployed by members of the
Baha'i denomination based on a fraudulent will and testament.

Such tactics have been used for decades by the Haifan Baha'is, in and
out of courts of law, to slander and smear the individual and other Bahai
denominations. They are the same tactics used by all fanaticis and
fundamentalists, religious or political, to stigmatize or demonize the
person of dissenting opinion. Quotations from numerous individuals
documenting these tactics, spanning decades, may be found below:

"The Bahai Technique":
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm

Shunning & Slander > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm

Fortunately, for the sake of the freedom and liberty of Orthodox
Baha'is and Baha'is of other denominations, Judge Amy St. Eve
was not fooled by such cult techniques. Her name will live forever
in Bahai circles where the principles actually taught by Abdu'l-Baha,
extolling the conscience of the individual, are honored, revered, and
practiced.

The response of the Haifan apologists is evidence, once again, why
the Orthodox Baha'is should counter-sue the Haifan Baha'is for the
damages they have incurred from the frivolous lawsuit, which have
indeed been wreaked upon individual Orthodox Baha'is and the
denomination as a whole, as I have outlined in previous posts.
--
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/




2007 - Lawsuit by Wilmette NSA against Other Denominations

Orthodox Baha'i Faith Press Release

[H***@aol.com]

Post by Baha'i Censorship - See Website
As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our denomination.

I'm still waiting for the document where the court recognizes you as
amici curiae.

[Asparagus]

Post by H***@aol.com

Well ..... ! Your religious organisation did sue a similarly named
religious organisation with a view to having that latter organisation cease
and desist from using various symbols (common to both organisations) for
which your religious organisation claims exclusive ownership.

The suit was filed by the Remeyites. The NSA was merely seeking to
have the decision made on that occassion enforced. The judge ruled
that the Orthodox Baha'is and the BUPC are not legitimate successors
to Mason Remey.

Wow! Does that make them the legitimate successor to Shoghi then?

Now your sect sure as hell is not a legitimate de jure successor to Shoghi.
You've had to change the constitution to justify your power structure. At
the same time, Remey is not a legitimate successor, not being appointed in
accordance with the terms of a document, whose provenance, in any case, is
suspect. It I was you, which thankfully I'm not, I would not be blowing my
foghorn about anything Bahaistic - irrespective of my sectarian leaning.

Why don't you face facts - Bahaism is as corrupt and dysfunctional as the
rest of the religions around. Mebbe it's worse and in a class of its own!
Damn it all! It crumbled at the first hurdle of succession to the
Guardianship. Old Shoghi made an absolute hames of the situation and that's
the claim to divine guidance defenestrated, which makes you just another
tatty little religious group trying to grasp relevance, with no divine
foundations on which to base your pretensions or your grasping!

About the best that can be said of you is that you attract a lower class of
enemy e.g. the Bayani Banshees!

And you can't even claim to be occupying my time any more as I'm rarely
around here.

By all means, practice your religious faith in accordance with the dictates
of your conscience. Just do us all a big favour and don't come out with
shite, like that garbage of yours above, and then act outraged when it's
transparency and inaccuracy is remarked upon