Ruhaniya
2009-03-07 07:07:34 UTC
CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
On Mar 7, 1:46 am, ***@onetel.net.uk wrote:
"First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them." -- Eric Stetson, September
2003
- being the pimps that you all are - whoring minorities to a group of
predators at point A and then running to the international press and
media claiming HR violations against the predators at point B, all the
while dealing and goading both the victim and the predator at various
points behind the scene. This is the well-worn British imperial tactic
of divide and conquer.
is what does an English homosexual operative of the British Labor
Party, such as you, give a damn about the Bahais of Iran, when a)
ostensibly you have neither ever been to Iran or are Iranian and b)
you vociferously deny being a Bahai when you are accused of such
(although we all know that is bullshit and that you are on the
payroll)? If you say you care about the human rights of minorities
being trampled, pray tell, when have you ever advocated so
passionately about the rights of any other minority group elsewhere?
The bottom line of your position is this: you are the mouthpiece of a
clique of hacks who are a) using the plight of the Iranian Bahais for
their own nefarious reasons because b) you are trying to position
yourselves politically in the event of a regime change in Iran.
Otherwise you couldn't give a damn about any of this, nor is it
remotely your business to care, just as you British scum-bags have
never ever *really* cared about the rights of anyone unless it has
sought to benefit your interests directly. Just like TE Lawrence, your
advocacy and agency are the crocodile tears of a typical English
ponce.
QED
See Bahaism and the British,
http://bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home
Also see, especially,
HOSTAGE TO KHOMEINI by Robert Dreyfuss (New Benjamin Franklin House:
New York, 1980) pp.117-118 (Pdf pages 73-74)
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf
&
http://www.archive.org/details/HostageToKhomeini
...Today the Bahai cult is hated in Iran, and is considered correctly
to be an arm of the British Crown. During the destabilization of the
Shah in 1978, it was widely reported that in several instances the
Bahai cult secretly funded the Khomeini Shi’ite movement. In part, the
money would have flowed through the cult’s links to the same
international ‘human rights’ organizations, such as Amnesty
International, that originally sponsored the anti-Shah movement in
Iran. These movements also derive from the “one world” currents
associated with the Bahais since the early 1900s. (If any Iranians
have been misled on the question of the Bahais by the supposed
antipathy of Khomeini’s clique to the Bahais, it should be noted that
the Bahai cultists often deliberately encouraged anti-Bahai activities
as camouflage)...
Also see pp. 115-116 (Pdf page 72)
On Mar 7, 1:46 am, ***@onetel.net.uk wrote:
"First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them." -- Eric Stetson, September
2003
What reason do you have for suggesting that these women had sex for
the purpose of converting muslims to the Baha'i Faith?
Because there are clear historical precedents of you British scum-bagsthe purpose of converting muslims to the Baha'i Faith?
- being the pimps that you all are - whoring minorities to a group of
predators at point A and then running to the international press and
media claiming HR violations against the predators at point B, all the
while dealing and goading both the victim and the predator at various
points behind the scene. This is the well-worn British imperial tactic
of divide and conquer.
The article itself does not support this claim.
The article categorically suggests it. The more appropriate questionis what does an English homosexual operative of the British Labor
Party, such as you, give a damn about the Bahais of Iran, when a)
ostensibly you have neither ever been to Iran or are Iranian and b)
you vociferously deny being a Bahai when you are accused of such
(although we all know that is bullshit and that you are on the
payroll)? If you say you care about the human rights of minorities
being trampled, pray tell, when have you ever advocated so
passionately about the rights of any other minority group elsewhere?
The bottom line of your position is this: you are the mouthpiece of a
clique of hacks who are a) using the plight of the Iranian Bahais for
their own nefarious reasons because b) you are trying to position
yourselves politically in the event of a regime change in Iran.
Otherwise you couldn't give a damn about any of this, nor is it
remotely your business to care, just as you British scum-bags have
never ever *really* cared about the rights of anyone unless it has
sought to benefit your interests directly. Just like TE Lawrence, your
advocacy and agency are the crocodile tears of a typical English
ponce.
QED
See Bahaism and the British,
http://bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home
Also see, especially,
HOSTAGE TO KHOMEINI by Robert Dreyfuss (New Benjamin Franklin House:
New York, 1980) pp.117-118 (Pdf pages 73-74)
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf
&
http://www.archive.org/details/HostageToKhomeini
...Today the Bahai cult is hated in Iran, and is considered correctly
to be an arm of the British Crown. During the destabilization of the
Shah in 1978, it was widely reported that in several instances the
Bahai cult secretly funded the Khomeini Shi’ite movement. In part, the
money would have flowed through the cult’s links to the same
international ‘human rights’ organizations, such as Amnesty
International, that originally sponsored the anti-Shah movement in
Iran. These movements also derive from the “one world” currents
associated with the Bahais since the early 1900s. (If any Iranians
have been misled on the question of the Bahais by the supposed
antipathy of Khomeini’s clique to the Bahais, it should be noted that
the Bahai cultists often deliberately encouraged anti-Bahai activities
as camouflage)...
Also see pp. 115-116 (Pdf page 72)