Refuting Deceptive 'News' About Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba Released On Anti-Sai Websites
A Visual Guide:
- The Article Is True Or Mostly True And Seems Sincere.
- The Article Has Truths And Untruths And Seems Insincere.
- The Article Is False And Has No Proof To Support It.
- The Article Is Fluff, Filler Stuff, Not Relevant.
SATHYA SAI BABA NEWS (With Updates And Comments):
The Hislop letters - excerpt from a 2001 letter by Timothy Conway
Comment: Click Here to view my page about the questionability of the Hislop Letters and the proof that the letters were forged and tampered with.
For 20 years, no one mentioned these alleged Hislop letters. Only 6 years after Hislop died did they mysteriously make their appearance. Even after their questionable appearance, not even one person had the common sense to provide the general public with scans to the alleged letters. Anti-Sai Activists only provided text transcripts. In late Februrary 2005 someone finally had the novel idea to provide the alleged scans for public viewing. The reason why this was done was because Timothy Conway admitted the scans were tampered with and altered.
Sai Org. spending spree crashes in Super Dome, Sydney
Comment: This article was written by Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy. This article is a perfect example of propaganda that has absolutely no supporting evidence or documentation to back it up. Just a bunch of claims. Click Here to view the Sai Australia site and their article regarding their public meetings. Contrary to this article's opinion, the Sai Australia site felt that their efforts were "very successful". It is also to be noted that despite Priddy and Pittard's claims that Sathya Sai Baba's popularity has dropped considerably, they failed to divulge the fact that Sathya Sai Baba receives the most charitable contributions from foreigners than any other organization in India (something pointed out derisively by Anti-Sai Activists themselves)! If Sathya Sai Baba's popularity is so low, why is he receiving tremendous charitable support from foreigners?
General Notice concerning anonymous defamatory attacks
Comment: Click Here to view my response to this amusing article.
The Hislop letters & the Sai Org.'s cover-up on cover-up (4)
Comment: Click Here to view my page about the questionability of the Hislop Letters and the proof that the letters were forged and tampered with. Despite Robert Priddy reading my critique about the questionability of the alleged Hislop Letters, he failed to counter any of my points with any factual information.
Sathya Sai Organisation Disinformation and Subterfuge (part one)
Comment: This article pertains to an announcement that was made on the Sai Org website about a meeting that was held at "Westminster Cathedral". This information was a misprint and it should have read "Harrow High School". Because of this oversight, Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy accused the entire Sai Organization of "disinformation" and "subterfuge".
After I made a few inquiries, the Sai Org website made the necessary correction and Pittard and Priddy are now whining because the Sai Org did not offer an apology or an explanation with the correction (as if Anti-Sai Sites correct their disinformation and offer apologies and explanations).
They also accuse me (although they are still afraid to mention my name) of not providing any "documentation" to support my views. The "documentation" they seek, in on their own website. Westminster sent a letter to Ashok Bhagani (who is not the webmaster for the Sai Org website) and who lives in the UK. The Sai Org website is maintained in the USA. Consequently, Westminster sent their letter to the wrong person. As if this isn't embarrassing enough, Westminster also failed to cite the relevant webpage they were complaining about! No wonder the page was never updated. I guess Mr. Bhagani was supposed to divine the information through telepathy. The Sai Org website is a voluminous and extensive website, having hundreds of webpages. Without providing the relevant webpage, it simply isn't possible to correct some vague reference, or have someone else correct it (especially when the webpage link was never provided to begin with). Despite these facts, Pittard and Priddy frothed-at-the-mouth, hurled insults and severely castigated the Sai Org.
Pittard and Priddy refuse to offer an apology or an explanation regarding an openly faked signature that was put on the "Ex Office Bearers" page, located on Priddy's website. Priddy took an openly faked signature that I made on SaiPetition.net and used it as a genuine submission from a "prominent ex-devotee" (Reference). This proves that Anti-Sai Activists (including Pittard and Priddy) do not verify the identity or claims made by people who submit signatures on their bogus "petition". To date, Robert Priddy refuses to remove the fake name from his "Ex Office Bearers" page even after I informed him about it on July 24th 2005. Consequently, Priddy's behavior is far worse than the Sai Org's. The Sai Org promptly corrected their error. Priddy refuses to correct his error (one of many) and thereby disseminates fraudulent information on his website, attempting to peddle it as the "truth".
Sathya Sai Organisation Disinformation and Subterfuge (part two)
Comment: Barry Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy quoted an article written by Serguei Badaev that stated (in part):
"Anyway, after all that happened to the so-called UNESCO conference in September 2000, it was not quite correct for 'Sanathana Sarathi' to publish that "Dr. Leonarda Jekantaite, Secretary General of UNESCO (Lithuania) presented the Keynote Address." (Sanathana Sarathi, v.43, October 2000, p.317). Though she was 'Secretary-General' of the Lithuanian branch of UNESCO, she was not accredited to represent UNESCO at the conference. This she also confirmed to Robert Priddy by e-mail when he had investigated the matter with UNESCO. She stated that she was there as a private person interested in Eastern values education. Giving her full UNESCO title 'Sanathana Sarathi' made readers think that she was an official UNESCO representative. This amounts to face-saving deceit."
Nowhere in the quote: "Dr. Leonarda Jekantaite, Secretary General of UNESCO (Lithuania) presented the Keynote Address" did it say she "represented" UNESCO. It simply stated her title, something that was done with other keynote speakers as well. Her title does not mean she was an official UNESCO representative, as Sanathana Sarathi did not say she was the "official UNESCO representative". They simply cited her title, which is 100% true.
"It was also very strange and confusing to read in the inaugural speech of Indulal Shah, the international president of the Sathya Sai Organisation, at the 7th World Conference (November 2000, Prashanthi Nilayam) the following words: "In this context, let me share with you that US magazine 'Week' has chosen to give respect to the UNESCO conference held in Prasanthi Nilayam highlighting the message of Bhagawan on 'Values for All'". (20.11.2000. Materials of the 7th World Conference of the Sai Organisation). After all, it does not matter whether 'Week' has published anything about the conference or not. What matters is that I. Shah has consciously deceived his spiritual brothers and sisters using then UNESCO name for the conference which had nothing to do with it."
Indulal Shah made only one reference about the conference being a "UNESCO Conference". It most certainly appeared he misspoke. Since Indulal Shah did not make more than one reference to UNESCO, it was (more than likely) a slip of the tongue. Something that Anti-Sai Activists do all the time. This serves to highlight the fact that the prime motivation for Anti-Sai propaganda is not to present the facts, but rather, to wage a smear campaign driven by anger and vindictiveness (probabaly because, in 5 years and counting, Anti-Sai Activists have made zero progress in furthering their allegations against Sathya Sai Baba).