Frequently Asked Questions
FAQs Menu (click on a link to go to relevant section):
- Why is the purpose of this website?
- I would like to contact you by phone. What is your phone number?
- If you do not provide your phone number or address, how can we verify who you say you are?
- Why don’t you answer your phone?
- Are you a Sathya Sai Baba devotee?
- If you are not a devotee, why did you create this website?
- Who helped you create this website?
- Is anyone funding or contributing money to your website?
- Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba is God?
- Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba has genuine paranormal powers?
- Do you believe Sathya Sai Baba has sexually abused people?
- Is it true that you defended Sathya Sai Baba when you believed him to be an abuser?
- What about the claims that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile / paedophile who engaged in acts of pedophilia / paedophilia?
- Why would anyone want to lie about Sathya Sai Baba?
- What about the claims that you ‘slander’, ‘libel’ and ‘defame’ Ex-Devotees and critics of Sai Baba?
- What about the evidence against Sathya Sai Baba?
Moreno’s Response: To expose the lies, deceit, dishonesty, misrepresentations, conflations, exaggerations, defamations, libels and contradictory allegations made against Sathya Sai Baba by Anti-Sai Activists (aka “Ex-Devotees”) who disperse their propaganda and rhetoric on hundreds of websites, blogs and various forums on the internet (Ref).
Moreno’s Response: I do not discuss any matters related to Sathya Sai Baba over the phone or in person. I am only willing to have these discussions through email correspondence. This is the policy I have adopted so that I can retain an actual transcript to my words so they will not be misunderstood, misinterpreted or misrepresented. This policy applies to devotees, non-devotees and ex-devotees alike.
The Sathya Sai Baba debate is a highly charged one in which many people say many things. Those who investigate the Sai Controversy with an open mind, and who refuse to accept the negative and one-sided viewpoints of those inimical towards Sathya Sai Baba, are often the targets of vicious character assassination. With the many hearsay accounts dispersed on Anti-Baba webites, I have approached this entire issue in a structured and consistent way. I attribute the success of my viewpoints due to this approach.
Moreno’s Response: The same way you can verify the identities of numerous Ex-Devotees who do not divulge their phone numbers or addresses on the internet.
The new ploy being used by Ex-Devotees is that if people (i.e., Pro-Sai Activists) do not provide their full names, addresses and phone numbers, they are not who they claim to be. Of course, this puts Ex-Devotees in a tenuous position considering that the overwhelming majority of Anti-Baba articles they publish do not divulge the full names, phone numbers and addresses to the people who allegedly wrote them. This must mean (using Ex-Devotee’s logic/illogic) that the authors to those Anti-Baba articles are not who they claim to be.
Neither phone numbers or addresses are accurate ways of identifying a person’s identity, as both of these can be changed or modified to a friend or family member located anywhere in the world. No where do Ex-Devotees demand the full names, phone numbers and addresses to those sympathetic with their cause. These demands are made exclusively from Pro-Baba Activists. This points to Ex-Devotee’s double-standards, deceit and hypocrisy.
I have received vast amounts of hate mail from Anti-Baba Activists and even a death threat. Also, taking into consideration the group thuggery tactics employed by Ex-Devotees, I choose not to publicly divulge my phone number or address for self-evident reasons. I have been contacted by phone by both Pro-Sai and Anti-Sai Activists (including Ojvind Kyro). If I am not who I say I am, these people would not have been able to contact me. Now would they?
In particular, Robert Priddy should publicly and clearly divulge his phone number and address on his Anti-Baba websites and blogs and then demand that all Anti-Sai Activists divulge their full names, addresses and phone numbers so that their identities can be verified. Since Robert Priddy wants to set the standard for Pro-Sai Activists, he should practice it first.
Moreno’s Response: I have a fully functional answering machine. Feel free to leave me your name, email address and a detailed message. However, once you leave your message on my recorder, your message becomes my property and all messages will be made into voice files and saved on computer disks for future reference. If you do not want your messages possibly broadcast on the internet, I suggest you email me. Depending on the content of your emails, I generally do not publish them on the internet and maintain complete confidentiality when requested.
Moreno’s Response: I am not a Sathya Sai Baba devotee. I was a devotee from the age of 18 to the age of 25. I had/have basic philosophical differences of opinion with several key aspects to Sathya Sai Baba’s teachings (in particular, God Concepts & Karma) and I left the Sai Movement for that reason. Nevertheless, I had many beautiful, powerful and spiritual experiences with Sathya Sai Baba (as I have had with many other spiritual personalities). My opinions about Sathya Sai Baba (based on my personal experiences with him) are positive. I do not belong to, go to, or affiliate myself with any Sai Centers nor have I ever been affiliated with the Sathya Sai Organization. I am an open-minded (but not gullible) agnostic.
Moreno’s Response: I believe the only type of person who can present a balanced view into the Sai Controversy is one who is extremely familiar with Sathya Sai Baba, but not to the extent of making excuses for him (as devotees generally do). As one will notice on my website, I provide links to all the articles I take issue with or discuss. I do not try to suppress other viewpoints. However, Ex-Devotees refuse to provide links to my website and have even banned my website from linking to them. I think this proves that Ex-Devotees have much to fear and they operate on the premises of deceit, lies and suppression to promote their agenda of hate at any cost. My continued involvement in the Sai Controversy is also due to Ex-Devotee’s falsified and fraudulent claims that I am a “sexual molestation victim” of Sathya Sai Baba (a bold-faced and shameless libel):
- Joe Moreno Refutes Being Sexually Abused By Sathya Sai Baba
- Joe Moreno Refutes Priddy’s Sexual Abuse Libels: 01 - 02 - 03 - 04 - 05 - 06 - 07 - 08
- Joe Moreno Refutes Dadlani’s Sexual Abuse Libels: 01 - 02
- Joe Moreno Refutes RFJ Sandt’s Sexual Abuse Libel
- Alleged Sexual Molestation Victim Comes Forward With A Shocking Revelation
Moreno’s Response: I created the templates, screencaps and many of the images used on my website by myself. I am the sole author for the articles on my website and I alone can access, modify, edit, delete or add articles on my websites. Although I have been emailed information, suggestions and ideas for my articles, I make the final determination on what information is used and how it used. I give full credit to those whose articles I cite. As a rule of thumb, I only accept information that I can verify for myself or information based on my own personal observations and experiences.
Moreno’s Response: Anti-Sai Activists have resorted to cheap propaganda tactics by accusing me of being “secretly funded” and that I am making “profits” off of my “expensive” websites. This is wholly untrue. Currently I am spending about US $184 per year on my domain-names and web hosting. That is approximately US $15 per month. I do not make any profits from my website, nor do I request or receive any type of donations. Futhermore, who is secretly funding the “expensive web pages” from Anti-Sai websites? What profits are they making and from whom? Anti-Sai websites have been on the internet much longer than mine and there are no less than ninety plus (90+) of them. Since I am knowledgable with web design, I do not need to employ anyone to create my websites. I created them myself.
Moreno’s Response: No, I do not believe that Sathya Sai Baba is God.
Moreno’s Response: Based on my own personal experiences with Sathya Sai Baba, yes, I do believe he possesses genuine paranormal powers. As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy and Barry Pittard (two of the main spokespersons for the Anti-Sai Movement) have said (even after their defection) that they believe Sathya Sai Baba possesses genuine paranormal powers:
“Some of what I experienced of SSB’s extraordinary and positive powers through many years is undeniable, even after the most rigorous skeptical investigations, and I do not regard him as any ordinary human being.” ~ Robert Priddy
“I can tell you that I and others have witnessed hundreds - and ones of the most profoundly beautiful sort - both mediated in his own person and in places far from him but in their style connected with him. My own view is this: that they are happening on a tremendously wide scale; that they cannot all be explained away as faked...From November 1975, I began to experience many profound and beautiful phenomena. Wherever I travelled in the world, they manifested far away from, yet were often clearly related to, his physical presence on the planet...I have had thousands of experiences that transcend scientific or intellectual explanation...I have many times experienced supranormal phenomena related to him, which there is no explaining away...Their sheer magnitude round the globe is bound to attract history’s final verdict that they are real, and do happen.” ~ Barry Pittard
Moreno’s Response: I must admit that when I first read the many articles of alleged sexual abuse against Sathya Sai Baba on Anti-Sai websites, I fully and blindly believed them and reacted the way many people did, i.e., with disbelief, shock and anger.
Being personally touched by sexual abuse through close friends (unrelated to Sai Baba), I gave the benefit of the doubt to alleged sexual abuse victims. Until just recently (May 3rd 2006), I stated that I believed Sathya Sai Baba did “sexually” abuse men. I held this position despite being questioned on how I could believe the allegations when alleged victims never even tried to take their case to a court of law, despite being offered free “world class legal resources”. I was open-minded about the allegations even though some alleged victims (who were very vocal on the internet) were unwilling (for some unknown reason) to file their cases in a court of law in India.
In light of a major development, I have subsequently retracted my comments about believing the sexual abuse allegations against Sathya Sai Baba. The sole reason why I held on to this position was due to what I perceived as sincere and genuine accounts made by Alaya Rahm on the internet and in the Secret Swami documentary. See:
- Alaya Rahm’s Self-Dismissed Lawsuit
- Alaya Rahm: A Decade-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs & Alcohol
- Scathing Response To Critics About Alaya Rahm’s Failed Lawsuit
- The Sathya Sai “Sex Scandal” Myth
Moreno’s Response: No, I most certainly did not. Robert Priddy and various Ex-Devotees continually claim that I defended Sathya Sai Baba when I believed the guru had sexually abused men. My original arguments (all documented on my website) were not “defenses” of Sathya Sai Baba, but rather were objections to Ex-Devotee’s obvious and very disturbing smear tactics and crude behaviors (which forced me to question their integrity and credibility). I repeatedly encouraged Ex-Devotee’s to pursue their criminal allegations against Sathya Sai Baba along legal venues. Despite these facts, Ex-Devotees ceaselessly cite my transitional research between 2004-2005 regarding the Sai Controversy and my former belief that Alaya Rahm was credible. As stated before, I have subsequently retracted my comments about believing the sexual abuse allegations against Sathya Sai Baba. The sole reason why I held on to this position was due to what I perceived as sincere and genuine accounts made by Alaya Rahm on the internet and in the Secret Swami documentary. See:
- Alaya Rahm’s Self-Dismissed Lawsuit
- Alaya Rahm: A Decade-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs & Alcohol
- Scathing Response To Critics About Alaya Rahm’s Failed Lawsuit
- The Sathya Sai “Sex Scandal” Myth
What about the claims that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile / paedophile who engaged in acts of pedophilia / paedophilia?
Moreno’s Response: Anti-Sai Activists wage an unremitting smear campaign against Sathya Sai Baba that falsely accuses him of “serial pedophilia” and the sexual abuse of “boys” and “children”. These claims are fallacious, unsustantiated and wholly untrue. “Pedophilia” is the sexual abuse or exploitation of a boy, girl or child 12/13 years of age or younger (Ref). There are no testimonies from boys, children or parents of children that support the erroneous claim that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile (paedophile) who engaged in sexual interactions with children. As a matter of fact, the youngest, non-anonymous testimony came from a 16 years old teenager (Jed Geyerhahn) who claimed he received a non-sexual “oiling”. All the other alleged victims were 18 years of age or older. This once again goes to show how those inimical towards Sathya Sai Baba resort to cheap propaganda and blatant disinformation because the truth simply does not argue in their favor.
Moreno’s Response: For the very same reasons why Ex-Devotees lie about me being a “sexual molestation” victim of Sathya Sai Baba (Refs: 01 - 02 - 03 - 04 - 05 - 05 - 06 - 07 - 08 - 09). Since Ex-Devotees have the audacity to publicly lie about me being a sexual molestation victim of Sathya Sai Baba, they are obvious liars who cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Robert Priddy and Ex-Devotees have resorted to public acts of screencap fraud against me, have falsely accused me of using proxy IPs, have falsely accused me of using the SheilaWaring pseudonym, have falsely attributed QuickTopic posts to me, have created hundreds of attack webpages against me, etc., etc., etc.
There are numerous Christian & Atheist Anti-Baba Movements on the internet that have resorted to gutter smears and documented untruths against Sathya Sai Baba.
My webpage about Critics, Skeptics and Ex-Devotees of Sathya Sai Baba fully documents their shocking and very disturbing online behavior, attacks and smear campaigns. Anti-Sai Activists are a mob of angry, vindictive and hateful individuals who place their own agenda of deceit and dishonesty above everything else. Particularly disturbing are the smear campaigns waged by usedbybaba, Barbara Dent, Tony O’Clery, Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard, Kevin R. D. Shepherd, PhD Timothy Conway, Brian Steel and Sanjay Kishore Dadlani.
Click Here to see how white supremacists posted their propaganda in a Sathya Sai Baba Yahoo Group. What are white supremacists doing in a Sathya Sai Baba Yahoo Group to begin with? It is apparent that there are white supremacists who are spreading hate against Sathya Sai Baba. I even received a racist email where Sathya Sai Baba was referred to as a “black b*st*rd”! It is also clear that the Adeliaide Institute (which the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs considers to be both a hate group and Anti-Semitic) is waging their own Anti-Baba campaign. The Adelaide Institute published various Anti-Baba articles written by Barry Pittard on their website. What do holocaust deniers and Anti-Semites have to do with Sathya Sai Baba in the first place?
There are people who dislike and/or are jealous of Sathya Sai Baba and have spread lies, rumors and defamatory articles against him through various media. For example, see my articles on Vir Sanghvi, Paul Lewis, Tanya Datta, Michelle Goldberg, Vishal Arora and NineMSN A Current Affair. There are devotees of other gurus who continually deride Sathya Sai Baba as a fraud. Since Sathya Sai Baba claims to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai Baba, there are some Shirdi Sai Baba devotees who deride him as a fake and an imposter. One need go no further than Sai-related Yahoo Groups to see this widespread Anti-Sai activity in action where many people (under the guise of complete anonymity) spread unsubstantiated allegations against Sathya Sai Baba. Anti-Sai websites cut and pasted many of those anonymous posts onto their websites.
I have personally (first-hand) heard ridiculous rumors and gossips from the Kashmiri shopkeepers outside Sathya Sai Baba’s ashram. Those shopkeepers volunteered this information to me unasked and related all sorts of ridiculous stories without verifying them. A Kashmiri shopkeeper told me that Sathya Sai Baba’s Ashram was actually a gated, nude community! The shopkeeper was completely serious and argued with me when I denied it! He even had other Kashmiri “witnesses” who could corroborate his story! I heard these stories from several different shopkeepers and was also told unbelievable stories of a sexual nature against Sathya Sai Baba. Again, all this information was divulged unasked and without any sort of prompting whatsoever going back to 1988.
Because of the widespread claims to Baba’s miracles, the Indian Radical Humanist Association, Federation of Atheist, Humanist, and Rationalist Organizations in Andhra Pradesh, Federation of Indian Rationalists, Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal in India and James Randi have all tried to expose Sathya Sai Baba using all means, fair and foul. For example, click here to view an anonymous letter dispersed by Basava Premanand (an Indian Rationalist, Atheist and Anti-Sai Activists since 1968). Premanand agreed with Dr. Kavoor about how anonymous stories, relating to Baba’s miracles, are false, fabricated and could never be accepted as the truth. Then Premanand turns right around and distributes an anonymous letter against Sathya Sai Baba (that appears to have been written by Premanand himself) as the truth! If these Rationalist and Atheist organizations employ these types of double standards and resort to this type of subterfuge publicly, one can only imagine the prevalence of “behind-the-scenes” Anti-Sai activity.
For example, Dale Beyerstein said, “‘Sam Dalal’ is a name given by James Randi. Randi in a phone conversation said that Sai Baba ‘materialised’ a Seiko watch for a Seiko watch company executive visiting India. Sam Dalal asked for the serial number from the executive as I understood it, and got it.” However, Dr. Kavoor said he contacted Shoji Hattori and Mr. Hattori said he never knew or heard of Sathya Sai Baba and never received a watch from him! After doing some basic research into this claim, I discovered that James Randi was the source for this 20 year old untruth. Click Here to view my article about Sam Dalal, James Randi and Dale Beyerstein and a lie that has been published on Anti-Sai, Rationalist and Skeptic websites for years.
Basava Premanand has also rightly developed a reputation as a sensationalist tabloid critic who is neither scientific nor rational. For example, click here to read one example (out of many) where Premanand related an utterly unbelievable and unsubstantiated story against Sathya Sai Baba. Click Here to read my article about Premanand’s conspiracy theory about the 1993 police shootings. Click Here to view screen captures where Basava Premanand’s personally claimed, on SaiPetition.net, that he was a follower of Sri Sathya Sai Baba from 1968 to 1974 and was the “best worker in the SSB Org., Podanur”. However, in the Secret Swami Documentary, Basava Premanand claimed that he was never a follower and had been trying to investigate SSB since 1968 itself. To further this argument, click here to read an article that was published in the The Independent, on December 24th 2000, where it was claimed that Premanand had “spent nearly 50 years touring Indian villages, drawing crowds of people by demonstrating how "miracles" are performed”. When this article was written, Premanand was 71 (he was born in 1930). Premanand had been exposing gurus since the age of 21 or 22. This means that in 1968 (at the age of 38, or 16 years after he was a rationalist) Premanand was not a follower of Satya Sai Baba. Consequently, Premanand lied.
It is clear that FARA, CSICOP, and other Rationalist and Atheist organizations have a keen Anti-Sai agenda whose track record is far from being spotless! As a matter of fact, it was Babu Gogineni (Executive Director of the International Humanist and Ethical Union) who was one of the major players responsible for trying to get the British Parliament to pass a motion against Sathya Sai Baba.
Andries Krugers Dagneaux (a vocal Anti-Sai Activist) divulged the fact that Lousewies van der Laan (the woman who questioned the European Commission about Sathya Sai Baba) is his cousin!
Moreno’s Response: Anti-Sai Activists have been resorting to group thuggery tactics and are collectively accusing me of “slandering”, “libeling” and “defaming” them. These absurd claims are patently false and not even one critic has attempted to sue me for slander, libel or defamation despite indirect legal threats. Unlike Ex-Devotees, I back up my claims with factual and verifiable information, links and screen-caps. If anyone is slandering, libeling or defaming others, it is Ex-Devotees against me. I have refuted many of Ex-Devotee’s malicious defamations and gutter untruths about me on my personal webpage and on my article entitled ‘Open Letter’: Anti-Sai Propaganda, Rhetoric And Hypocrisy Exposed. It is also a fact that Ex-Devotees were threatened with legal action for their defamations and they put up a disclaimer stating that the information they provide is not necessary valid or true (Ref). You will find no such disclaimer on this website (Ref).
Moreno’s Response: Anti-Sai allegations are made despite NO court cases ever being filed, first-hand, in a court of law in India. Not even one alleged victim has utilized FREE, “world class legal resources” to bring Sathya Sai Baba to justice. Not even ONE single affidavit has ever been made public (despite numerous claims to “20”, “scores” and “over a hundred” affidavits being in existence and published on the internet). The petition signatures have NEVER been independently verified. “Evidence” is cited from mostly anonymous sources or people using a first name or a pseudonym. Anti-Sai’s have slandered Sathya Sai Baba in the most vile way, yet whenever anyone questions them and their character, all of a sudden they are beyond reproach. All of this points to a Cultish, Secretive, Hate-Group, that tries to mislead the general public with propaganda. No documents. No affidavits. No court cases. No first-hand complaints filed in India. No independent agencies verifying their alleged data. No anything!
Despite these facts, Anti-Sai Activists have the audacity to attack those who question their viewpoints and unsubstantiated claims. If the “evidence” is so compelling, why has it never been taken to a court of law? I do not want excuses. I want to know why not even one victim has even tried to take their case to a court of law in India? My website exposes the Anti-Sai Movement for what it is: A dishonest and deceitful hate-group that wages an unremitting smear campaign against Sathya Sai Baba because they have failed to make any leeway against him in a Court of Law. This highly suggests that the “evidence” against Sathya Sai Baba is inadequate or non-existent.
People are finally beginning to see through these baseless allegations, which are full of weasel-words like “claim”, “if”, “possibly”, “maybe”, “probably”, “alleged”, “seem” and various other words denoting exceptions and/or admissions of limitations to the allegations leveled against Sai Baba. These numerous weasel-words leave the allegations looking inconclusive at best and works of fiction at worst.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been proven to be a “charlatan”.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been convicted of any crime.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been charged with any crime.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never had even one single complaint lodged against him by any alleged victim, first-hand, in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India (the only place where courts would have jurisdiction over Baba as an individual defendant).
These are the cold, hard facts and no rationalist, critic, skeptic or ex-devotee can provide a scintilla of verifiable evidence to the contrary (Ref).
Search This Website Using Google: