Gerald, why are you refusing to address the fact that you are an apologist for homosexual paedophilia, murders, drug-running, financial scandals, false miracles, ad infinitum? Funny enough, the incidents you cite as doubtful are fully supported by your beloved guru as genuine.

Even hilarious than that, your homosexual guru has just been exposed in public for possibly his biggest lie ever (Shirdi), yet you don't even have the guts to accept it? Tsk tsk tsk, because you know you'll shoot yourself in the feet. :-)

I've told you before, don't talk to me unless you have something worthwhile to respond to instead of talking about homosexuality and your own homosexual inclinations, sausage boy.

Mo-wenno, your beloved guru is such a small gnat that he didn't even merit a mention in Narasimha Swami's book, how does that make you feel? Burning with rage? :-)

Remember, Sai Baba had supposedly declared his 'fullness' on 20th October 1940 (oops, 1943!) and was openly behaving like the avatar he proclaimed himself to be. Still Narasimha Swami was not impressed and only discussed a Karur boy and a Bangalore girl. Oh dear, he missed his one and only chance of fame in Shirdi circles and blew it. :-)

Now go away, sausage boy, and come back when you have something worthy of my attention. You have the attention span of an ant, and I am not amused by your childish behaviour.

Sanjay, why are you refusing to address the fact that you are a miracle-monger who believes, accepts and promotes belief in miracles? Funny enough, the miracles you promote cannot be proven or examined because they allegedly occurred 5,000 to several hundred-million years ago. lol

Nice term there "faggotface".

Coincidentally, I updated my blog about your Incestuous Homoeroticism and your Homosexualization Of Everything I Say. Everytime you open your big mouth, you confirm this basic truth that you are obsessed with homosexuals and homosexuality.

Been feeling "Evlisssy" recently? lol

There is no rationalizing with a self-professed drunk, a psychopath and a person who fantasizes about slicing his flesh with razors and licking the barrel of a gun before blowing his brains out (Reference With Pictures). Go bark up some other tree :-)

Updated: Full Exposure: See /m272

Gerald Moreno stupidly argues for the authenticity of Sai Baba's miracles. Why is Krishna exempt from this if he is also God, and especially if Sai Baba claims to be the selfsame Krishna too? LOL!

EXPOSED! /m269 :-)

Excuse me, but can someone explain to me how Puttaparthi could be ignorant of Shirdi Sai Baba, and everyone was surprised to hear Sathyanarayana Raju declare his previous avatar "out of the blue", when two of his uncles were devotees way before he declared anything?

No wonder he was initially treated with scorn, they thought he had lost his marbles!

[Pssst! He had. :-)]

Edited by author 10-06-2006 01:13 AM
What kind of drugs is Joe Moreno on? Of course it matters what Sathya Sai Baba says about these "alleged" miracles, since Moreno brought it up. It only goes to show that when Moreno argues along these lines, it is extremely weak and he shoots himself in both feet.

And I don't need to say it again but I will, just for fun :-), that this forum is meant to discuss Sathya Sai Baba and not me, so keep on attacking me all you like, you only continue to prove your irrelevance here. Sai Baba's biggest works of authorship are Ramakatha Rasavahini and Bhagavatha Vahini which, surprise surprise, is packed full of "fanciful" miracle stories relating to the lives of Rama and Krishna. Gerald Moreno ("Joe108") tears out his hair and gnashes his teeth at this fact, because it conflicts with the "rational" and "logical" stance which he is pretending to take.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, talk about shooting yourself in both feet! He argues against Krishna, whereas his guru Sai Baba loves Krishna and authenticates everything. LOL!

Notice how Gerald Moreno tried to publicly deceive people into thinking that Sathya Sai Baba's miracles were "thoroughly investigated" by Haraldsson when they were not. His requests for experimentation were denied by the Baba himself, so anything he wrote was purely observational and based on devotee testimonies, that are biased. Tough luck. Sai Baba is a fantastic liar, he has been lying about his Shirdi avatarhood since 1940. Oops, sorry, I mean 1943. LOL.

Moreno Exposed: /m269

:-)

Discuss Sai Baba here, faggotface, and stop obsessing over me.

Sanjay, it is your opinion that Sathya Sai Baba is a fraud, so it does not matter what SSB said about these alleged miracles. The fact remains that you are a Hare Krishna Congregational Member who solicits the authenticity and incontestability of alleged miracles attributed to Lord Krishna. Far be it for a miracle-monger such as yourself to be attempting to deceive others with the facade that you are skeptical and rational when you are neither :-)

Blog Exposing Sanjay Dadlani (aka "Sai Baba EXPOSED")

Full Exposure: See /m272

So do any of the braindead nitwits here have a clue why 1943 became 1940 in the "official biographies"?

Shall I give a clue?

No, I won't. :-)

Sanjay Dadlani (aka "Sai Baba EXPOSED") fully exposed:

See /m272

There is absolutely no proof that Lord Krishna performed any miracles or manifested any powers :-)

Sanjay fully believes in Sri Krishna's alleged miracles and powers and even preaches that they are genuine and actually occurred. For example, Sanjay believes that Lord Krishna literally manifested 16,000 separate, physical bodies, married 16,000 separate women and copulated with each and every single one of them and begat many children. Sanjay is hardly the one to be taking a skeptical or critical stance when he believes in these things himself. Lump that :-)

Blog Exposing Sanjay Dadlani (aka "Sai Baba EXPOSED")

Edited by author 10-05-2006 10:30 PM
Re /m349:

"The only thing that is devastating Sanjay is how you keep babbling incoherently thinking you actually know what you are talking about or are making sense."

I know full well what I am talking about. :-) Sai Baba the Liar lied to the media (as well as countless other people) that he was the reincarnation of Shirdi Sai Baba, and that his knowledge about it when no one else knew is proof of the fact. Not to mention that his whole facade is hinged on that declaration. We now know that this is a complete lie.

How could Sai Baba be bitten by a scorpion in 1940 and then declare himself as (Shirdi) Sai Baba a couple of months later, when he was attending school and worshipping a small picture of Shirdi Baba in 1941? How could no one in Puttaparthi know anything about Shirdi Sai Baba, when two of Raju's (Sathya Sai's) uncles were open devotees of Shirdi Baba, not to mention that Raju himself regularly attended Shirdi bhajans? Even when the host of these bhajans was personally trained by Narasimha Swamiji? Even his own classmates testify that he used to worship Shirdi Sai Baba, so how couldn't anyone know who he was?

Raju was such a small fry that he didn't even merit a place in Narasimha Swamiji's four-volume Shirdi epic, especially in the section where possible reincarnations are discussed. On the contrary, Narasimha Swamiji specifically discussed just two people, a boy from Karur and a girl from Bangalore, whom he personally exposed as frauds. Raju did not even make a mention, despite the book being first published well over a decade after their supposed meeting (Narasimha and Raju's). There is only a vague hint about materialisations that could have referred to anybody. :-)

I know full well what I am talking about, whereas unquestioning devotees satisfy themselves with Kasturi's poorly-researched fairy stories that are self-contradictory. And there is much more to come. :-)

Let's get a few facts correct: Erlendur Haraldsson's "investigations" were not "thoroughly performed". He admits in his book that his requests for a scientific investigation were denied by Sathya Sai Baba. Consequently much of the accounts related in his book are strictly observational and rely almost wholly on the testimony of devotees, which is hardly unbiased. So the spurious claims about this phenomena having being investigated by a "third-party" are without basis.

And for the record, I have visited Sai Sruti many times, and several former followers have visited Srirangapatnam.

I personally couldn't care less for any of these "supernatural" paranormal phenomenas because there is no proof that any of these phenomenas are performed directly or indirectly by Sai Baba. One could very easily claim that these phenomenas are faked, just as easy as it is to put vibhuti on the inside of a glass frame and claim that it has miraculously manifested. More concentration is focused on miracles that are supposed to occur directly from Sai Baba's person, and this includes the alleged materialisation of vibhuti, rings, necklaces, watches, and so on. Concentrate on that instead of living in a cloud-cuckoo land of ash and honey emrging from pictures and the like.

Edited by author 10-04-2006 01:09 PM
/m335
BeastMaster, you are dismissing paranormal phenomena that have been investigated by a "neutral third party" (Erlendur Haraldsson) and are focusing on other alleged paranormal phenomena you have ascertained have not been investigated by a "neutral third party". In one instance, you dismiss the "neutral third party" and in another instance you demand it. You are cherry-picking your critiques.

These alleged manifestations (which, once again, are not limited to vibuthi) have not been investigated by critics and skeptics although they allege this phenomena is fraudulent. Critics draw conclusion a priori without viewing the alleged phenomena first-hand. Critics have had every opportunity to expose these alleged manifestions that they consider fradulent. They have chosen the path of long-distance speculative rationalizations.

Devotees accept these alleged manifestations as signs from Sathya Sai Baba and do not require further proof for themselves. They do not see a reason to prove what they believe to be real.

The bigger question is why haven't you investigated it for yourself? It is amusing that you ask that Sai Devotees (of all people) acquire a "neutral third party" to investigate the alleged materializations happening in their homes. Will you accept the findings of a "neutral third party" selected by Sai Devotees? The critera you demand is compromised. No matter what the results, you will find a reason not to accept the results.

It is also amusing that you are attempting to request a formal investigation on a forum board. If you were truly interested, one would think you would make other efforts than the superficial ones you are making here.

Regarding your comment:

"How is the holy ash which is made of cow dung is reaching the picture frames?"

- How do you know that the alleged materialized vibuthi is made from cow dung?

- What "neutral third party" supplied you with this information?

- Why are you claiming you know what the vibuthi is allegedly made of if you already acknowledged that no independent research has been conducted about these alleged vibuthi manifestations? In other words, where are you getting your information from? Since you set the standard of a "neutral third party", I would like the name to the "neutral third party" who gave you this information. Surely, you are not basing your words on speculation, assumption, conjecture or the words of a non-independent source? Are you?

Regarding your comment:

"How is honey which is nectar from the flowers collected and processed by bees is oozing from the glass plate of the pictures"

- Amrita is not honey.

- What "neutral third party" gave you the information that amrita is honey?

- Why would you claim that amrita is honey in the first place? Did you see and taste it for yourself? When, where, under what circumstance? Why weren't you aware of this basic fact?

Finally, and perhaps the most important, what theosophical explanations are you willing to accept?

As far as I am concerned, this discussion is moot. Until you experience and investiagate this matter for yourself, no amount of "neutral third party" demands (made on a internet forum) are going to satisfy you. This is evident by your casual dismissal of Erlendur Haraldsson's work (from a "neutral third party"), which was thorough and even included the experiences from ex-devotees. Once again, the fact remains that every single person (devotee and ex-devotee alike) attributed unexplained, miraculous, paranormal phenomena to Sathya Sai Baba. All without exception. These were first-hand accounts obtained through first-hand interviews. You are free to believe or disbelieve as you choose. Nevertheless, it is apparent which position you are taking.

It is also amusing that earlier (/m248) you were willing to cite an unsubstantiated account from Piet Vroon's "Santa Claus In India" (which was based on the word of an anonymous and alleged "informant"). Strange enough, Piet Vroon was such a psychologically unstable critic, he committed suicide. Nice double checking there :-)

/m347
BeastMaster, why are you not preaching to Sanjay Dadlani?

After all, Sanjay is a Hare Krishna Congregational Member who superstitiously believes in scriptures (specifically, the Srimad Bhagavatam) that promotes belief in rain, lightning and thunder gods. Your comments fully apply to him as well.

The only thing that is devastating Sanjay is how you keep babbling incoherently thinking you actually know what you are talking about or are making sense.

No, Beast Master, YOU need to do a three level search. I already researched it. Look it up, you claim to be so intelligent. If you are going to act like a know-it-all all the time, you are going to pay the price. I'm not going to babysit you. I have had enough of babysitting the anti-Sai nutters of negativity.

There's all kinds of credible stuff on the internet about Geller's association with U.S. intelligence. If you are as smart as you pretend to be you should be able to find it.

Besides that, I do not consider you very credible since I know you are an armchair critic who is afraid to get your feet wet.