This is a response from Equalizer to Brian Steel's comments
This is exactly the problem with Brian Steel. He has not refuted my critique about him one bit. Rather, he strengthens my position while compromising his own. Remove the rhetoric about me and focus on Brian Steel's comments about the English Translations vs. the Original Telugu Discourses and the issue is still the same.
Brian Steel said, "My basic point was (and is) that there is an essential difference between what SSB says in his frequent unscripted Telugu Discourses and what is subsequently published in English..." Fair enough. However, if this is true, why does Brian Steel, and other Anti-Sai Activists, use the English Translations as reliable references to what SSB actually and literally said in his discourses? Brian Steel just claimed that what SSB said in Telugu is not what is being published in English.
Strengthening my case, once again, Brian Steel said, "Most devotees have been totally unaware of this and therefore inadvertently quote the officially published commercial versions of the Discourses as if they offered SSB's exact words (and style)." What is amusing about this comment is that Brian Steel himself quotes the "officially published commercial versions" offering them as SSB's "exact words" when it comes to perceived factual discrepancies made by SSB (something done by other Anti-Sai Activists as well)! Why does Brian Steel adhere to two different standards? He tries very hard to make the case that the English Translations are not SSB's actual and literal words, yet (at the same time) uses these same English Translations as inerrant references to what SSB literally and actually said in Telugu, when it comes to discrepancies and perceived errors!
This brings us to Brian Steel's reference to accurate "literal translations". Brian Steel is referring to translations that were published on internety.com/premsai. This site was run by devotees who published "thoughts for the day" and discourses in 9 languages. Brian Steel does not know who made these "literal translations". Brian Steel knows nothing about these devotees, including their names. Brian Steel cannot say, with any certainty, that these translations were accurate. Brian Steel believed these translations were accurate based on the word of devotees! How does Brian Steel not know that these devotees may have enhanced or edited the translations to reflect their devotion in SSB? How can Brian Steel accept the word of devotees when he considers them mislead, belonging to a cult and being brainwashed?
Since Brian Steel does not speak, write or understand Telugu, he is basing ALL of his conclusions on speculations, probabilities and on the word of others.
Since SSB's Telugu discourses are recorded on audio cassettes (and easily obtainable by the general public), it should not be difficult for Anti-Sai Activists to hire a neutral, professional translator (as they have done in the past) and compare the translations. No one has even attempted to do this. That's probably because Anti-Sai Activists (including Brian Steel) have found errors in about 60 discourses, out of 1,200 (or 0.04%)!
Brian Steel Deception
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Friday, January 20, 2006
Response from Brian Steel
This is a comment from Mr Brian Steel.
Dear Sir:
A friend informed me that Gerald Joe Moreno (aka ‘Equalizer’ in this incarnation) is still recklessly spreading misinformation about my research into the Packaging of the Discourses of Sathya Sai Baba.
Please allow me to quote from a recent Appendix to the document which he misrepresents in his critique. This should give you and your readers at least an inkling of the reprehensible tactics employed by ‘Equalizer’ in his crusade. Better still, why not read the Appendix and its predecessor?
Namaste,
Brian Steel
(Excerpt from http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/packageapp06.htm Copyright © 2006 Brian Steel)
Both the SSO (usually obliquely) and their defenders (more brazenly) continue to turn a blind eye in public to the substantial body of clear evidence offered in my Dossier on the Packaging of SSB's Discourses. [ ../More/packagenew04.htm]
My basic point was (and is) that there is an essential difference between what SSB says in his frequent unscripted Telugu Discourses and what is subsequently published in English and other languages for devotees to read and study. This in turn indicates that the real SSB is different in certain aspects from the officially projected version of him. Most devotees have been totally unaware of this and therefore inadvertently quote the officially published commercial versions of the Discourses as if they offered SSB's exact words (and style). His real words (insofar as we are allowed to glimpse them from time to time) show personality aspects which differ from those which have been promoted internationally, including a rambling spoken style and an even greater propensity to human error and confusion than that already visible in the official translations. Such basic comparisons of the different Discourse versions further undermine his own claim of Divine Omniscience and those made by associates and echoed by devotees.
This curious phenomenon, when pointed out with the newly available evidence at our disposal, is so evident that for three years no one offered any detailed criticism of my research. There was an understandably embarrassed silence from the SSB camp. Then an Internet campaigner, whose motives still remain obscure, suddenly materialised in late 2004, claiming a burning desire to find out the TRUTH about SSB. Over the past year, on two of his websites, he has delivered and widely publicised a torrent of dismissive pronouncements on a large number of articles which question the officially promoted image of SSB. Shortly after the beginning of his crusade, this person turned his attention very briefly to my published work on the Discourses. During a somewhat frenzied three-week correspondence (December 2004 - January 2005), he repeatedly refused my requests that he should take into account the detailed information in my Dossier, including the extracts from the literal translations. His subsequent public verdict on the Dossier and on my research was therefore based on a gross but quite deliberate misrepresentation of my work.
Those SSB devotees who may still find solace in the official SSO low-key denials of unusual editing practices may be encouraged by the provocative antics of this Internet exhibitionist. However, they - and more particularly other readers - would be well advised to take the precaution of reading the original Dossier and this Appendix of further evidence on the true nature of SSB's Discourses if they are really interested in getting closer to the truth of the matter.
***
[I should specifically point out to readers of your blogspot that I have quoted extensively in both of my articles from literal translations from Telugu made and briefly posted by SSB devotees between 2000 and 2002. Their existence and importance are ignored by Equalizer (Moreno) when making his kangaroo court judgement on my writing. These and other aspects of his wilfulness and ‘spin’ are also shown quite clearly in our brief 2005 correspondence - which, in a characteristically foolhardy way, he himself has published on his website.]
Brian
Dear Sir:
A friend informed me that Gerald Joe Moreno (aka ‘Equalizer’ in this incarnation) is still recklessly spreading misinformation about my research into the Packaging of the Discourses of Sathya Sai Baba.
Please allow me to quote from a recent Appendix to the document which he misrepresents in his critique. This should give you and your readers at least an inkling of the reprehensible tactics employed by ‘Equalizer’ in his crusade. Better still, why not read the Appendix and its predecessor?
Namaste,
Brian Steel
(Excerpt from http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/packageapp06.htm Copyright © 2006 Brian Steel)
Both the SSO (usually obliquely) and their defenders (more brazenly) continue to turn a blind eye in public to the substantial body of clear evidence offered in my Dossier on the Packaging of SSB's Discourses. [ ../More/packagenew04.htm]
My basic point was (and is) that there is an essential difference between what SSB says in his frequent unscripted Telugu Discourses and what is subsequently published in English and other languages for devotees to read and study. This in turn indicates that the real SSB is different in certain aspects from the officially projected version of him. Most devotees have been totally unaware of this and therefore inadvertently quote the officially published commercial versions of the Discourses as if they offered SSB's exact words (and style). His real words (insofar as we are allowed to glimpse them from time to time) show personality aspects which differ from those which have been promoted internationally, including a rambling spoken style and an even greater propensity to human error and confusion than that already visible in the official translations. Such basic comparisons of the different Discourse versions further undermine his own claim of Divine Omniscience and those made by associates and echoed by devotees.
This curious phenomenon, when pointed out with the newly available evidence at our disposal, is so evident that for three years no one offered any detailed criticism of my research. There was an understandably embarrassed silence from the SSB camp. Then an Internet campaigner, whose motives still remain obscure, suddenly materialised in late 2004, claiming a burning desire to find out the TRUTH about SSB. Over the past year, on two of his websites, he has delivered and widely publicised a torrent of dismissive pronouncements on a large number of articles which question the officially promoted image of SSB. Shortly after the beginning of his crusade, this person turned his attention very briefly to my published work on the Discourses. During a somewhat frenzied three-week correspondence (December 2004 - January 2005), he repeatedly refused my requests that he should take into account the detailed information in my Dossier, including the extracts from the literal translations. His subsequent public verdict on the Dossier and on my research was therefore based on a gross but quite deliberate misrepresentation of my work.
Those SSB devotees who may still find solace in the official SSO low-key denials of unusual editing practices may be encouraged by the provocative antics of this Internet exhibitionist. However, they - and more particularly other readers - would be well advised to take the precaution of reading the original Dossier and this Appendix of further evidence on the true nature of SSB's Discourses if they are really interested in getting closer to the truth of the matter.
***
[I should specifically point out to readers of your blogspot that I have quoted extensively in both of my articles from literal translations from Telugu made and briefly posted by SSB devotees between 2000 and 2002. Their existence and importance are ignored by Equalizer (Moreno) when making his kangaroo court judgement on my writing. These and other aspects of his wilfulness and ‘spin’ are also shown quite clearly in our brief 2005 correspondence - which, in a characteristically foolhardy way, he himself has published on his website.]
Brian
Response to Sanjay Dadlani from Equalizer
This is Equalizer's reply to Sanjay Dadlani's comments.
Dinakaran, I read Sanjay's response and I would like to comment on it.
Any casual reader of Sanjay's reply might feel that his rebuttal is fair, factual and balanced. Indeed, for those who are not fully conversant with all the facts surrounding the Sathya Sai Controversy, Sanjay's response seems completely adequate. However, let me give you some examples on how Sanjay purposely withholds pertinent information that undermines his comments.
I will discuss the following three issues: 1) The Unesco Withdrawl; 2) The real evidence against Sathya Sai Baba and 3) The Dadlani'nanda blog.
1) THE UNESCO WITHDRAWAL: Sanjay made reference to the Unesco Withdrawl as one of the "successes" of the Anti-Sai movement. What Sanjay failed to divulge is that the Unesco Withdrawal was due entirely to an unremitting "e-bombing" campaign waged by Anti-Sai Activists. I have written a fully referenced article that discusses this issue in depth: The Real Reason Behind The Unesco Withdrawl from the ISSE Conference. Sanjay also failed to disclose the fact that Anti-Sai Activists are now attacking Unesco because Unesco removed their withdrawal notice (against SSB) from their site. Sanjay is quick to reference the Unesco withdrawal, but leaves out pertinent information because it would undermine his reference to them.
2) THE REAL EVIDENCE AGAINST SATHYA SAI BABA: Anti-Sai allegations are made despite NO court cases ever being filed, first-hand, in a court of law in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried. 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 allegedly published on the internet). The online petition (against SSB and Sai Org.) has never been independently verified. "Evidence" is cited from mostly anonymous sources or people using a first name or a pseudonym. Anti-Sais 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. No documents. No affidavits. No court cases. No first-hand complaints filed in India. No independent agencies verifying their alleged data. No nothing! Despite these facts, Anti-Sai Activists have the audacity to attack those who question their viewpoints and unsubstantiated claims. One must also remember that all of these allegations are many, many years old.
3) THE DADLANI'NANDA BLOG: Sanjay felt that my Dadlani'nanda blog is tarnishing his reputation and that it is "slanderous" and "disgusting" (nevermind his wholesome reputation for disgusting posts on his online blog and his innocent requests for Jesus pornography: Refs: 01; http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/Ex-Baba.com/A-Dadlani/kishore-dadlani.html). Sanjay also made mention to composite images that he claimed are "childish". Again, what Sanjay failed to mention is that this whole issue of composite images and parodies first began because of his actions on his blog. Reference Taking It With A Smile & Comic Humor (scroll down to the bottom of the page). Sanjay posted sexually suggestive images, on his blog, against SSB. One of the images even depicted a child giving SSB oral sex from underneath his robe! These images provoked a response from a Sai Devotee using an anonymous name. PremaPerm sent me composite images of Dadlani to see how he liked it (Reference). Since sanjay felt that his postings of composite images were amusing, lighthearted and done in a spirit of casual jest, I fail to understand why he is so upset when the same thing was done to him? Sanjay also cited the International Sai Tribune blog, that parodies SSB, on his blog. If you look at the Contributors on that blog, you will notice that Sanjay is one of them (Sai Baba Exposed). Again, since Sanjay feels that parodies are harmless fun, why is he taking such great offence when I parody him on my blog? It is also important to point out that there are parodies written against Lisa De Witt and me on the International Sai Tribune blog as well. So if Sanjay thinks nothing about parodies against SSB, Devotees and me, why is he castigating me for engaging in the very same behavior that he engages in? Don't expect Sanjay to give you these facts. I created the Dadlani'nanda blog to expose his hypocrisy. As you can see, it worked.
And if you want to see whom is being negative and whom is attacking others, I suggest you take a look at the SathyaSaiBaba2 Yahoo Group and look for Sanjay's posts under the name SaiExposed420. Sanjay repeatedly accuses me of telling lies about him. However, he refuses to provide me with any factual information to refute any of my comments about him. It is obvious that Sanjay is disgruntled that I uncovered so much of his filth on the internet. Of course, no one is to blame but Sanjay himself. If he didn't write his filth in the first place, no one would have found it. Period.
So there you have it, Dinakaran. Did you know all these facts when you read Sanjay's reply? Now you know why I don't engage him in discussions. In my opinion, he is incapable of a rational discussion.
Sanjay Dadlani Exposed
Dinakaran, I read Sanjay's response and I would like to comment on it.
Any casual reader of Sanjay's reply might feel that his rebuttal is fair, factual and balanced. Indeed, for those who are not fully conversant with all the facts surrounding the Sathya Sai Controversy, Sanjay's response seems completely adequate. However, let me give you some examples on how Sanjay purposely withholds pertinent information that undermines his comments.
I will discuss the following three issues: 1) The Unesco Withdrawl; 2) The real evidence against Sathya Sai Baba and 3) The Dadlani'nanda blog.
1) THE UNESCO WITHDRAWAL: Sanjay made reference to the Unesco Withdrawl as one of the "successes" of the Anti-Sai movement. What Sanjay failed to divulge is that the Unesco Withdrawal was due entirely to an unremitting "e-bombing" campaign waged by Anti-Sai Activists. I have written a fully referenced article that discusses this issue in depth: The Real Reason Behind The Unesco Withdrawl from the ISSE Conference. Sanjay also failed to disclose the fact that Anti-Sai Activists are now attacking Unesco because Unesco removed their withdrawal notice (against SSB) from their site. Sanjay is quick to reference the Unesco withdrawal, but leaves out pertinent information because it would undermine his reference to them.
2) THE REAL EVIDENCE AGAINST SATHYA SAI BABA: Anti-Sai allegations are made despite NO court cases ever being filed, first-hand, in a court of law in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried. 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 allegedly published on the internet). The online petition (against SSB and Sai Org.) has never been independently verified. "Evidence" is cited from mostly anonymous sources or people using a first name or a pseudonym. Anti-Sais 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. No documents. No affidavits. No court cases. No first-hand complaints filed in India. No independent agencies verifying their alleged data. No nothing! Despite these facts, Anti-Sai Activists have the audacity to attack those who question their viewpoints and unsubstantiated claims. One must also remember that all of these allegations are many, many years old.
3) THE DADLANI'NANDA BLOG: Sanjay felt that my Dadlani'nanda blog is tarnishing his reputation and that it is "slanderous" and "disgusting" (nevermind his wholesome reputation for disgusting posts on his online blog and his innocent requests for Jesus pornography: Refs: 01; http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/Ex-Baba.com/A-Dadlani/kishore-dadlani.html). Sanjay also made mention to composite images that he claimed are "childish". Again, what Sanjay failed to mention is that this whole issue of composite images and parodies first began because of his actions on his blog. Reference Taking It With A Smile & Comic Humor (scroll down to the bottom of the page). Sanjay posted sexually suggestive images, on his blog, against SSB. One of the images even depicted a child giving SSB oral sex from underneath his robe! These images provoked a response from a Sai Devotee using an anonymous name. PremaPerm sent me composite images of Dadlani to see how he liked it (Reference). Since sanjay felt that his postings of composite images were amusing, lighthearted and done in a spirit of casual jest, I fail to understand why he is so upset when the same thing was done to him? Sanjay also cited the International Sai Tribune blog, that parodies SSB, on his blog. If you look at the Contributors on that blog, you will notice that Sanjay is one of them (Sai Baba Exposed). Again, since Sanjay feels that parodies are harmless fun, why is he taking such great offence when I parody him on my blog? It is also important to point out that there are parodies written against Lisa De Witt and me on the International Sai Tribune blog as well. So if Sanjay thinks nothing about parodies against SSB, Devotees and me, why is he castigating me for engaging in the very same behavior that he engages in? Don't expect Sanjay to give you these facts. I created the Dadlani'nanda blog to expose his hypocrisy. As you can see, it worked.
And if you want to see whom is being negative and whom is attacking others, I suggest you take a look at the SathyaSaiBaba2 Yahoo Group and look for Sanjay's posts under the name SaiExposed420. Sanjay repeatedly accuses me of telling lies about him. However, he refuses to provide me with any factual information to refute any of my comments about him. It is obvious that Sanjay is disgruntled that I uncovered so much of his filth on the internet. Of course, no one is to blame but Sanjay himself. If he didn't write his filth in the first place, no one would have found it. Period.
So there you have it, Dinakaran. Did you know all these facts when you read Sanjay's reply? Now you know why I don't engage him in discussions. In my opinion, he is incapable of a rational discussion.
Sanjay Dadlani Exposed
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Time to shed a tear for the unlucky bull
This is a report from The Hindu about Jallikattu. According to Wikki, "Jallikattu is a South Indian celebration involving bull taming, somewhat similar to the Spanish running of the bulls. It is held in the villages of Tamil Nadu on the eve of Mattu Pongal, one of the four days of Pongal festival (usually January 15 on the Western calendar). The one held in Alanganallur, near Madurai, is the most popular. This sport is also known as "Manju Virattu", meaning "chasing the bull".
In Jallikattu, an agitated bull is set to run in an open space. Several people, empty handed, try to tame it by controlling its horns. The winner gets a prize, which is generally tied to the horns of the bull. On most occasions, the bulls are intoxicated with alcohol. Only men take part in this macho game. Sometimes, more than one bull is loose at the same time. The village farmers take this game as a display of their masculine strength. Betting is also common during the game."
I find this one of the most cruel games. Organisations like PETA and SPCA must take up this issue and put an end to this barbaric 'game'. Here goes the report:
S. Annamalai
MADURAI: Every year, during Pongal, animal lovers make feeble protests against the cruel use of bulls in jallikattu in the southern districts.
The focus at these events tends to be on the human casualty and nobody takes note of the animals' agony, they lament.
In the last two days, three people were killed and hundreds injured in jallikattu at Palamedu and Alanganallur near Madurai. It is now touted as an international event, similar to Spanish bull fights. Historically, the sport was organised after harvest, during peacetime, by the rulers. The aim was to provide an opportunity for able-bodied youth to exhibit their valour.
The youth grappled with the ferocious bulls and those who tamed them got married to the daughter of the animal's owner.
The sport has degenerated over the years, with listless youth managing to hang on to the hump of the bulls for a distance of 50-100 metres to come out victorious.
Very few owners groom the bulls properly. They use unfair means to make the animals ferocious. The bulls are fed with arrack moments before they are let out into the arena.
Some inject the animals with a mixture of chilly powder on their back. Others bite their tail before releasing them for action.
The arenas are usually open grounds and not well marked. For the bulls, it is a run for their life.
The injuries they inflict on the players are in self-defence. Mob frenzy rules the arena, especially at Alanganallur.
No rules
The sport is devoid of rules. The youth seldom touch the horns of the bulls, and many catch them by their tail.
Rather than taking on the `matadors,' the bulls, let out one by one through a narrow gate, are desperate to get out of the arena. The combat is never one-on-one. It is the bull against a mob.
In the past, jallikattu has even triggered caste skirmishes in some places.
But the spectacle of a single bull slicing its way through a mob has become so popular that Alanganallur is being promoted as a favoured destination for foreign tourists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very few owners groom the bulls properly
The animals are fed with arrack before they are let out into the arena
Arenas are open grounds where mob frenzy rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)