- “The Guardian” Newspaper Article
- Sanjay’s Admissions About The Guardian Article
- Some Very Poor Research By Paul Lewis
- Regarding The US Sate Department Warning
- Regarding The BBC Secret Swami Programme
- In Conclusion
On November 4th 2006, Paul Lewis (“The Guardian” newspaper journalist) published an article against Sathya Sai Baba entitled “The Indian living god, the paedophilia claims and the Duke of Edinburgh awards.” It has recently come to light that Paul Lewis wrote his article in exclusive collaboration with Anti-Sai Activists, including the fully exposed pervert Sanjay Kishore Dadalani. The text from the article is as follows:
The Indian Living God, The Paedophilia Claims And The Duke Of Edinburgh Awards
· Sexual abuse accusations against group’s leader
· 80th birthday invitation to hundreds of youngsters
Saturday November 4, 2006
A spiritual group whose “living god” founder has been accused of sexually abusing young boys has become an accredited partner of the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme, the Guardian can reveal.
Last night pressure was mounting on the charity to break its links with the group whose followers are devoted to the preachings of 79-year-old holy man, Sai Baba.
About 200 young people will fly to India in two weeks’ time on a humanitarian pilgrimage run by Sai Youth UK, a division of the Sri Sathya Sai Organisation. The teenagers and young men earn their Duke of Edinburgh awards for humanitarian work, chiefly distributing medical aid.
The trip coincides with Sai Baba’s 80th birthday and has been arranged, organisers say, after he gave a divine commandment for the UK’s Sai youth movement to visit him for the occasion.
For decades male former devotees have alleged that the guru molested them during so-called “interviews”. During the last youth pilgrimage, in 2004, young people were granted group interviews with the guru after administering medical aid to villages surrounding Sai Baba’s ashram in Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh, although there was no evidence of abuse.
Large numbers of young men have travelled from across the world to study alongside and meet the guru. His supporters say their encounter was spiritually enriching. Others, including participants in a BBC programme, The Secret Swami, two years ago, accuse him of abuse, claiming he massaged their testicles with oil and coerced them into oral sex.
Sai Baba has never been charged over the sex abuse allegations. However, the US State Department issued a travel warning after reports of “inappropriate sexual behaviour by a prominent local religious leader” which, officials later confirmed was a reference to Sai Baba.
Tom Sackville, a former Home Office minister and chairman of Fair, a cult-watching and victim support group, said: “It is appallingly naive for the award scheme to involve young people and the royal family with an organisation whose leader is accused of paedophilia. Parents who plan to send their children on this month’s pilgrimage … should be aware of the danger their children are being exposed to.”
But Peter Westgarth, chief executive of the charity, last night faced down calls to terminate his organisation’s relationship with the Sai organisation. He said: “This is not the only religion accused of paedophilia. Young people who are participating on these trips are doing so because they choose to,” he said. “The awards accredit the good work they do for poor people in India. We make no judgment about their religion. We would no sooner intervene here than we would the Church Lads’ and Girls’ Brigade.”
The Conservative MP Michael Gove said he would write to the charity asking it to consider a stricter monitoring of the organisations they they work with. “As a society we need a more determined effort to identify and expose those religious cults and extremists that pose a direct threat to people, so that they do not enjoy patronage that should be directed elsewhere,” he said.
Shitu Chudasama, Sai’s UK national youth coordinator, defended the trip, saying it was primarily a humanitarian mission to help impoverished people, saying that the sex abuse claims were “totally unfounded”. He added: “We hope to have an interview with Sai Baba but it’s not guaranteed. If he wants to see us, he’ll call us.”
Sai Organisation’s UK branch has also came into contact with royals through the awards, something Buckingham Palace was made aware of in September. In correspondence seen by the Guardian, Brigadier Sir Miles Hunt-Davis, Prince Philip’s private secretary, wrote: “[We] are very keen to get this sorted out properly and finally.” He said trustees of the award would undertake legal advice before deciding how to proceed.
In July the Sai Organisation received a certificate for their “invaluable contribution” to the awards at a Buckingham Palace garden party. A news story which appeared on a Sai Baba website after the ceremony was removed after an intervention by Peter Westgarth, who said the event had been misrepresented.
In the posting, Mr Chudasama recounted the moment he delivered a speech to “various dignitaries, diplomats, ministers [and] famous celebrities” at the palace. “I was the last speaker called up, and suddenly a confidence, a joy, engulfed my being,” he said. “I attributed everything to our founder Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. As I spoke I watched the sea of faces, they were hanging from my every word and there was a look of excitement on their faces as if to say ‘why have we not heard of this organisation before?’.”
Mr Chudasama also attended a private audience with Prince Philip at St James’s Palace last year. “Prince Philip showed a very keen interest in our youth and asked many questions,” Mr Chudasama wrote in a Sai newsletter. “I also had the opportunity to mention … that we drew our inspiration and motivation from our founder Sri Sathya Sai Baba; he paused for a few seconds and then said: “Very good”.
Saytha Sai Baba, who has an estimated 30 million followers worldwide, is possibly India’s most controversial holy man. He gained a following in his teens when he claimed to have divine powers and, later, said he was an incarnation of God. His teachings are benign – his most famous mantra is “Love All, Serve All” – and he encourages followers, which include many of India’s political elite, to undertake humanitarian work. He purports to be able to miraculously conjure sacred ash and expensive jewellery into the palm of his hand, as if out of thin air. Opponents dismiss his miracles as party tricks. The Sai Organisation claims to have more than 1,200 Saytha Sai Baba Centres in more than 100 countries. (Reference)
On a QuickTopic forum, Sanjay conceded that Paul Lewis’ article was the direct result of collaboration between Anti-Sai Activists and The Guardian newspaper. Paul Lewis’ biased Anti-Sai newspaper article was in planning for six months. Here are Sanjay’s comments (fully acknowledging that the newspaper article against Sathya Sai Baba was a premeditated, concerted and deliberate Anti-Sai-Baba hack job):
Want to talk about blindness? I warned you fools about this months ago, but you’re way too thick to pick up the hints. I even warned you months in advance about the BBC movie, and you were too thick to pick up the hints about that too. Nothing has changed even two years later. :-)
Indeed, on April 24th 2006, Sanjay did give a warning about a coming Anti-Sai exposure in November regarding the very same UK Youth Group Trip that formed the basis to The Guardian newspaper article. On the SSB2 Yahoo Group, Sanjay said:
Sai Baba, male-rapist extraordinaire, has been drooling for TWO YEARS expecting the entire UK Youth contingent to travel to Puttaparthi and satisfy his perverted sexual cravings. It’s all going down this November. Details to follow (Reference).
Six months later, come November (just as Sanjay said), Paul Lewis’ Anti-Sai article was published about (you guessed it) the UK Youth Group Trip and allegations of “pedophilia”.
More admissions from Sanjay on QuickTopic:
What you morons fail to realise is that these things take months of planning and co-ordinated research, especially by journalists and reporters of prestigious newspapers (such as the Times, Daily Telegraph, Australian Age, etc etc) who tend to go off and do their own research in the hope of turning up something new. We already knew about this issue months before the date pf publication of course. In fact it was mooted as a front-page story, but at the last minute a development in a legal issue involving PM Tony Blair took precedence and the Sai Baba article was moved to Page 3. No matter, open the paper and it all goes BOOM! in your face…How did you like the distractions, Moreno? Sorry I couldn’t take part while I was busy participating in this development…We run the Exposé and the Exposé continues.
WE run the Exposé and the Exposé continues!
And yes, I know all about what has gone on behind the scenes. This is the stuff I am working on while you idiots are arguing endlessly over who’s a bigger pervert than who when the biggest pervert of all (Sai Baba) has just been exposed today (Saturday 4th November 2006) in a very nice Page 3 spread in a highbrow British newspaper like The Guardian. Of course, I already know which page it’s on even though I don’t have it yet. In a few hours I’ll go out and purchase a hard copy. :-)
Needless to say, it is exactly this type of hidden bias that is responsible for misleading so many people about Sai Baba. This very same type of hidden bias is to be found in both the Secret Swami Documentary and Michelle Goldberg’s Salon.com article entitled Untouchable?. This time around, however, we have direct admissions from Sanjay Dadlani that this newspaper article was the unequivocal result of behind-the-scenes scheming, subterfuge and collaboration between The Guardian, Paul Lewis and Anti-Sai Activists themselves.
Although this article was in planning for six months, Paul Lewis could not even get basic facts correct. For instance, Lewis wrote:
…followers are devoted to the preachings of 79-year-old holy man, Sai Baba…The trip coincides with Sai Baba’s 80th birthday…
First of all, Baba is not 79 years old. He is going to be 81 years old this year and his 80th birthday celebrations occurred last year. It is nothing short of utter absurdity to claim that an 81 year old guru in a wheelchair is going to sexually molest children. This is exactly what Anti-Sai Activists want others to believe. As a matter of fact, one must remember that Anti-Sai Activists repeatedly make the arguments that Sathya Sai Baba suffers from frail health, stumbles often while walking, has thinning hair, suffers from dementia, broke bones going back to 1988 and allegedly suffered several heart attacks. This is the type of “frail person” who allegedly has the libido of a teenager and the strength of a giant to subdue healthy male adults in the prime of their youth.
I found it very disturbing that Paul Lewis (intentionally?) left out the wholly relevant word “unconfirmed” when he cited the U.S. State Department Warning (that Anti-Sai Activists boasted on accomplishing themselves: Reference). Paul Lewis selectively wrote:
“…the US State Department issued a travel warning after reports of ‘inappropriate sexual behaviour by a prominent local religious leader’…”.
The warning actually said (not mentioning Baba by name):
“…unconfirmed reports of inappropriate sexual behavior by a prominent local religious leader…” (Reference).
Is it just coincidence that Paul Lewis left out the very same word (i.e., “unconfirmed”) that Anti-Sai Activists leave out in their error-filled writings? I think not.
Although Paul Lewis had six months to research his article, he apparently missed my high-ranking pages concerning Alaya Rahm (The BBC “Secret Swami” prime witness) who ended up self-dismissing his own lawsuit against the Sathya Sai Baba Society after Lewis Kreydick (a witness named by Alaya himself) came forward and thoroughly refuted Alaya’s claims (Refs: 01 – 02).
Tom Sackville has been made fully aware of all this information (I personally emailed it to him), yet he continues on as if he is oblivious to these facts. Neither Tom Sackville, Anti-Sai Activists, Paul Lewis or anyone else for that matter can produce even one “pedophilia” testimony from a “child”, “boy” or “kid” (or told by a parent) who was allegedly sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba. Paul Lewis researched his article for six months in collaboration with Anti-Sai Activists (who claim they have the real “evidence” against Satya Sai Baba) and even with their help, Lewis could not substantiate the “pedophilia” claims with one single testimony or story. This is revealing in itself.
Purposely withheld from the general public were Alaya Rahm’s promiscuous sexual activities (prior to meeting Sai Baba) and his self-admission (in the “Response To Form Interrogatories” court records) to being a decade-long daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol. Alaya was so “seriously sexually abused” he suffered no psychological trauma that would have required medical or psychiatric care, by his own admission. Alaya identified no psychologist who had ever examined him, nor did his parents ever send him to see any kind of therapist. Alaya, although an adult, was being financially supported by his parents and only came forward with his allegations of sexual abuse when his parents (on a surprise visit) threatened to cut him off financially because they were displeased with his lifestyle, the company he was keeping and his failure to behave in a proper manner.
Anti-Sai Activists also attempt to hide the fact that Alaya Rahm made very disturbing claims that Sathya Sai Baba literally and miraculously transformed his male genitals into female ones on two separate occasions. As if this is not shocking enough, Alaya Rahm wrote a love-poem to Sathya Sai Baba after allegedly being sexually abused dozens of times. Alaya even carried two scarves with him so that he could double his chances of having an interview with Sai Baba. Is this the behavior of someone who was being “seriously sexually abused”?
Even though Barry Pittard (an Anti-Sai Activist) stated “Well over a hundred sworn affidavits alleging sexual molestation of young males has been lodged with FBI”, not even one single witness was identified to the court on Alaya Rahm’s behalf. This highly suggests that Anti-Sai Activist’s numbers about alleged victims are untrue, unsubstantiated and unverifiable. This single fact alone wholly compromises and changes the entire face of the allegations against Sathya Sai Baba.
In conclusion, this once again goes to show that all of these Anti-Sai articles have an Anti-Sai agenda behind them. Although Paul Lewis was working in collaboration with Anti-Sai Activists for six months, the end result is that he could not provide any new information against Sathya Sai Baba. Paul Lewis attempted to re-packaged old allegations and old claims and pass it off as something new.
Six months of research later, Paul Lewis could not write about any confirmed cases of “pedophilia”. Rather, Lewis wrote about “claims of pedophilia”. Surely, if there was proof or legitimate complaints of “pedophilia” against Sathya Sai Baba, Lewis (a journalist for the “esteemed” Guardian newspaper) would have found it. He didn’t find anything. Nothing. Why not? With all these rampant claims of “pedophilia”, surely there must have been at least one case or story he could cite. No cases and no stories were cited. Period.
In the past 6 years, those opposing Sathya Sai Baba have failed to make any leeway against him in a court of law for alleged acts of sexual impropriety. This highly suggests that the “evidence” against Sathya Sai Baba is inadequate or non-existent.
Because Anti-Sai Activist have no proof against Sathya Sai Baba, they wage an internet smear campaign and attempt to feed questionable stories to the media by banding together and employing group thuggery tactics. Any sincere inquiry into this issue will clearly reveal that the allegations against Sathya Sai Baba are based on rumors, second/third hand accounts, anonymous individuals and the like.
Thankfully, Sanjay has a big mouth, can’t keep secrets and let it slip out that Anti-Sai Activists were behind The Guardian’s newspaper article. Who knows what other secrets lay behind the other “exposures” against Sai Baba? As one can see, the modus operandi of Anti-Sai Activists is one of subterfuge, deceit and secrecy. In the past, those who accused Anti-Sai Activists of behaving this way were dismissed as “paranoid” or resorting to “ad hominem” attacks. All along, Sai Devotees and Pro-Sai Activists were right. Anti-Sai Activists are deceitful propagandists who operate behind-the-scenes, resorting to secrecy and subterfuge to push their public hate-campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba. The truth is now out and there is no stopping it.