Many tags and Google entries relate to the blog “Sathya Sai Baba – Life, Love & Spirituality” (which contains plenty of hate against me and other critics of Sai Baba – plus any amount of highly visible nonspiritual libel and character assassination. One among many tags anyone can check as nominally by ‘sathyasaibaba’ was:-
sathyasaibaba wrote 2 days ago: By Proxy Defenders Of Alleged Victims And By Proxy Defamers Of Sathya Sai Baba Dictionary (Read more)…
Here Gerald Joe Moreno cites legal definitions of ‘proxy’ in trying vainly to clear himself of the charge that he is a proxy for Sai Baba interests. He tries to limit the meaning of proxy to a strictly legal definition, but there are others which are in common use. The following definition taken literally, however, fits him like a glove. Moreno acts as “the agency, function, or office of a deputy who acts as a substitute for another” (i.e. whether a self-appointed deputy or not) and ” a representative who acts on behalf of other persons or organizations”. There need be no power of attorney for a proxy, who can be simply a substitute (Websters), and Moreno is certainly a welcome substitute for the Sathya Sai authorities who he defends at every turn of events. He even allows the public to think he is a substitute for sathyasaibaba, having chosen that blog title no doubt realizing that alerts and tags would appear (to the unprepared and curious public) as being from Sathya Sai Baba himself! Another definition of “by proxy” is “to get something second hand” (Urban dictionary). Most of Moreno’s blog materials are at second-hand and not a few were written by Sai officials! His blog acts as a proxy for many views leading readers to believe he is a devotee, though he denies that vigorously.
Moreno as a tireless proxy defender of the Sathya Sai Organization: Whether or not Moreno is a self-appointed, unofficial deputy or a hired undercover agent makes litle difference. His massive libel campaign passes without correction or comment from the entire Sai Organization, despite their being challenged on this by prominent ex-followers (especially the JuST group).
Despite Moreno’s untruthful claim, I have not claimed that Moreno has links from official Sai websites – they are too careful for that! The Sathya Sai Organization could with great ease stop most attacks on critics if they so wished, and also links to Joe Moreno’s pages by the webmasters of semi-independent websites (like saibabaofindia). They would be obliged to follow Sai official ‘advice’. Evidently the Sai Organization is in silent collusion with Moreno’s work, which they cannot do themselves as they would then expose further what they really are like. They have caused closures of sites they deemed unsatisfactory before, such as the major site by Sai students with literal translations of Sai discourses. They could no doubt get many of Moreno’s postings removed from wordpress.com if they wished since they have the copyright – not least Dr. G. Venkataraman, – head of Radio Sai and leading member of the Prashanthi Council. Moreno reposted a web page the Duke of Edinburgh Award’s executive made them remove. It is their copyright, not Moreno’s. (WordPress forcibly removed some of Moreno’s thefts of my materials for copyright infringement – more on this later).
That Moreno received printed and video materials from the defending party – i.e. it consisted in two lawyers with the involvement of the lawyer and Sai devotee Robert Baskin, who is a legal advisor to the Sathya Sai Society of America and who G. Venkataraman of Radio Sai thanked for providing documentations about the court case to the Sai authorities. The defendant Dr. Michael Goldstein (Head of the world-wide Sathya Sai Organization) may instead have himself provided Moreno with the materials (even if through a proxy so as to keep at arm’s length). Our representatives visited the court in Orange County but could not even obtain the Kreydick materials Moreno had obtained because they were not available to the public, only to the two parties involved. Only a few other official documents could be obtained, which we secured.
These materials were never presented in court session, either, since the case was dropped for technical reasons. Had they been so, their credibility would have been nullified because Alaya Rahm could not even tell his own parents about the sexual abuses, so he would not have told a fanatically devoted person like Lewis Kreydick either. Only later did he dare tell his parents, explaining how fearful he was before that of revealing this because of the consequences. Later he spoke with students about the molestations and felt a lot of support from them, so where was Kreydick then? The BBC investigated this matter in great depth and were entirely satisfied in the genuineness of the Rahm’s case, and the Sai leaders in the US were unable to make any legal challenge sit, nor were those in Canada able to pressurise the CBS authorities into quashing the broadcasts of ‘The Secret Swami’.
So Moreno had to remove those same materials which he posted on the Sathya Sai Baba Wikipedia article because he could not prove having obtained them from the court which he claimed had sent to him against payment. Moreno was unable to show any receipt or any proof that the documents were ever available at Orange County Court. Moreno also obtained videos of Kreydick reading his testimony! These are STILL NOT available anywhere else. He could only respond by posting masses of postings on his attack websites about “Robert Priddy’s pre-senile rantings”, which characterisation encapsulates the essence of his almost endless arguments. It was also impossible to obtain the Kreydick material from the court on-line – only a few official documents were available in that way. Kreydick’s submission was filed, but it was not presented in court nor was it made a public document, though Moreno mendaciously asserted again and again that it is. The supposed ‘proofs’ he posted are therefore sheer deception. He was consequently unable – after I removed them – to repost the Kreydick materials on Wikipedia, from which he was soon banned indefinitely. Typically, he tried at the time to claim he had withdrawn of his own free will!
Moreno acted as a proxy for the defense, Dr. Goldstein etc. in publicising those materials (i.e. Lewis Kreydick’s very dubious and simplistic claims). He was even originally informed of the case by Sai officials, because no specific information about the case was available except to attorneys and parties until after Moreno had publicised the fact. Further evidence of connections to Robert Baskin are also found (see here). Moreno has fatuously claimed that he could not know Robert Baskin because he lives in California, while Moreno is in New Mexico! A cogent rebuttal? Well, both have been to Sai Baba ashrams, and Baskin has also attended many Sai centres in the USA.
Let Moreno inform us who the ‘Robert” was who first introduced him to Sathya Sai Baba and told him amazing stories… but expect him to ignore this challenge, as he always does with real issues. If it was not Robert Baskin, was it Robert Bozzani, or Robert Bruce? There were very few people called Robert who could relate such first-hand stories in the US when Moreno met this Robert.
Here is one of my challenges made on Wikipedia, which eventually led to Moreno meeting his Wiki-waterloo. (Apropos, he was also banned from Netscape, and Digg for massive spamming).
Moreno used thousands of words and a plethora of entries in the Wikipedia discussion pages trying to defend the posting of Kredick materials on the Sathya Sai Baba Wikipedia main page More on Gerald Joe Moreno‘s big proxy issue is to follow soon ….. -
- – but see
Alaya Rahm’s Lawsuit vs Sathya Sai Society of U.S. Joint Statement by International JuST Group and the Rahm family
Sai Baba Hatchet Man Picks On A Young Child
Terroist-related Slurs Used By Sai Baba Internet Fanatic Sai Baba Internet Man – No Apology When Caught Using Anti-Semitism Slur
The Rahm’s testimony on the BBC World documentary