News Desk

Thanks Ex-I. That dead link was what I was referring to however as the blessed drama would have it I had saved the whole lot at the time so i have the full answer including the links that the expert provided in his response to the questioner. So I wonder how they will disappear that! oh and I have a paper copy as well. Unfortunately a couple of the links seem to have been nobbled but never mind because what I have makes interesting enough reading. Am so glad that you also provided the link to the Google Answers cache. And I also discovered about the Way back machine. So thanks a lot, the forum will appreciate it I am sure.

An Indian ex-BK pointed out that the BKs have been working the media to supress negative press for years.

Little wonder why one can come across some absolute garbage written about the BKWSU on the net. They are too fastidious in their efforts at madia manipulation consequently if people cant get sensible answers from them then they are likely to take literal meanings from the little inside stuff - Murli points - that they do come across.

Little wonder why one can come across some absolute garbage written about the BKWSU on the net. They are too fastidious in their efforts at madia manipulation consequently if people cant get sensible answers from them then they are likely to take literal meanings from the little inside stuff - Murli points - that they do come across.

Hmmn, "Madia" ... I like it. I think that you have just coined a new word.

Yup, there is BK madia out there. Some disturbed soul, "RHUBERDIA K. SMITH", wrote something called the "Owelsong" pages about them that goes right over the top. Weird because the author obviously knew something about the BK and had been in deep at some point. I have no idea who it was. It was like they did BK and then went and took a lot of LSD.

http://www.maxpages.com/owelsong

It would be a good thing to do a critique of it from an informed position. Nonsense like this is actually damaged to all parties attempting to seriously discuss the BKWSU. I wish that they would take it down.

Cheers Ex-I. Yes, the media fell into lunacy after taking the seven day course (apologies for the typo). Yes, I saw that article as well.

BKsimonb is busy removing the links about the prevented cult suicide information of Heidi Fittkau-Garthe (I am told she was in the "inner circle" before her departure to form her own group) on wikipedia. Perhaps she got tired of waiting for destruction? The BKs hide this from us when joining and all the past dates for destruction. Why do they want to protect her, and her actions?

Depression and suicidal feelings are very common when leaving, or trying to leave the BKs. I am preparing an article about this for my Psychic Dimension thread.

I see some people have quoted me here on the Newsdesk, talking about BKsimonb, including ex-l. Sorry I have not been joining in, I did not get any reply notifications.

Don't worry MER-C, Celibacy as with most every other BK 'principle', as far as I can make out is a recommendation rather than a pre-requisite. [[User:Searchin man|searchin man]] 00:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I wish they had told me that celibacy was an optional recommendation! I missed out there obviously.

Hi proy, If this is BKWSU orchestrated then i feel violated. What are the sources that the BKSimonb profile is 'cleansing'? A crazy conspiracy theorist could conjecture that the BKWSU actions signal to us all that there is something pretty disturbing going in inside the organisation. We students are the ones who can speak to the world with authority on these matters. Do they intend to make us seem as if we are deluded? We did the course and listened to the Murli.

Yup, there is BK madia out there. Some disturbed soul, "RHUBERDIA K. SMITH", wrote something called the "Owelsong" pages about them that goes right over the top.

She probably had seen this ex-BK website. Just wondering if she's signup to be a member on this site.

"Information Cleansing"

Hi proy, If this is BKWSU orchestrated then I feel violated. What are the sources that the BKSimonb profile is 'cleansing'? A crazy conspiracy theorist could conjecture that the BKWSU actions signal to us all that there is something pretty disturbing going in inside the organisation. We students are the ones who can speak to the world with authority on these matters. Do they intend to make us seem as if we are deluded? We did the course and listened to the Murli.

As far as I know the BKWSU IT team are doing this both on the Wikipedia and on Google, led by Mohini and Waddy. Waddy last wrote me a letter (2005) from Florida, so I guess she is still there. Mohini I think is based in New York and is in charge of the IT team. Current BKs would know this better than I do. I have not been to a centre since I left. Look at the links from Google etc. posted by ex-l in this thread. Here is a short extract.

Warning – this is going to be llllloooooonnnnngggg ... Further warning – some of the web sites cited below set off numerous pop ups and pop unders and are not be taken as having any endorsement from me.

One way that I would seek to get past the blurb on any organisation is to try and identify criticisms of it and/or its founder/leadership. Obviously this will also produce a highly biased picture, which may include downright lies, but it will be an interesting counterweight to the PR and can open up avenues for further research should you so wish. The second way would be to try to identify academic opinion on the matter.

Since this is an organisation that is trying to promote a particular brand of spirituality, I’ll start with that context, with "cult" as my first search term, since that is likely to be the primary accusation to be made against the group. I’ll keep the name at just "Brahma Kumaris" because that is the essential part.

1. “Brahma Kumaris” cult

(a) “On Thursday 8 January 1998, the Spanish police in Santa Cruz on the tourist island of Tenerife announced that they had only just prevented a mass suicide planned for that day A Berlin psychologist, Ms Heide Fittkau-Garthe ... was the leader, the 'World Mother', of the Atma Center (Isis Holistic Center); the cult involved in this ... Apparently, Fittkau-Garthe had been the leader of the Hamburg branch of the Brahma Kumaris religious group (founded in the 1930s in India; headquarters at Mt. Abu). She retained its doctrine of an elite of 'golden souls', destined to reincarnate to rule the world in a new world era, and its belief in "Shiv Baba" (or "Brahma Baba") as supreme deity.”

http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/isis.htm

The words Brahma Kumaris in the snippet above are a hyperlink. Following that link, I got to a higher directory level on the same site, titled "Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual Organization: controversies" http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/brahma_kumaris.htm

Which gave me a link leading to: "The 'Brahma Kumari World Spiritual Organization', or 'World Spiritual University' ... was founded in 1937 in colonial British India, by the diamond trader Dada Lekh Raj. His devotees call him Brahma Baba. They claim Raj was a manifestation ... of the Hindu God Shiva ... devotees at Mt Abu in India claim still to receive his channeled messages from the hereafter. They expect Brahma Baba's return soon. Then, a destructive, but purifying fire will supposedly end the old 'Kali Yuga' era, and bring about a new Golden Era; in which the spiritual elite of Golden Souls (the Brahma Kumaris) will rule the world ... Devotees should be celibate, as sex is allegedly the great enemy of the soul. With a 'fifty points chart' devotees must count, whether they are thinking about Baba enough, and whether their thoughts are pure enough. Negative ideas [critical of the organization's leadership] are said to gobble up energy and to poison the atmosphere. Ex-devotees complain about anti-women attitudes, and autocracy. New devotees often join the movement after supposedly non-religious introductory courses in 'Positive Thinking'. In followup courses, Baba enters the picture."

http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/brahma_kumaris.htm#Brahma

The web site is that of SIMPOS: Foundation for Information on the Social Consequences of Occult Tendencies. Survey 1996-1999 http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/simpoeng.htm

This is the type of information that is busily being deleted from the internet by BKWSU IT people. They will be individual BKs like BKsimonb etc. They will try to confuse the issue by posting under multiple identities, e.g. Avyakt7, BKkaruna etc. For those in charge of the IT team to be ignorant of what is going on would seem incredible to me. A conspiracy theory is only a theory when there is no evidence for it. Look at the evidence for yourself and I think you will have to conclude that this is a conspiracy PROBABILITY. Assuming the BKWSU are reading this, if this web vandalism continues then IMHO we must conclude that this is a conspiracy FACT. A whitewash job is going on. Very likely the BKWSU are orchestrating it. If they do not come on this forum and deny it then I will assume that they are behind it, and approve of it. This is very foolish of them. Nothing is worse than trying to cover up information. It leads one to believe two things. One, that there is even more that they have to hide, that will eventually come out into the open, and two that if something bad happens in the organisation they will cover it up rather than put it right. Read Eromain's letters on the Abuse thread on this forum for evidence of them doing this in the past.

Hi proy, If this is BKWSU orchestrated then I feel violated.

Avyakt7 is Avyakt7 (on the forum and wikipedia) also he is Riveros11 and Luis and a host of IP addresses, including from two universities.
Bksimonb= Simon B from head of security in London.
Appledell=Don't know who but it could be Kiran (a woman I am told).
BKkaruna=Head of PR BK Karuna.
So, Abrahma Kumar, these are some of their stooges.

"Information Cleansing"

This is the type of information that is busily being deleted from the internet by BKWSU IT people. They will be individual BKs like BKsimonb etc. They will try to confuse the issue by posting under multiple identities, e.g. Avyakt7, BKkaruna etc. For those in charge of the IT team to be ignorant of what is going on would seem incredible to me. A conspiracy theory is only a theory when there is no evidence for it. Look at the evidence for yourself and I think you will have to conclude that this is a conspiracy PROBABILITY. Assuming the BKWSU are reading this, if this web vandalism continues then IMHO we must conclude that this is a conspiracy FACT. A whitewash job is going on. Very likely the BKWSU are orchestrating it. If they do not come on this forum and deny it then I will assume that they are behind it, and approve of it. This is very foolish of them. Nothing is worse than trying to cover up information. It leads one to believe two things. One, that there is even more that they have to hide, that will eventually come out into the open, and two that if something bad happens in the organisation they will cover it up rather than put it right. Read Eromain's letters on the Abuse thread on this forum for evidence of them doing this in the past.

And leader Mohini has a degree in journalism, nevermind being a zone-in-charge or "President" of the BKWSU ... The need for accuracy rather than insinuation is paramount. Its is important to aspire to higher principles that the BKWSU.

BKkaruna is actually BK Karuna Shetty, Chief of Global PR and Mutlimedia for the BKWSU, so this activity is coming right from the top. In my opinion, the public face of the BKWSU all acts with pretty much one mind anyway and it is not possible to think creatively within their system, except for inventing new disguises - sorry, "service plans" - and increasing titles for oneself! If you do a Google search for "Avyakt7 and bomb", you can see where he is coming from.

Mohini expressed a deep compassion for those in the media and sited an example of seeing a newsreader and thinking, "How can she manage all that bad news?" She shared her personal practice which includes not being influenced by negativity and not allowing hopelessness to touch her feelings by instead asking, "What can I do to bring hope?" In the case of the newsreader, she was compelled to send the reporter nurturing vibrations of peace.

In the case of the Wikipedia and Google its even easier ... just assign a team of junior BKs to re-write it or remove articles!

If you want a perfect example of how the BKWSU works with regards media re-writes. Here are BK Luis "Not fast enough, not strong enough" Riveros re-writes. This is the BKWSU IT team "spearheading", as Luis like to call it, the members Wikipedia Arbitration Committee, who all received the same copy and paste message. The crazy thing about the Wikipedia is that whatever you do, it stays up there as record for as long as some one keeps paying the electricity bill for the internet! If you follow down the links to his contributions, you get a feel for the tone of what is going on and how much effort is being put in by the BKWSU to control this article.

And here are where BKs Simon Blandford and Luis Riveros are working together to the same party line; Link. Usual lies, insinuations and impossible to prove conjectures completely ignoring any positive input or objectively factual statements, as far as I can see. Simonb was the same BK that wrote Murlis were "internal documents" only.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee#Members; Charles Matthews, Morven, Blnguyen, Jayjg, dforrester, Fred Bauder, Charles Matthews, Morven, FloNight, SimonP, dforrester and others.

Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University

Dear ArbComm Member of Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University;
This note is to bring to your attention two issues which are creating upheaval in the article located here [16]and placed on probation under the premise of "Any user may request review by members of the Arbitration Committee."[17]. This request is based on enforcement or remedies stated in the arbitration process and failure to follow up on it.
1) An article-banned user [18] orchestrated a come back through proxy IPs from Japan and then through an account "Some people" which has been blocked twice. The problem with this is that this user had modified the entire article in less than 12 hours on January 28 2007. This user partner, TalkAbout; acted in synchrony with 244 on that night and made some changes as well using "Some people" new version. User Andries had a minor edit of that version as well.
Request to investigate user Some people [19] Analysis of situation [20] Suspicion of sockpuppet account [21] Blocks to user Some people for "a reincarnation of the editor who formerly posted from the IP address 195.82.106.244"( As Admin Thatcher put it) [22]
2) The only Admin we've dealing with is Thatcher131. I would like to bring to your attention what I consider to be "lack of neutrality" and fairness from his/her part. Even though, user "Some people" was blocked by Thatcher131 under a strong suspicion of him being user 244 (banned by the ArbComm for a year) Thatcher131 supported the new version of the page which are the versions of a banned user.[23] A request for enforcement of arbitration has been submitted long time ago before user 195.82.106.244 (aka 244) made several changes through his sockpuppet account "Some people" [24] but the request is still sitting there.
User "Some people" transformed the article with over 30 + entries on 22:41 28 Jan 2007 [25] and then User TalkAbout added some content and at that point, that was considered the new "good version" of the article.
I would like to request the following: 1) the article to be reverted to a state before "Some people" took over. 2) To change the "Admin in charge", Thatcher131 to someone who is not emotionally involved in this issue (Thatcher131 was the clerk in the arbitration case and helped user 195.82.106.244 to file the case and presented some evidence against me but not against 244[26])and that could enforce normal wikipedia procedures are taking place. I appreciate your time and prompt consideration on this.
Truly Yours, avyakt7 21:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmf.
I blocked Some people (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) as a likely sock/meat puppet of the anonymous 195 editor when I was sure based on contribs. Just not fast enough for Riveros, I guess. I have also semi-protected the article to prevent drive-by editing by 195-like IP addresses.
Riveros reverted across 30 edits by three editors, only some of which were the banned 195 editor.
Riveros seems to object to my advice and comments on the BKWS talk page here.
The fact that TalkAbout (talk • contribs) prefers many of the same content edits as the 195 editor (based on personal interpretation of BK scriptures; hence original research) is a problem. However, TalkAbout is not abusive, and even Riveros acknowledges that TalkAbout is somone different. The case does not authorize additional action against any other editor of the article.
Riveros seems to have ownership issues, "The issue here is that a user reverted a post I had for a week after discussion. Whether that post has BK sources or not is not the issue. The issue is: it was deleted whitout letting me know about it. " [27]
I filed the initial request for arbitration, so I recused myself as clerk for this case. The idea that I am biased is laughable.
I am not "in charge" of anything, I am just the only Admin who regularly watches Arbitration enforcement. Arbitration enforcement is a burden, not a pleasure. To take action there responsibly, an Admin must be famliar not only with recent edits, but with the background of the case and the behavior of all parties, to make sure that one party is not taking advantage of an Admin's unfamiliarity to get an inappropriate sanction. It is certainly the toughest job I have ever volunteered for on Wikipedia. That fact, combined with the fact that someone is guaranteed to be upset no matter what action an Admin takes or declines to take (and frequently, both sides are upset with the result), probably is responsible for the fact that so few admins patrol there. So I will be happy to unwatch the BK page and have nothing further to do with this dispute.
I can see that being an arbitration clerk and also handling complaints at arbitration enforcement may cause some confusion. I certainly don't want to give the impression that only clerks may enforce arbitration remedies. If the committee wishes me to choose one or the other I will be happy to do so.
As I told several of the participants in the Waldorf case, don't assume that if the BKWS case is reopened, the arbitration hammer will drop on everyone else but you.
Thatcher131 22:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Tatcher131, here is my reply:
1. Not fast enough, not strong enough. "Some people" have been around since 244 was banned doing the same disruptive behavior. That is why he was able to come back and make over 30 entries and get away with it. He is a banned user. There is a "big" problem here if a banned user is allowed to post. Thatcher131, you then supported this behavior.
2. My reverts were based on the fact that user "Some people" was banned. Thatcher131 even suggested that user was 195.82.106.244 before I reverted the article. Unfortunately, TalkAbout made her entries at that time too. However, I gave her a notice which she disregarded; besides, it is very likely that TalkAbout and "Some people" are working together. A fast look at the article history (which I gave a link above) will demonstrate this. This case is not about abusive behavior, it is about enforcing something which the ArbCom pointed out.
3. As far as "ownership issues": This is what you wrote to me:"When you reverted Some people here, you also reverted several of TalkAbout's edits. One way to deal with the situation is, rather than reverting, try and remove poorly sourced content added by Some people without removing TalkAbout's. Another way of handling it would be to apologize to TalkAbout: I am sorry that I had to revert your work as well, but Some people is a banned user, and it was too hard to separate your edits from his. Go ahead and add your stuff back." A third way of dealing with it would be to negotiate with the other editors on the talk page before making any changes. Try and propose compromise language, or point out sections that are original research rather than reporting what other reliable sources have said." Thatcher131, please realize what you are suggesting. You want me to go back and take TalkAbout's editions out of "Some people" when both of them were editing almost at the same time. Please takea look at the history. That in itself, will support what I am saying. I did what it was in my hands to do; which at the time was to warn TalkAbout that she was acting dishonestly if she used "Some people" versions. Just see the history of the article. Besides, All I was asking is what you sugessted me to do; which is for TalkAbout to let me know that she was going to erase my post. My post was discussed in the talk page and changed by me accordingly. TalkAbout and Some People just decide to erase it completely without a word.
4. I do not think the idea you are biased is laughable. I showed a link above where you went out of your way as a clerk to try to get me [28] If you are not the one in "charge" then it looks like it, since you are the only one who reponds our inquires; sometimes acting on them; some others putting those off. If there is some one else that I could go to, please let me know.
5. I am asking for enforcement of the final desicion of the ArbCom. If this case needs to be re-opened to accomplish that, let it be. Best Wishes, avyakt7 21:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The need for accuracy rather than insinuation is paramount. Its is important to aspire to higher principles that the BKWSU.

I totally agree with you ex-l. Please tell me where you think I am being inaccurate. I am willing to learn.

The need for accuracy rather than insinuation is paramount. Its is important to aspire to higher principles that the BKWSU.

I totally agree with you ex-l. Please tell me where you think I am being inaccurate. I am willing to learn.

Thanks to you both and i too wish that my posts are always directed by accuracy rather than insinuation. It is a pleasure being part of this forum.

I wonder if anyone can recognise Heidi from any of these photos. Maybe her picture could go in the "Roll of Honour"?

There is no copyright on the photos so they can be saved onto the up/downloads section of the site if wanted.

http://www.webshots.com/search?query=Br ... -+Red+Fort

I wonder if anyone can recognise Heidi from any of these photos. Maybe her picture could go in the "Roll of Honour"?

Honor?

The woman was whacky in my opinion, albeit that it appears she was set up on the Tenerife UFO cult suicide stunt ... she did not even manage to top herself.

To me, the only reason she got anywhere in the BKWSU was because she was a white women that actually had some worldly status, e.g. a degree ... a real "doctor", a psychologist even, when they had no one of any creditibility to hang on to. And she had connections. Jayanti and Janki were all over her ... she was up on the guddhi with them and everything.

It would be moderately interesting to know what really went on back them but moreso to find out why Surya and Suman left Gyan. Any German ex-BKs online?

The woman was whacko ... the only reason she got anywhere in the BKWSU was because she was a white women that actually had some worldly status, e.g. a degree ... a real "doctor", when they had no one of any creditibility to hang on to. And she had connections. Jayanti and Janki were all over her ... she was up on the guddhi with them and everything.

OK. I did not know the full facts. I only read about the suicide. Excuse my ignorance. So what was the story?