... ... this long treatise still does not address the crimes of sb in molestations, rapes, and pedophilia. Many of the so-called top leaders in the USA, and on the international level, are turning deaf ears and blind eyes to what baba has done to many children and teenagers. These facts are not nearly properly addressed here. They are glossed over with the same type of tripe that Bongiovanni is famous for. These homosexual crimes ARE the main menu and main issue and the explanation here stinks. And you are still covering up the 1993 executions. That stinks too. Most of this is bs, and you know it. You may try to counter attack THE FINDINGS, but the main issue of sexual crimes committed by sb coming forth by many, from many countries, you will have big trouble answering for. Ultimately, sb will have to answer for them, and you will be branded as sympathizers and complicitors. You will not be able to refute these charges. They will eventually be settled in many court rooms throughout this planet. If you have done an inadequate job in attempting to counter balance and refute THE FINDINGS, you will have no chance refuting the testimony of the many victims. And please, give me a break, putting oil on male genitalia by sb can only be for one reason: checking out the receptivity of the future victims of his homosexual activities. There is absolutely no precedent or valid reason for such a crass and gross gambit. I don't care what he says as the reason(s), or your denial and/or defence of it--this stinks! I have no other reason to castigate sb except his own personal crimes. They must stop. There must be no more victims. Can you guarantee that? Can you even agree that what he is doing is criminal? With the pap in this web site, probably not. Dave Lyons, former president of the New Orleans Center NOTE: I did not see any names in this site. Does anyone claim responsibility for its content? Bon??

Bon Giovanni, named in the letter, was asked to reply:

Hello Dave Lyons,  ex-president of the New Orleans Center, cabdriver, online
author via many aliases, critic, vigilante, and muckraker, (and hello to all
with whom his letter is shared). I know David that in the past you have sent
on my private letters to others, so you see now I just greet folks outright.

Your e-pistle was forwarded to me as you mention me directly yet did not
write me directly. (That's okay David, I understand.) Long time since we
talked on the phone, is it not? Since that time, a number of your
correspondents have written me after you had sent them unasked for
correspondence, and so I am somewhat abreast of your current attitude,
David, but am unsure if you are aware of mine. Perhaps this will clarify
that.

You wrote:

>
> this long treatise still does not address the crimes of sb in
> molestations,
> rapes, and pedophilia.

This long treatise, as you call it, is a rebuttal. I believe it is both apt
and brief when compared to the items it rebuts.

As for your claim about "crimes of sb",  perhaps we can agree that should
evidence be put to the appropriate legal venue, officers of the court may
take due action. There is nothing amiss in that. Whether we agree or not
however I feel it is amiss of you to claim this and that under any alias,
sans specifics or evidence. That only engenders confusion, David.

>Many of the so-called top leaders in the USA,
> and on
> the international level, are turning deaf ears and blind eyes to what
> baba
> has done to many children and teenagers.

It is hoped that those so-called top leaders will be named so they may duly
address those who charge them. So too might be named those  "many children
and teenagers". That would surely encourage all to bring their evidence
forward to an apt court. There is nothing amiss in that. (It is amiss
however to charge this and that under an alias, sans specifics,  David--
that smacks of nothing so much as pettiness or panic.)

> These facts are not nearly
> properly
> addressed here.

Beg pardon, but the article rebuts what is presented: stories, claims,
assertions, innuendoes, anonymous letters, hyperbole. However, rather than
just complain about what others do, David, do something constructive and
helpful. Build clarity. Show exactly what you mean. State what you know.
Give specifics. Tell what is fact and show what is assumed.

>They are glossed over with the same type of tripe that
> Bongiovanni is famous for.

Why David, what an unusually direct thing for you to say, in that you
usually only mock me behind my back or under an alias. Well, at any rate as
a famous  fellow I can but tell you I have become accustomed to being given
credit (or charged) for things I have not done said or thought. You might
say I  gloss over such tripe, but I prefer to say I ignore it,  knowing it
is all but due my mocker's hopes for attention.

>These homosexual crimes ARE the main menu
> and main
> issue and the explanation here stinks.

If  you do have evidence of any homosexual crime, do present the case to an
apt court of law. There is nothing amiss in that. There is however quite a
bit amiss in those who like you forever claim crimes yet  present no
evidence.  Such persons might be considered scoundrels, you know, so much so
they would not even be allowed at a service project.

>And you are still covering up
> the 1993
> executions.

Do you mean Ramakrishnan and his fellow residents? Or perhaps you are
referring to their assailants, the men who planted bombs and poison in the
ashram, then snuck into the mandir where they then attacked those residents
with bloody purpose.

Exactly who do you think were "executed" David? Whoever you mean, strive to
present specifics, as that will both serve many and curtail your own
confusion.


>      You may try to counter attack THE FINDINGS, but the main issue of
> sexual
> crimes committed by sb coming forth by many, from many countries, you
> will
> have big trouble answering for.

I anticipate no big trouble as I have nothing to do with such matters. You
see, what you call sexual crimes has yet to be proven, and since you seem
unaware of what obtains, I will remind you that  I answer for what I do and
say, David. That means I speak for no one else. (I find mostly those who do
claim to speak for others have the troubles that you expect.)

>Ultimately, sb will have to answer for
> them,

Ultimately each will have to answer for what each says and does. That
includes you and me as well as Swami.  I call that a good thing, David.

> and you will be branded as sympathizers and complicitors.

I believe I will be branded as one who has stood for what he believes, but
even if I am branded as a villain for those beliefs I am content that I have
done as I see fit, unswayed by a mob mentality.

> You will not
> be
> able to refute these charges. They will eventually be settled in many
> court
> rooms throughout this planet.

If your hope comes to pass then you may rejoice. To gloat before the event,
however, makes one look crass. By that I mean:

>      If you have done an inadequate job in attempting to counter
> balance and
> refute THE FINDINGS, you will have no chance refuting the testimony of
> the
> many victims.

There is neither wisdom nor adequacy in refuting testimony until _after_ the
testimony is made.  The attentive thus do well to turn a hearing ear and a
keen eye *as* evidence is presented, but until then, the wise and the
prudent  neither convict nor pardon. If you have evidence, present it to a
court of law, David. Otherwise, what are you on about?


>And please, give me a break, putting oil on male
> genitalia by
> sb can only be for one reason: checking out the receptivity of the
> future
> victims of his homosexual activities.

Apparently that would be your desire were you to be in such a position. As
you wish, David, but as to what reason any others have for their actions,
one might ask.

>There is absolutely no precedent
> or
> valid reason for such a crass and gross gambit.

I think you mean, "David Lyons Knows All". For myself, when looking to what
reason any others have for their actions, one might ask.

> I don't care what he
> says as
> the reason(s), or your denial and/or defence of it--

It  is clear you do not care, yet in so saying you reveal why persons of
good will once dear to you  now rarely address you openly.


>      I have no other reason to castigate sb except his own personal
> crimes.

Your reason as you call it is not evidenced: all you evidence is your need
to demean. Instead you might show reason by offering actual evidence in an
apt court of law. *That* will surely stop all this.

> They must stop. There must be no more victims. Can you guarantee that?

You have it backwards David. Steady on: first you investigate, then you
prove the charges, then you convict. I can guarantee that if you do that, 
all will stop.

> Can
> you even agree that what he is doing is criminal?

Can you even prove what you claim? Do you know as fact what anyone is doing?
If so, do: do bring your evidence to an apt court David. Do. There is
nothing amiss in that.


>  NOTE: I did
> not see
> any names in this site. Does anyone claim responsibility for its
> content?
> Bon??
>

David, since so much of what you write online is via an alias I find it coy
of you to now request a signature of anyone. However, as I believe it says
in the site, the material is written by a group of elders-- so if you know
any elders who will yet speak to you, you might ask.