Paul Lewis' Hidden Bias In The Guardian UK Newspaper
Journalist Paul Lewis | The Guardian Newspaper | "The Indian Living God, The Paedophilia Claims And The Duke Of Edinburgh Awards" | November 4th 2006
Paul Lewis Menu (click on a link to go to relevant section):
- Introduction To Paul Lewis
- Link To Paul Lewis' Article In The Guardian UK Newspaper
- Paul Lewis' Anti-Sai Agenda Uncovered
- Some Very Shabby Research By Paul Lewis
- Paul Lewis Distorted The U.S. State Department Warning
- Paul Lewis' Mention Of The Secret Swami Programme
- In Conclusion
Introduction To Paul Lewis: 
On November 4th 2006, Paul Lewis (a journalist for The Guardian UK newspaper) published a poorly researched article against Sathya Sai Baba entitled "The Indian living god, the paedophilia claims and the Duke of Edinburgh awards".
This article has been duplicated and summarized in various other media under different titles such as:
- "UK charity runs into rough seas over Sai Baba link"
- "Satya Sai Baba caught in British controversy"
- "Spiritual leader Satya Sai Baba caught in British controversy"
- "Brit boys to keep off Sai Baba's reach"
- "Sai Baba accused of sexual abuse
Interesting enough, despite all these different media replicating this story, not even one single journalist has been able to verify or substantiate even one single case of alleged "pedophilia" against Sathya Sai Baba. Now that is something worth noting.
Link To Paul Lewis' Article In The Guardian UK Newspaper:
"The Indian Living God, The Paedophilia Claims And The Duke Of Edinburgh Awards"
Paul Lewis' Anti-Sai-Baba Agenda Uncovered:
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. On a QuickTopic forum, Sanjay Dadlani conceded that The Guardian article was the direct result of collaboration between himself, Anti-Sai Activists and Paul Lewis. 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:
Sanjay Dadlani: "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. :-)" (Reference)
Indeed, on April 24th 2006, Sanjay did give a warning about a coming Anti-Sai exposure in November regarding the UK Sai Youth Group traveling to Puttaparthi and sexual abuse claims. On the SSB2 Yahoo Group, Sanjay said:
Sanjay Dadlani: "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).
Just as Sanjay predicted, come November (six months later), Paul Lewis published an article in The Guardian newspaper about (you guessed it) the UK Sai Youth Group traveling to Puttaparthi and "paedophilia claims". Coincidence? I think not.
More admissions from Sanjay Dadlani on QuickTopic:
Sanjay Dadlani: "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." (Reference)
Sanjay Dadlani: "WE run the Exposé and the Exposé continues!" (Reference)
Sanjay Dadlani: "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. :-)" (Reference)
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 Paul Lewis' newspaper article was the unequivocal result of behind-the-scenes scheming, subterfuge and collaboration between himself, Anti-Sai Activists and Paul Lewis.
Some Very Shabby Research By Paul Lewis:
Although this article was in planning for six months, Paul Lewis could not even get basic facts correct about Sathya Sai Baba. For instance, Lewis wrote:
Paul Lewis: "...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.
Paul Lewis Distorted The U.S. State Department Warning:
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:
Paul Lewis: "...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):
US State Dept.: "...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.
It is also significant to point out that Ex-Devotees attempted to get Britain to issue a similar warning against Sathya Sai Baba and failed. The following is the response given by S. Revathi and R. Ramanujam to Glen Meloy:
From: Revathi.Ramanujam@fco.gov.uk
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 08:01:23 +0100
To: glenmeloy@earthlink.net
Subject: Travel Warning for Visitors to Sai Baba Ashrams
Dear Mr Meloy
Thank you for your e-mail of 2 May 2002 addressed to Stephen Bailey which has been passed to me for reply.
We have not received any complaints against the Sai Baba organisation from British visitors, and as far as we can establish, no police investigations are currently underway. This remains a matter for the Indian authorities to investigate. In the light of this, it would be inappropriate to include references to these allegations in our travel advice.
S Revathi
Mrs R Ramanujam
Consular Officer BDHC, Chennai
Paul Lewis' Mention Of The Secret Swami Programme:
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 was 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 single paedophilia testimony from a "child", "boy" or "kid" (or as related by a parent) who was allegedly sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba. Paul Lewis researched his article 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 independently substantiate the "paedophilia" claims. 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 from someone who was being "seriously sexually abused"? Furthermore, all of this transpired when Alaya was an adult, 18+ years of age.
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 to 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:
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.
After six months of research and access to Anti-Sai Activists (who claim they have the "real evidence" against Sathya Sai Baba), Paul Lewis could not independently confirm even one single case 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 found nothing. Why not? With all these rampant claims of "pedophilia", surely there must have been at least one case or story he could have independently confirmed. No cases and no stories were confirmed. 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, contradictory testimonies, anonymous individuals and the like.
Thankfully, Sanjay has a big mouth, cannot keep secrets and let it slip out that Anti-Sai Activists were behind The Guardian 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 Sai Proponents 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.