Just slander from Annica Karkkainen and an answer from Barry Pittard  


Date: 06-05-2002

From: http://www.quicktopic.com/8/H/qYarJBpGLW7G6/p1843.1836

Message 1841

06-05-2002 04:27 AM ET (US)

By: Annica

What I mentioned in my message [1797] of my talks with 'victims' who at least told me directly (not through a third hand person or through rumours) that they felt more victimized of their PROBLEMS than any acts of Sai Baba, is completely true.

I know that these people with the severest problems battled their problems on a daily basis and have no intentions at all to have it revealed or publicized to anyone. Perhaps this is why most stories come through other people.
I did not know how to respond to the things they told me of raping women, of abusive sex with men and women, of abusing children sexually and so on. I don't even know why they so openly told me of this; some revealed that they had never told anyone of these secrets before. They felt they wanted this to be put in the past; they felt they had done evil and wanted Sai Baba to help them to change.
A few even expressed that they did not feel their their acts had been evil at all, which truly surprised me.

Of course, not all of them had such severe problems. Some, especially the young, were simply obsessed with sex, masturbated maybe too much (Sai Baba had called this a 'weakness' to them and asked them to control themselves, put oil or vibhuti on their genitals) and had no other view of women except for using them for sex.
I do not at all agree with speculations from people that these practices of adding oil on genitals and so on were done to "raise kundalini", etc. To me this is nonsense speculations. Swami very clearly told them that their habits were a weakness, and not good for them if it continued. Swami had also expressed concern that their feelings for women lacked respect and were based only on sex and said this was "no better than a dog".

One told me Baba had even IMITATED him, making him take the role of the female and demonstrated exactly how he himself had acted with women. He felt humiliated; he felt used. For the first time he began to wonder how the women had felt in his past. Was this what he had put them through? He didn't like what had been done to him; it was too revealing and not pleasant to be on the 'other end' of it all.

Glen Meloy, for example, was a very arrogant and egoist young man. Maybe it was only during that time in his life and he has changed and become a wonderful person; I don't know. But I remember when he used to get a lot of interviews. We were all of course very curious what had been told. He very openly told everyone of his interviews and enjoyed the attention. As hardly anyone is ever called alone for an interview but always together with other people, the others present in the interviews usually had added stories which were left out from Glen himself. Like when he lived with a roommate, a girl, and he told his friends he had made her pregnant. When the 'guys' asked him whether he would marry the girl Glen responded "What do I care! She should have protected herself!". Glen neither cared about the girl or his own child. Sai Baba had called him "cold hearted" in the interview and that he had been a 'very bad boy'. Sai Baba had asked him to get married (to the girl) and Meloy had objected and told Baba himself to "get married". Baba had responded that he already was married. All eyebrows had raised. "Married to Mother Nature" Sai Baba had added amused. Meloy has tried to give the impression in the past that when he 'objected to abuse' he was called cold hearted by Baba... Glen WAS a cold-hearted person.
If he has changed, it is a benefit for him.

Some have commented on my statements as If I have never met the persons concerned. I can mention just in brief as an example, that Conny Larsson was known to me for nearly 4 years. I liked Conny as a person. I had never been to found of the wishy-washy, conservative 'spiritual' crowd. Conny was more forceful, a determined leader but his stories of his life with Swami always changed a bit from year to year which confused us at the ashram. Conny liked attention from people, so he would conduct meetings, talks, meditation classes, etc., when he visited the ashram. His childhood was difficult and it was painful to hear his rendering of his past. According to him, his relief came from acting (he became a Swedish theatre and film actor) and from meeting Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. He told us he was a personal secretary of Mahesh Yogi and would even sleep in Mahesh Yogis room. The relationship ended when Larsson felt Mahesh Yogi had fooled people by claiming that he had a divine visit by Patanjali himself, whom had offered the Yogi a secret meditation technique he could show his followers. The yogi or his organisation was obviously selling this technique for a high fee - which had upset Conny for Conny loved truth more than anything.

Lately Larsson has made official letters posted on websites stating that he has been 'baptised' the name Sathya (Truth) by Sai Baba himself. Let me clarify to people that Conny told us that he himself requested Swami to name him Sathya. He was never given this name. Swami had said nothing but on further request he had let Conny use whatever name he wanted. This is what he told me and others, unless he lied.

He left Mahesh Yogi, took his untaxed black money he had earned from his films and theatre in Sweden and moved to Sri Lanka. He started a business there, building huts for tourists on the beach. Too much illegal practices in Sri Lanka and rubbing officials the wrong way, put him in trouble. A failed love affair with a man as well, along with the rest made him depressed and Conny contemplated suicide while praying deeply to God to help him.
According to Larsson, unless he lied to all of us for years, Sai Baba manifested himself on the shores one morning and rescued Larsson from drowning himself. He said Baba filled him with deep, subtle feelings of love in the darkest moments of his life.
When he finally went to see Sai Baba in person and asked him what to do with his business and his money (Conny was wealthy at this time), Baba had told him to sell it off, that nothing good would come from 'dirty money'.

With Conny's situation and 'abuse', this is a person I don't believe is telling the truth at all. I do believe in some people who have told me their experiences, but I don't at all believe in Conny's story as of late.
The reason for this is that Conny never had any secrets about his experiences, and could not even keep a secret and often lied in his stories which was known to all of us.
Another reason being that I was actually present in the very interview with the young Swedish boy who had received a lot of attention from Swami; Larsson was jealous and for the first time tried to push everyone out of the group and be alone with the boy and have interviews alone. It had nothing to do with 'protection'. The boy wanted interviews, even left India and came back. Larsson found him handsome and was jealous. Larssons reactions were only natural, I suppose, when you are attracted to someone. The only objection I have is that I feel Larsson has not been truthful to the public.
I feel the Swedish boy should speak for himself if he feels abused or want to process any claims against Baba and not behind the curtain of Larsson or Britt-Marie Andre.
As what the boy told us, he was never 'abused'. Baba has approached him in what he felt was offensive and surprising, and had confused him. He had pushed Baba away.
Even then he had returned to India for more visits.
I never got to ask the boy whether he felt he had any personal problems and whether this would have anything to do with it. So, I don't know his background.
There are so many OTHER sides to these stories and I feel one one point is projected - and in my view, quite exaggerated as from what had been told to me.

From: http://www.quicktopic.com/8/H/qYarJBpGLW7G6/p1879.1876

Message 1879

06-06-2002 05:17 PM ET (US)

By: Barry Pittard


For more than two decades, many devotees and non-devotees have had close knowledge of the great integrity, courage and decency of both Glen Meloy (USA) and Conny Larsson (Sweden), who you have shockingly maligned.

It is one thing to critically assess evidence of any person’s contributions to the Expose. This task relates to relevance, and needs to be in context, and have respect to facts, evidence, and the logic of contentions. It is another thing altogether to slander. A person’s good name for being morally upright is indescribably precious, yet repeatedly those who have stood up in the Expose have had to suffer scurrilous, untrue allegations, typically which have nothing to do with the topic and present day concerns. Your comments amount, surely, to libel, and cannot be allowed to stand uncountered.

What motive can you have for belittling two people who have worked so incredibly selflessly, sacrificially and with almost superhuman effort to bring the allegations of countless victims worldwide of Sai Baba? In slandering Glen and Conny, you by extention slander the many boys, young men, their families and their supporters, who they have valiantly striven to assist.

In slandering these two persons, you have wrongly attacked two extraordinarily good and decent men. Have you taken a look at the many names of persons who have signed the Petition calling upon civil and other authorities to investigate the allegations against Sai Baba? These signatories are part of the ever growing numbers of dissenters who are going public in support of efforts so bravely pioneered by a tiny handful of persons, among foremost of whom were Glen Meloy and Conny Larsson.

Consider, if you will, that so many signatories, now former devotees, were for years highly respected names and often office bearers in the Sathya Sai Organisation.

Nor, in any case, do the great many and weighty testimonies against Sai Baba stand or fall on the strength or weakness of this or that individual Expose member. The evidence comes from a great many individuals. Why do you take the same line as so many of Sai Baba's followers (including some top leaders) who set out to malign the Expose by attempting to single out and to slur two or three individuals in it? The Expose relates to hundreds of serious, responsible dissenters. Will you malign us ALL?

Even if (and I do not for a moment credit your accounts of Glen and Conny) a person had made mistakes much earlier in his life, the onus is on you to prove that any pattern of offense now governs any person’s conduct of the Expose.

Barry Pittard, Australia


More about Annica Karkkainen:

Annica Karkkainen has been widely accused of fraud and reported to police in India on several counts. Those who wish to know the facts in our possession can mail  directly and - presenting their full credentials so they are identifiable, and stating their motive for finding out (eg. say, as an offended party or witness etc,). The following shows an extensive  (miniaturized) document by one person seeking reimbursement and other listed likewise exbaba has received. This can be released if the application is deemed trustworthy.