Fresh Allegations
LETTER FROM ERVAD JAL BIRDY
From:
Jal N. Birdy [SMTP:jalnb@mediaone.net]
Sent: Friday,
August 25, 2000 1:01 AM
To:
( -- 60 persons --)
Subject: FEZANA
Motions - Overhaul or Do Not Vote At All
Dear FEZANA Member Association Presidents:
TMZA is obliged to give a rebuttal to the many erroneous arguments that IZA has placed before the Member Associations. We hope our answers will make you appraise the situation in a better light and appreciate the seriousness of the issues that we are being asked to decide using voting procedures that are grossly inadequate for the purpose.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
Ervad Jal N. Birdy
Vice President, TMZA.
FEZANA MOTIONS – “OVERHAUL - OR DO NOT
VOTE AT ALL”
Dear FEZANA Member Association Presidents:
This is in response to IZA’s 4-page letter of August 21, 2000, giving a point-by-point rebuttal to TMZA’s letter dated August 19, 2000 to FEZANA President, Framroze Patel. In their letter, IZA tries to make us believe that this whole issue about the inclusion of Mr. Ali Jafarey in the WZC2000 congress is a “Right to speak / Right to be heard” issue and urges FEZANA member associations to give a green light to their motions. This is pure camouflage.
This is NOT a “Right to Speak” issue at all. It is a matter of publicizing the views of the so-called Jafarey “Fundamentalists”, at the risk of wiping out the faith and beliefs of the miniscule Parsi-Zarathushti community. These “Fundamentalist” views are devised mainly to make the Zarathushti religion more palatable to disgruntled Iranian Muslims and others, who are being wooed by them. Of course, if the “Fundamentalist” leader himself is barred from participating in a World Zarathushti Millennium Congress, they lose face; so they dare not let that happen at any cost.
The issue before us is therefore crucial to the survival of our worldwide Parsi-Zarathushti community and let no one tell you otherwise. FEZANA voting rules are grossly inadequate to deal with an issue of such importance to our community. We are giving below some of the reasons why Zarathushtis in general and Parsi-Zarathushtis in particular should call on FEZANA to withdraw the motions from being voted on until voting procedures and/or the constitution is overhauled and agreed to by all Associations. At the same time we will point out some fallacies in IZA’s arguments:
1.. We are being asked to vote on motions, which if passed, could go against the sentiments of thousands of Parsi-Zarathushtis worldwide, who have protested and still continue to protest against the “inclusion” of this individual, who is polarizing our community. Let us not forget that this is a World Congress and not a North American Congress alone. (If anyone wants to see the hundreds of letters of protests written to the WZC2000 Co-Chairs since the beginning of the year, please let us know.)
2.. We are being asked to vote on motions, which if passed, will endorse and encourage an individual who, by his conversion policies, is putting the lives of thousands of Parsi- and Iranian-Zarathushtis living in Islamic countries in unnecessary jeopardy. We at TMZA do not wish to be a party in taking such a risk. We do not want the life of a single co-religionist to be jeopardized in this way. (The protest letter received from the Karachi Parsi Anjuman Trust Funds bears witness to this fact. If anyone wants to see this letter please let us know.)
3.. We are being asked to vote on motions, which if passed, will endorse the actions of an individual who has caused and allowed his followers to insult the customs and traditions of Parsi-Zarathushtis in the most abusive and degrading terms. (TMZA cannot bear to quote or reproduce the contents of a letter posted on the club-z alias by one “Mr. Eruch Irani”, a crony of Mr. Jafarey, on September 7, 1996. We are not aware of any reprimand being issued to this person by anyone in authority for posting such degrading material in public.)
4.. We are being asked to vote on motions, which if passed, will endorse and encourage an individual who has been masquerading as a scholar for several decades and who is busy distorting and misrepresenting the scriptures of unsuspecting Zarathushtis. Our scriptures, which have served to sustain our faith and devotion towards our religion, towards Asho Zarathushtra and to which we have turned for solace in times of difficulty for well over a millennium, have now become a matter of mere intellectual gymnastics for this individual and his followers. Can you imagine a Zarathushti being allowed to preach at an Islamic World Conference and saying that the Koran is full of mistakes and needs changing? Why then are we prepared to let an outsider interfere with our faith and beliefs? (If anyone wants to see examples of such gross distortions and deceptions, please let us know.)
5.. IZA is presenting us with a totally false picture when they tell us:
“No one has banned their (Traditional) speakers or interfered with their speaker choices because of disagreement with such speaker’s ideas. Indeed any such interference would not only be a violation of the Operating Guidelines, but would also be a violation of the FEZANA constitution”.
These words sound good but they are really quite hollow. Let us remind IZA about the deal that was struck by their friends with the “Traditionalists” at the February WZC2000 meeting in Houston. At that time it was agreed that Mr. Jafarey’s name would be withdrawn if the names of several Traditionalist speakers (Ervad K. N. Dastoor, Prof. James Russell, Prof. Boyd and Behram Atashband) would be withdrawn also. This was agreed to after much discussion and negotiation between the track chairs present (including Dr. Anoushiravani representing the Zarathushtra’s Vision Track Chair) after which their unanimous decision received the Executive Board’s blessing. The final slate of speakers was subsequently announced to all concerned.
Several months later, the Zarathushtra’s Vision Track Chair, contrary to the agreement reached in February, again insisted on nominating Mr. Jafarey as a speaker. The EB was asked to make its decision known through a vote. The EB after much deliberation exercised their right to decline issuing an invitation to Mr. Jafarey. This decision was not accepted by the Track Chair concerned.
It is therefore clear that IZA’s friends are trying to renege on the February deal, while the Traditionalists have stood true to their word as good Zarathushtis. We find it hard to believe that IZA was not aware of this deal. By striking such a deal, they have themselves violated the operating guidelines. Also, if they knew about it, why did they not tell us the truth in their letter instead of lecturing us about “Inclusion and Right to speak”? If they did not know, are they prepared to withdraw their motion now, because their friends have let them down by violating the operating guidelines?
6.. Mr. Jafarey openly announced on the Internet that he did not invite any Traditionalist speaker to take part in the program at his 10th anniversary celebration last March. Where were the IZA and the “Inclusion – Right to speak” activists then? Does it not sound hypocritical that they should lecture to us about “Inclusion and Right to speak” now?
7.. IZA has stated that “Traditional Zarathushtis are seeking to ram their version of the religion down everyone’s throats”. Nothing could be further from the truth as is evident from the number of the so-called Zarathushti-by-choice who are being given a platform at the Congress. The ordinary Parsi-Zarathushti, or “Traditionalist” as he/she is often called, does not want to interfere with how others practice their religion; all they want is to be left alone to practice their own faith the way they have done for the past countless centuries, without harassment or ridicule.
8.. Although IZA or ZAGNY may tell us otherwise, TMZA firmly reiterates that the voting procedures currently in vogue in the FEZANA constitution are grossly inadequate for dealing with issues currently before us. “Robert’s Rule” of Democratic Principles as applied in politics cannot be applied to matters of faith and belief. For instance, if Catholics were to be asked to vote on the Immaculate Conception of Virgin Mary, that would be the end of Roman Catholicism. If Moslems were to be asked to vote on whether the word of Prophet Mohammed in the Koran was a revelation from Allah or not, that would be the end of Islam. Only we, the so-called “intelligent, open minded and progressive” Zarathushtis would clamor for a vote on any and everything and behave in such an irresponsible manner, that we put our own existence in jeopardy.
9.. IZA may call it delaying tactics; TMZA calls it prudent and responsible behavior. TMZA reiterates this is not a matter of “Inclusion or Freedom to speak”, as disguised by the proponents of these notorious motions; it is a matter of propagating their so-called “Fundamentalist” views that can decimate a miniscule, although determined, community – the Parsi-Zarathushti community.
j.. The key to ending this divide is in Mr. Jafarey’s hand. This situation would disappear overnight, resulting in a win-win situation for everyone, if Mr. Jafarey were only to take a leaf out of the Dalai Llama’s book. If he is half the leader that his friends make him out to be, he would firmly decline any invitation to attend the conference, in favor of preserving peace and harmony in the community. That will be an acid test of his leadership.
Until that happens, TMZA calls on the North
American Zarathushtis to urge FEZANA to retract the motions and install proper
voting procedures, agreed by all Associations, before any voting is allowed to
take place on this issue.
Sincerely,
Ervad Jal N. Birdy
Vice President, TMZA.
August 24, 2000
* * * * * *
LINKS:
FRESH ALLEGATIONS, Responses by Amalsad & Jafarey
TABLE OF CONTENTS and Their Links
Introduction & the Gist of "The Plain Reality Behind The Intricate Falsity"
Analysis of the 26-page "Global Protest"