The UHJ deceived millions of Baha'is to believe that they're not proselytizing.

Baha'i Hack Scott Hakala gets exposed on /r/exbahai

Hello u/DavidbinOwen (Scott Hakala) and welcome to r/exbahai. About an hour ago, your comment on this sub made the following points:
  • Most of us did not provide a "great reason for leaving".
  • Most of us are "not very positive about life or much else".
  • Many ex-Baha'is do not participate on this sub because of its negativity, disparagement, and misrepresentation of the Faith.
How about I tackle the first point since the last two are obvious broad assumptions on your part? Let's see...what's a great reason for leaving a religion? How about deception? Here an example:
It is true that Bahá'u'lláh lays on every Bahá'í the duty to teach His Faith. At the same time, however, we are forbidden to proselytize, so it is important for all believers to understand the difference between teaching and proselytizing. It is a significant difference and, in some countries where teaching a religion is permitted, but proselytizing is forbidden, the distinction is made in the law of the land. Proselytizing implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith. It is also usually understood to imply the making of threats or the offering of material benefits as an inducement to conversion. In some countries mission schools or hospitals, for all the good they do, are regarded with suspicion and even aversion by the local authorities because they are considered to be material inducements to conversion and hence instruments of proselytization.
(The Universal House of Justice, Messages 1963 to 1986, p. 513)
The definition of "proselytize":
v. intr.
(1) to induce someone to convert to one's faith
(2) to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause
v. tr.
to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause
(Merriam Webster Dictionary)
convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another
(Oxford Dictionary)
to try to persuade people to share your religious or political beliefs
(Macmillan Dictionary)
to convert (someone) from one religious faith to another
(Collins English Dictionary)
(1) to try to convert (a person), especially to one's religion
(2) to persuade to do or join something, especially by offering an inducement
(Webster's New World College Dictionary)
to try to persuade someone to change their religious or political beliefs or way of living to your own
to try to persuade someone to change his or her religious beliefs, political party, etc., to your own
(Cambridge Dictionary)
v. intr.
(1) to attempt to convert someone to one's own religious faith
(2) to attempt to persuade someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine
to convert (a person) from one belief, doctrine, cause, or faith to another
(American Heritage Dictionary)
v. intr.
to make converts or proselytes
v. tr.
to convert to some religion, system, opinion, or the like; to bring, or cause to come, over; to proselyte
(Webster's 1913 Dictionary)
To conclude, the UHJ deceived millions of Baha'is to believe that they're not proselytizing in the absence of coercion by conveniently redefining the word to require coercion. Why? To disassociate themselves from its negative connotation and subsequently, they adopted the euphemism, "teaching".

EDIT: I didn't dox because you revealed your name yesterday on Reddit.

Source :


  1. Hey, what happened to the other two blog entries here mentioning Scott Hakala?

    1. Ah, you removed the pics of him he claimed were "copyrighted" to remove the excuse he was making to attack us. Good move. What matters is that the information about that con man gets more and more exposed over time, not that he is made fun of with photoshopped images. Sometimes NOT hitting people below the belt does more damage.

    2. Guess what they already know about it and your posts just admitted to what you did that was illegal. Best of luck.

  2. BTW Dale, I offered to speak with you directly and even meet in person to show that what you said about me was false. You refused. What does that say about me being a "con man"? I learned and was taught by my parents to not judge others, especially falsely and to not lie or cheat others. At least I don't hide and invent false identities on the Internet to disparage and misrepresent others or other religions.

    1. {{{your posts just admitted to what you [Naser Emtesali] did that was illegal.}}}
      Un, no! An admission of guilt would have been him stating directly, "I committed an illegal act when I posted those pics making fun of Scott Hakala." Removing the pics was an recognition that the pics were in bad taste, just as I said, not that they were actually illegal.

      {{{Dale, I offered to speak with you directly and even meet in person to show that what you said about me was false. You refused.}}}
      Don't you mean what Wahid Azal and perhaps Naser Emtesali said about you? I don't recall stating anything about you except in reaction to what I saw from you on this blog.

      {{{What does that say about me being a "con man"?}}}
      The very blog entry above shows you engaging in "doublespeak", making a distinction between "teaching" and "proselytizing" which does not exist in the normal usage of English. Doublespeak is a form of LYING, and that is what I was referring to when I called you a con man.

      {{{At least I don't hide and invent false identities on the Internet to disparage and misrepresent others or other religions.}}}
      Nor do I. Dale Husband is my REAL name and my Circle H logo is used all over the internet. So buzz off!

      Also, the very page you linked to says, among other things:
      {{{The person who uploaded the content may respond with a counter notice to restore the content. A person who sends takedowns or counter notices without proof or files frivolous notices faces fines and attorney fees. There is also the possibility of criminal sanctions because DMCA notices are signed under penalty of perjury.}}}
      So watch your step!

    2. I should clarify that it was actually the Universal House of Justice that was doing the "doublespeak" mentioned above. Of course, if you think that body is infallible, you would defend that practice, which then makes you also dishonest. Truth is not based on claims of infallibility, period.

    3. Dale,
      If you are so noble and honest and honorable, why do you fear speaking with me directly or allowing any comments or fair response by me on your blog?
      I understand the law on DMCA notices quite well. The pictures and content are owned by my firm. Posting false and defamatory accusations about a person on the Internet can be viewed as illegal and removed on many blog sites and forums; I hope you understand that!

      Also, technically, the content from Quora is owned by Quora and portions deleted on Quora for violations of its policies is inappropriate. This all started because Nima Hazini (aka N. Wahid Azal) pitched a fit of rage when some of his comments on Quora got deleted because they were offensive and inappropriate (not the first time for him on a forum I understand). He had the strange idea that there is some BIA out there stalking him (even people not very friendly to the Baha'i Faith have characterized him as paranoid). Why is there an assumption people like me that mention him or reply and disagree with him must be agents of the BIA.
      I hope you realize how most sane and honest people reading your blog may react to it and find you to be a very angry and troubled person and it does not reflect well on you.

    4. {{{If you are so noble and honest and honorable, why do you fear speaking with me directly or allowing any comments or fair response by me on your blog?}}}
      You are not entitled to anything from me. Just as you defended the deletion of Wahid Azal's comments you claimed were offensive, so I have a right to avoid you, ignore you, or refuse to allow you to step on MY property. And stop trying to read my mind, for that's just insulting. I do not fear you, I DESPISE you!

      {{{People can use user names on a forum that does not have a policy requiring real names.}}}
      Naser Emtesali's point was you were using a name that was clearly intended by you to pretend to be someone you were not. ("David Bin Owen" is a personal name.) I myself might use a name like "Honorable Skeptic" or "Seeker Alpha" on a forum, but would have no problem revealing my real name if I were asked for it. Indeed, I use my Circle H logo not to hide my face from the public, but as an expression of my soul. Your real name on Reddit had to be exposed by another. Why couldn't you have just used SDHakala on Reddit like you are here? Unless.....were you BANNED from Reddit under your real name and is an account you made to get around the banning?

    5. Scott Hakala made the following comments on my blog, which have been held in moderation indefitely.

      {{{Scott David Hakala
      Oct 19, 2017 2:01 PM
      But you speciifically [sic] defended an illegal use and alteration of copyrighted images and a vicious personal attack and on the Baha’i Faith on me that was both false and defamatory. Then you refused to contact me directly and offline to discuss and find out the truth.}}}
      I already addressed my skepticism of your claims of illegality and falsehoods. I do not knowingly promote any acts that are clearly illegal and I do not lie about anything. And how would talking to you over the phone or meeting you face to face help me? I don't think it would change anything. As I noted before, public statements that can be read by all are always best. You are repeatedly trying to stigmatize me over a non-issue. And you wonder why you were banned from my blog? WHAT ARROGANCE YOU HAVE!

      {{{Scott David Hakala
      Oct 28, 2017 1:31 PM
      I just receive notice that the two offending articles are to be removed. WE will see if this occurs. There was no duplicity. In fact, numerous persons that saw that blog and your statements found what you said quite false, defamatory, and offensive.}}}
      Since the pics you objected to have been removed, I'm quite sure you are indeed lying here.
      NUMEROUS persons, really??? LOL! I doubt that. Again, I do not lie about anything. If my statements are indeed offensive, it is because they do not conform to the assumptions of the brainwashed.


  4. {{{At least I don't hide and invent false identities on the Internet to disparage and misrepresent others or other religions.}}}

    You are a liar. What is this?

    Is this your real identity?

    Get lost from here or I will ban you.

    1. People can use user names on a forum that does not have a policy requiring real names. Quora does have a real name policy. So, now who is intolerant? It is easy sitting in Tehran to post false and malicious stuff attacking people and stroke one's ego for it, but you don't seem to be so tolerant when a person responds and defends against such attacks.

    2. Note Dr Sa'eed Khan on the Baha'is he knew

      From Mission Problems in New Persia, 1926, p. 83, 87 and 89 quoted by William McElwee Miller in The Baha'i Faith: It's History and Teachings, 1973, p. 289.


      "...There is no conscience with them [ i.e. the Baha'is], they keep to no principle, they tell you what is untrue, ignoring or denying undoubted historical facts, and this is the character of both the leader and the led...As to morality and honesty, the whole system has proved disappointing...I have been in contact with many Baha'is, and have had dealings with many and have tested many, and unfortunately I have met not a single one who could be called honest or faithful in the full sense of these words..."

      Dr Sa'eed Khan [was] a highly-respected physician...who had as a doctor treated the second widow of the Bab, and had for a lifetime known intimately both Babis [i.e. Bayanis] and Baha'is in Tehran and Hamadan.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts

Total Pageviews


Blog Archive