Skip to main content

Gerald Joe Moreno

Troll Boast, No Image

By Cyberstalking, Equalizer, Gerald Joe Moreno, trolls, Wikipedia
Wikipedia manager Jimmy Wales in 2006 at a Wikimania conference discussing the identification and elimination of trolls.
The activity of internet trolls has become a major issue, with new measures in process and in debate. A well known Wikipedia article refers to different applications of the term troll. Standard advice is to ignore rather than to engage with a troll. Wikipedia is strongly associated with trolling. Larry Sanger of Citizendium explicitly referred to trolls in his acute dissatisfaction with the “anyone can edit” policy on Wikipedia, granting a general license to the use of pseudonyms.
At large, the pseudonymous phenomenon of trolling varies from militant teenage aggression to more sustained and menacing attack by seasoned cyber agitators. Some critics say that all web users must be registered with their real name and image identity; moreover,  all websites in defiance of this precaution should be eliminated from the web. Until such a development  occurs, the internet is uncivilised.
Gerald Joe Moreno, alias Equalizer, was not a typical troll, being known by his real name at his website. However, many of his blogs exhibited a pseudonym. In this respect, he can certainly be considered a troll. Many readers of Equalizer blogs did not understand that Moreno was the author. An increasingly general public impression of the troll phenomenon (certainly in Britain) is that of a miscreant who attacks and slurs while concealing personal identity. 

A basic problem, in the case of Moreno (Equalizer), is the aggressive and defamatory verbal style demonstrated by the role of “guru defender.” He was also accused by ex-devotees of being a cyberstalker, which is a very undesirable category.
Moreno (SSS108, Equalizer) assumed that he was victorious in his 2007 online repudiation of myself. Using the pseudonym of Joe108, he posted a brief item of five lines on, a popular American site. He asserted:
Attempting to portray himself as a serious researcher into the Sai Controversy, Kevin Shepherd wrote a rambling diatribe against Joe Moreno. Moreno responded to Shepherd and exposed him as a shabby and biased researcher. 
Troll boasts are notorious for a deceptive sense of inflation. The so-called “diatribe” was my complaint arising from Moreno’s censorious Wikipedia User page (dated 2006) against my publishing venture. Some observers say that the complaint did not ramble, but made a strong point, which Moreno evasively resisted. I did not claim to be a researcher into the “Sai Controversy,” an apologist phrase, instead referring to some relevant data concerning my own case (the updated version is at Wikipedia Issues).
I responded to the overbearing gestures with a detailed refutation of the supposed victory. My lengthy Response to Moreno (2007) was conveniently ignored by the contested entity, in preference for the five line frivolity posted on

Improvised triple image of Kevin R. D. Shepherd displayed on Equalizer blogs. 
Another factor emerging was the aversion of Moreno to any presentation of his image. I had included his sole known image in my original article of protest. I was berated for this disclosure of his appearance, also threatened with legal consequences if I included his image in any book (which was not my intention). Moreno was so opposed to the employment of his image that eventually I deleted this from my sites in April 2010. He failed to respond in due measure, retaining all three of the images he displayed of myself so frequently and abusively (along with five of my mother).
The fact emerges that my image was reproduced over eighty times on the Equalizer blog cycle of 2008-9. Yet the image of Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer) was conveniently prohibited by the subject. The “guru defender” version of the lax troll code may be considered questionable.
Kevin R. D. Shepherd
ENTRY no. 10
Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Conspiracy and Michael Goldstein

By BBC, Gerald Joe Moreno, Michael Goldstein, Sathya Sai Baba, Secret Swami, Tanya Datta
Dr. Michael Goldstein in The Secret Swami documentary
In 2007, the sectarian blogger Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer) made the accusation that “he [Kevin R. D. Shepherd] is a thoroughly biased conspiracy theorist incapable of formulating a sober argument, let alone conducting any semblance of adequate or impartial research.” This charming PR exercise was accompanied by another doubtful compliment, via an assertion that the material in my books (unread by him) “is controversial, convoluted and conspiratorial.”
As if to prove his vehement point, Moreno placed three images of myself directly above these statements, an action which struck many readers as an excessive gesture. The observer may deduce that three photographs mean guilty of conspiracy, whereas only one image might have permitted a loophole for a more rational argument than was afforded at (which gained the repute of an “inquisition” site). 
Cultist campaigners often use words like conspiracy. They frequently see themselves as following an all-encompassing cause, which can brook no objections or resistance. The objector is therefore a conspirator or a biased critic who must be maligned. 
Ex-devotees complained that Moreno never revised his extreme statements and numerous errors. He viewed his sweeping judgments as being authoritative, endorsed by his role as defender of the guru Sathya Sai Baba (d.2011). 
Some of the ex-devotee victims believed that Moreno was financed in his web campaign by the wealthy Dr. Michael Goldstein, the key American devotee and international leader of the Sathya Sai Organisation. Moreno obviously spent a great deal of time at his vengeful keyboard; his output was prolific.
Goldstein was not popular on ex-devotee sites. “He let down every abused young person by an assiduous cover-up of all questions of sex abuse by US [American] and other devotees or their families, and ceased to reply to letters to him as head of the [Sathya Sai] Organisation.” Quote from Dr. Michael Goldstein, International Chairman of the SSO (formerly online at
This leading and influential devotee was one of the entities appearing in the BBC documentary Secret Swami (2004). However, Goldstein was very evasive on the subject of testimonies to sexual abuse, with the consequence that a hidden camera technique was the BBC resort
In this manner, Goldstein was filmed at his home in California, where he was questioned about the sexual abuse. His heated response was considered intimidating by some viewers. Goldstein dismissed the testimonies, claiming that as a physician, he could judge by appearance as to whether anyone had been abused. Goldstein, a devotee since the 1970s, was described as a ranter in this confrontation with the BBC reporter Tanya Datta. Commentators remark upon the fact that, thinking he was in private, Goldstein was very offensive in his aggressive response to Datta. A model devotee was supposed to “speak sweetly,” which Goldstein failed to do in this instance.
This prominent follower was very effectively covering up serious instances of deviation, whether or not he intended this resort as a conspiracy. One sordid drawback was relayed in a report by a psychologist of events concerning an American youth (named as Sam Young), who appeared in the Danish documentary Seduced by Sathya Sai Baba (2002):

Every time we would go back to the personal [interview] room, he [Sathya Sai Baba] wants to be very intimate. He was constantly having me take out my penis and he would hold it, sometimes put it in his mouth and look at me, and then ask me to do the same thing or push my head down and lift his robe up. And I was gagging and almost about to vomit. (Asa Samsioe, How Sathya Sai Baba devotees, like Dr. Michael Goldstein, are weaving protective cocoons of self-deceit around themselves (2009),, Search tab Michael Goldstein)

Kevin R. D. Shepherd
ENTRY no. 9
November 2013 (modified 2021)
Copyright © 2021 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

BBC Secret Swami Documentary

By Alaya Rahm, Basava Premanand, BBC, Gerald Joe Moreno, Isaac Tigrett, Sathya Sai Baba, Tanya Datta
BBC reporter Tanya Datta
In his attack on myself at in 2007, Gerald Joe Moreno blacklisted the BBC Secret Swami documentary of 2004. The title of the G. J. Moreno blog proclaimed accusingly: “Kevin (R. D.) Shepherd referenced the BBC Secret Swami Documentary.” This BBC programme had become so well known and applauded that his reservation may be considered an apologist feat.
When the BBC investigated Sathya Sai Baba, they contributed some provocative insights, detailing both sides of the controversy about that guru. Yet Moreno (Equalizer) presented me as being in error for referring with approval to this documentary. He also misrepresented a court case occurring in California, which he associated with the BBC programme via the American ex-devotee Alaya Rahm, who testified to sexual abuse. According to Moreno, Alaya Rahm resorted to street drugs and alcohol, therefore his testimony was invalid.
The one hour documentary featured the BBC reporter Tanya Datta, who conducted varied interviews. The schedule covered basic components of the charges made against Sathya Sai Baba, i.e., fake miracles, sexual abuse, and the bedroom murders (see Anomalies and Testimonies).
An interview with the Rahm family (Alaya Rahm and his parents) was accompanied by clips of the guru at the 2004 Shiva-ratri festival,  performing a supposed miracle. The major Indian critic Basava Premanand was interviewed, describing how he had been investigating the guru since 1968. He and his colleagues were shown explaining how “miracles” could easily be performed in a deceptive manner, e.g., the materialisation of ash (vibhuti) and the ejection of a lingam (sacred object) from the guru’s mouth. The lingam could easily be concealed in a towel. The ash (and cheap jewellery) appeared via sleight of hand.
A contrasting interview with the wealthy American devotee Isaac Tigrett disclosed his belief that the “allegations” (actually solid testimonies)  of sexual abuse were probably true. “I believe there is truth to the rumours.” Tigrett also said condoningly: “He [Sathya Sai Baba] could go out out and murder someone tomorrow, as I said, it’s not going to change my evolution.”
An American ex-devotee named Mark Roche was also filmed. He relayed the attempt of Sathya Sai to engage him in oral sex during the year 1976. The Rahm family (in America) referred to similar experiences (see, Witnesses tab).
In relation to the notorious murders of June 1993, occurring at Puttaparthi ashram, the BBC interviewed the ex-Home Secretary for Andhra Pradesh, Veluyudhan P. B. Nair, who was in charge of the state police. He early discovered that the official police report of the controversial event was “riddled with lies and inconsistencies.” This commentator disputed the official version that police officers shot the four intruders in self-defence, instead urging a verdict of “cold-blooded murder.” A cover-up is strongly implied.

According to Nair, “the killing of the boys was only to buy silence.” Basava Premanand insisted that the central government stopped an investigation of the murders to prevent “economic offences, sex offences” emerging into the light of day.

Such factors were not welcome to the polemical campaign of Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer), who strenuously denied all the negative reports as being an error of the “Anti-Sai” contingent.

See further the BBC Transcript. See also BBC Documentary and A Reflection. Another documentary also assisted to support criticism of the Puttaparthi guru.  In 2002, the national television and radio broadcaster (DR, or Denmark Radio) of Denmark transmitted the evocative feature entitled Seduced by Sai Baba. This programme was viewed by millions in Denmark and Norway, afterwards being shown in Australia during 2004. The 54 minute Danish documentary investigated the sexual abuse of minors, and also revealed Sathya Sai “miracles” as sleight of hand (a Danish conjuror knew what really occurred).

In Denmark, the Seduced documentary caused a public outcry, revoking the purchase by Sathya Sai devotees of Arresodal manor estate. The devotee plan was for a Sathya Sai College at this famous location. Elsewhere, such colleges were scenes of sexual abuse. In Denmark, devotees made threats and launched litigation cases, failing in their apologist tactic. 

Testimonies to sexual abuse were strongly denied as “wild allegations” by Sathya Sai devotees. However, some partisans eventually portrayed the abuse as a form of “spiritual healing,” a contention appearing online in 2006, via an item by devotee Ram Das Awle. This writer claimed endorsement from Sathya Sai. The “sexual interventions” of the guru were here acknowledged as a fact. By now, there were so many reports of the guru’s sexual abuse appearing online that a more convergent strategy was evidently approved. Some devotees nevertheless continued to deny all the testimonies, confirming the widespread confusion. Critics described the new apologist strategy as a “sick rationalisation” of perverse habits.

Many converging testimonies and reports were the basis for critical assessment of Sathya Sai Baba as a homosexual and paedophile who liked to fondle males in the 6-24 age bracket. He never molested girls. He often favoured oral sex, which in his personal instance, he is reported to have described as union with God. He told his favourite boys that marriage was bad; a number of men around him were identified as homosexuals. The fate of Indian student victims at the Sai Colleges was particularly tragic, because their devotee parents were opposed to all realistic details, being indoctrinated by beliefs prevalent at Puttaparthi ashram.

Kevin R. D. Shepherd

ENTRY no. 8 

November 2013 (modified 2021)

Copyright © 2021 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Serious Citations Are Not Comical

By Anthony Busuttil, Gerald Joe Moreno, Jimmy Wales, Simon Kidd, Wikipedia
Simon Kidd
A very misleading item of Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer) appeared under the heading  “Comical Citations to Anonymous Scholars.” This was an aspersion aimed at me. On my first website in 2007, I referred to two Wikipedia editors who had argued in my favour. Following his policy of opposition, these two were blacklisted by Moreno (Equalizer), who caricatured them as impossible subjects for any significance or authority. Moreno asserted that Kevin R. D. Shepherd “attempted to con the general public with anonymous and alleged ‘scholarly’ references (whose credentials he exaggerated and embellished) that cannot be verified whatsoever.” 
The attacker was keen to imply that I was unaware of the Essjay controversy, signifying the episode in which a Wikipedia administrator lied about his credentials, claiming to be a tenured professor of religion at a private university. Essjay transpired to be a 24 year old college drop out. Moreno argued superficially that this meant I fitted a similar situation of error in referring to two Wikipedia editors as academics. His theory did not stand up to the test of time. 
One of these editors (The Communicator) stated on Wikipedia that he had a degree in philosophy. In November 2006, he gave information on a discussion page about his longstanding critical interest in the controversial practice of Holotropic Breathwork. In 1994, he had corresponded directly with Regius Professor Anthony Busuttil  and other medical authorities on this subject of Grof therapy. I knew very well that the eminent Professor Busuttil would not respond to non-academics, having some acquaintance with this matter myself; Busuttil had advised against Holotropic Breathwork on medical grounds, a factor not publicly known. 
The Communicator argued very competently on Wikipedia against the obscurantism evident in the Holotropic Breathwork article, whose partisan editors would not at first acknowledge any published criticism of Stanislav Grof and his therapy
Moreno implied that I was collaborating with The Communicator against Stanislav Grof and Holotropic Breathwork on Wikipedia. I denied this fiction, evidently designed to detract from the recommendations of my output provided by the two editors he opposed. Moreno clearly had no conception of what was involved in the Busuttil-Grof issue, revolving around the dangers of hyperventilation for therapy clients. He omitted reference to Busuttil and other matters of relevance. The Scottish Charities Office had been so alarmed at complaints received that they commissioned a report by Regius Professor Busuttil, who represented the Pathology Department of Edinburgh University. 
I knew that the other editor (Jedermann) was a Ph.D. because he had informed me about a Wikipedia article he had written. Jedermann divulged his real name on Citizendium six months before Moreno insisted that this academic was anonymous and, by implication, a mere fantasy projection of mine. The inability of the sectarian polemicist to keep track of events was a significant disadvantage for his version of citation. 
The two maligned editors transpired to be very tangible academics, one in Australia, and the other in Britain. The one in Australia, Simon Kidd, was indeed as I assessed him,  while Dr. M. E. Dean had even greater status in the academic world. In November 2006, Dr. Dean stated on a Wikipedia discussion page: “It is clear that Kevin Shepherd’s work is in good repute with academic researchers in comparative religion.” Serious citations of academics with credentials are not comical, only in the cartoon supplied by cultist preference and ignorance. 
In the same misleading blog of 2007, Moreno accentuated his cartoonist plot when he affirmed that “Kevin Shepherd…. publishes the writings of Stephen J. Castro and Kate Thomas through Citizen Initiative Publishing.” This error evidences the extent of his misconceptions about who was doing what. There was no such logo as CIP in my case, an extra word having been added. Moreno had also mistaken distributor details for publishing action, which are quite separate activities. 
I never published the writings of either Castro or Thomas, who were represented by completely different publishing imprints to my own. Citizen Initiative only published three books, all of these being written by me. For a period of limited duration, I agreed to distribute a few titles I had not published. 
In the face of cult misrepresentation, some authors and publishers might have to spend years correcting erroneous lore. This onus will not necessarily be assisted by the “anyone can edit” convenience of Wikipedia. Some observers have concluded that, in my case, Wikipedia has afforded one of the most memorable instances of error and abuse that they know of (via SSS108, alias Moreno, and other erring editors and administrators).
Moreno was ignorant of the fact that Dr. Dean had registered his discontent with Wikipedia on the rival Citizendium in early 2007, while  using his real name, thus clarifying his obsolete Wikipedia identity (as Jedermann). Another drawback followed. The same Wikipedia article that this academic transferred (in the original form) to Citizendium acquired a complicating Wikipedia discussion page which featured an attack upon myself via a Moreno (Equalizer) blog. 
The Moreno-influenced discussion page remained so discrepant that Wikipedia manager Jimmy Wales  deleted the offensive entry when he investigated the matter in 2012. Wales also knew that the disputed SSS108 (Moreno) User page of 2006 had been widely influential (and detrimental to myself), so he deleted that item also. Wikipedia troll problems can be substantial.
Even after revealing his real name identity, the academic Simon Kidd was mocked by sectarian polemicist Gerald Joe Moreno for supporting me in his Wikipedia discussions, on webpages influenced by Moreno blogtalk. The “Exposer” mentality, committed to a “guru defender” campaign, is not the best guide to Wikipedia events, academic roles, medical complexities, or citations. One drawback involved is that Moreno continued to promote his fictions and misrepresentations on Google, even after being  banned from Wikipedia.
Kevin R. D. Shepherd 
ENTRY no. 7 
Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Introduction to Kevin RD Shepherd

By Cambridge University Library, Cyberstalking, Findhorn Foundation, Gerald Joe Moreno
Cambridge University Library
In October 2008, Gerald Joe Moreno (alias Equalizer) duplicated his “vanity publisher” theme on a blogspot feature, under the heading of Introduction to Kevin RD Shepherd.  This was examined by my legal adviser, who expressed a negative verdict.

The troll blog stated that I am “a garrulous writer adept in writing loose, tabloid-like diatribes composed of rumour, hearsay and poorly researched claims.” More specifically, Equalizer asserted that his blog was “created to refute and respond to Kevin RD Shepherd’s articles against Joe Moreno.” Third person Moreno did not tell the reader that those three articles were written in protest at his stigma and libel. 

The invective of Gerald Joe Moreno was expressed in the original 2007 sub-heading “Kevin Shepherd: The ‘serious amateur’ non-academic writer  who conducts seriously amateurish and biased research.” Moreno did not understand the academic tag of “serious amateur,” himself being a non-academic blogger who had not written any books. He was attempting to justify his cordoning tactic on Wikipedia, an episode which had preceded his indefinite ban.

Moreno expressed the erroneous verdict that the unofficial phrase “serious amateur” was used exclusively in relation to astronomy, photography, and botany. He derived this acute contraction from a very literal reading at the websites of Cambridge and Oxford universities. This tactic reveals the dependence of bloggers on web entries, as distinct from active participation in research activities. 

On his Equalizer blog, third person Moreno repeated his error of misrepresenting me as having four publishing imprints instead of two. He blatantly  ignored my clearly expressed complaints on this score. He even reproduced his error of New Media Books Ltd, there being no publishing imprint with that name. In contrast, New Media Books did exist, the point being that I was not the publisher of the two books bearing this logo. The only two imprints that were my own were Citizen Initiative and the discontinued Anthropographia. 
Moreno had become notorious for never altering his statements; no revision was applicable to him, who was always right. Complaints and protests could be totally ignored as trifling reflections of victims who had dared to counter Moreno, the blog campaigner in the cause of Sathya Sai Baba. 
The accusation was made: “Kevin Shepherd has no claim to any sort of academic credentials.” This is not a crime, especially as third person Moreno had no such credentials, no history of library research, and no books to his credit. He contemptuously mentioned my “private research project” at Cambridge University Library (CUL). Equalizer was here anxious to reiterate that CUL was “not to be confused with Cambridge University itself.” This improvisation ignored the major participation of CUL in the life of Cambridge University. 
Third person Moreno went on to accuse me of having boasted that I followed “academic rules in citing sources to a greater extent than many academic philosophers.” The context of this reference was lost upon the sectarian apologist. I had protested at the confusion in my Response to Moreno (2007). The objection was completely ignored by Moreno, whose reporting proved unreliable to an acute degree. 
Very briefly, some academics had noticed my annotations in published books; they commented that these were more detailed and extensive than the notes found in many works by academic philosophers. The latter are rarely historians, and often employ conceptual sources only, drawn from philosophy. Whereas I did employ references to a variety of scholarly works, including journals and books applying to the history of science, the history of religion, and also social science. I do not claim any distinction in this respect; I have merely pointed out that the academic assessment did occur in relation to citizen books. 
Because of the gross misinterpretation, I had removed the afflicted reference the previous year from my (first) website. Moreno failed to report this action. With typically misleading negligence, he instead gave the impression that the abused quote was ongoing at my site.
A curiosity in Equalizer blog labels was noticed. One of these read “Findhorn Foundation Radical.” This was an erroneous definition of myself. I have never been a member of the Findhorn Foundation. I am known as a critic of that organisation, and in a completely independent capacity. 
Some blog readers received the impression that I was some sort of new age rebel from the Findhorn Foundation who had wandered into a scruffy minor library in Cambridge, there to boast about my achievements in citing sources, and ultimately to slur the angelic blog giant Joe Moreno with “tabloid-like diatribes.” 
Beware of blog introductions, in case these are misleading. 
Kevin R. D. Shepherd 
ENTRY no. 6 
Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Countering SSS108 and Jossi Fresco

By Gerald Joe Moreno, Jossi Fresco, Sathya Sai Baba, Wikipedia
In 2007, I countered the SSS108 (Gerald Joe Moreno) User page on Wikipedia, which dismissed my book Investigating the Sai Baba Movement (2005). The annotated contents of that book were not described by Moreno. The book was referenced in relation to a very brief Wikipedia editorial quote, which Moreno disliked because of explicit associations with his ex-devotee opponent Robert Priddy. The 1993 “bedroom murders” at the Puttaparthi ashram of Sathya Sai were too controversial to be mentioned on Wikipedia, according to the apologist tactic. 
The stigmatising User page had been assisted by Jossi Fresco, a figurehead for the promotion of religious sects and “cults.” Fresco was influential on Wikipedia as a supporter of the guru Prem Rawat. He eventually became the subject of much criticism, and “retired” at the end of  2008. 
The offensive User page was quite specific about the subject of censorship, being entitled User:SSS108/Kevin Shepherd. On my first website (2007), I protested at the cordoning gesture, and the evident sectarian complexion of the hostile tactic (this protest, in amplified format, is now Wikipedia Issues). Moreno quickly retaliated from his website He attempted a complete justification of his policy, presenting me as the erring party. His counter included expressions deemed vitriolic and libellous by some readers. A strong underlying theme was that any criticism of Sathya Sai Baba amounted to the critic being wrong and deserving censure.
The guru defender here argued that none of the allegations against Sathya Sai had been proved in a court of law, as though this factor negated all criticism. The allegations (actually strong testimonies) were described in terms of “frenzied Anti-Sai speculations.” My protest was dismissed in terms of “just another foaming-at-the-mouth Anti-Sai ruffian (who come a dime a dozen in the Anti-Sai Movement).” I was not a member of any movement. I had written a book, with over 500 annotations, that was peremptorily dismissed on the basis of an appendice associated with the accuser’s major ex-devotee opponent.

Extract from an ex-devotee site reproducing an Equalizer (Moreno) blog
Moreno contrived various arguments supposedly proving that I was wrong about all the subjects I had mentioned online in relation to Sathya Sai Baba. For instance, a critical article in The Guardian (2006) was overshadowed by a theme that Moreno’s opponent Sanjay Dadlani had known about that article in advance, and therefore the article was biased, being part of the Anti-Sai conspiracy. My subject was the journalist Paul Lewis, not the ex-devotee blogger Dadlani. The Lewis article was very relevant, while comprising only a fractional part of the critical information available on Sathya Sai Baba.
Avoiding the content of the Lewis article, Moreno preferred to dwell upon polemical references and pornographic associations of his erratic opponent Dadlani, while treating these as proof that criticism of Sathya Sai Baba is erroneous. This recourse answers to a form of diverting commentary and a simplistic pattern of apologist tactic. The acrimonious blog duel between Moreno and Dadlani (both young men), including many personal attacks, led absolutely nowhere.

Dadlani had composed a blog called Sai Baba Exposed. Moreno countered with Sanjay Dadlani Exposed. Dadlani also produced the blog Gerald ‘Joe’ Moreno Deception, including  an entry about The Guardian issue. This was entitled Moreno’s Guardian Lies and Speculations, and dated November 2006. Dadlani denied a close collaboration with Paul Lewis, emphasising that Moreno had misconceived this matter. The Moreno theme of “exposure” was evidently in retaliation for the proclaimed exposure of the guru by ex-devotees. I belonged to neither of these contending camps, but was regarded by Moreno as a member of the opposition. 
I was now stigmatised by Moreno as a “vanity publisher,” an accusation he had also levelled at a prominent ex-devotee (namely Robert Priddy, a retired academic and webmaster). This meant that my eleven books could be treated with contempt and totally ignored. Moreno attacks were the sole gauge for assessment; an insidious implication was that Moreno could not be wrong because he represented the lofty cause of the guru.
Not only did he caricature my career as a writer and publisher. Moreno also made pronounced errors. He even attributed to me two publishing logos that were not my own. He also misleadingly stated that the publisher Routledge “turned away Shepherd’s manuscript.” Routledge never saw that manuscript, merely being told about it, the length being a deterrent to their schedule at the time. The manuscript was Minds and Sociocultures: Zoroastrianism and the Indian Religions. This was eventually published with an extent of a thousand pages (Versus Sectarian Polemic).
In the cult world, unread books can be categorically dismissed. Thousands of annotations do not count against libellous attacks emanating from the troll sphere. Wikipedia activist editing was here revealed in full profile. This is where Jossi Fresco emphases lead: to arrogant misrepresentation and vindictive dismissal.
No complaint was legitimate against the elevated spiritual plane of saisathyasai, the Moreno site. Here the unassailable and ubiquitous mandate was: “Exposing Critic’s Smear Campaigns Against Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.”
My crime had been to insert three short appendices in a lengthy annotated book, appendices that gave space to ex-devotee reports (more especially those of Robert Priddy). This meant that all eleven annotated books must be stigmatised and my role misrepresented as that of a vanity publisher. Daring to counter Moreno (Equalizer) himself, the proclaimed Exposer, was a further crime. In the cult world, criticism is not tolerated; instead, critics are made the target of sectarian vitriol.

Kevin R. D. Shepherd

ENTRY no. 5

Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Wikipedia and Jimmy Wales

By Gerald Joe Moreno, Jimmy Wales, Sathya Sai Baba, Wikipedia
Jimmy Wales (Jimbo)
Censorship on Wikipedia is a varied phenomenon, including the problem of manipulated articles in which suspect editors gain ascendancy. 
The Church of Scientology become widely known for interfering with Wikipedia articles. According to Wikimedia UK, Scientology was the first organisation to be officially banned from Wikipedia, an event dating to 2009. A prolonged arbitration case confirmed that partisan editors had been removing and adding information in Wikipedia articles related to Scientology. The Church of Scientology was accordingly banned from editing, having violated the NPOV (neutral point of view) guideline of Wikipedia. 
There are other manifestations of zealous partisan editing on Wikipedia that are less less widely known. Such problems arise from the “anyone can edit” situation in which pseudonyms are a common resort. Critics say that there are many “cult” partisans on Wikipedia who influence articles in the religious category. 
Gerald Joe Moreno, alias Equalizer, commenced his attack on myself from Wikipedia in 2006.  An editor of the article on Sathya Sai Baba,  he was strident in the delivery of his opinions. One of his ex-devotee opponents, namely Robert Priddy, had been cited favourably in a book of mine entitled Investigating the Sai Baba Movement (2005). To Moreno, this meant that my book must be eliminated from reference on Wikipedia, especially when this book was listed in the (Wikipedia) article on Priddy. 
Moreno, here using the editorial pseudonym of SSS108,  produced a Wikipedia User page stigmatising my books. He had not read those books, being solely concerned with his attempt to suppress the Wikipedia article on his opponent Robert Priddy. Moreno  resorted to the pretext of my self-publishing as legitimation for his hostility, although the general context was clearly an argument in favour of Sathya Sai Baba, an argument strongly resisting criticism of the guru. 

The Moreno (SSS108) User page revolved around a Wikipedia quotation featuring Priddy and the notorious bedroom murders  occurring at the ashram of Sathya Sai Baba (see, Murders tab).  The bloodstained event was commemorated by grim images of the corpses. The editorial quote in dispute read: 

According to Kevin Shepherd the former national leader of the Sathya Sai movement in Norway, Robert Priddy, expressed the opinion that SSB [Sathya Sai Baba] was an accomplice to the 1993 murders, among others based on information given to him by his friend V. K. Narasimhan. 

The editorial quote was dismissed. The same User page featured the collaborating “cult” sympathiser Jossi Fresco, whose profile on Wikipedia became controversial. The following year, in 2007, Gerald Joe Moreno (SSS108) was banned indefinitely from Wikipedia  for activist editing. Fresco eventually encountered problems which led to his withdrawal from Wikipedia. 
The same SSS108 (Moreno) User page was deleted from Wikipedia several years later (in 2012) by the Wikipedia manager Jimmy Wales, who made private comments. Meanwhile, that User page had been influential on Google and on Wikipedia. The issue is one of Wikipedia troll activity adversely influencing internet audiences. 
Kevin R. D. Shepherd 
ENTRY no. 4 
Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Basava Premanand and Moreno Attack

By Basava Premanand, Gerald Joe Moreno, Sathya Sai Baba

Basava Premanand


In his attack on Professor Tulasi Srinivas (entry no. 2 on this site), Gerald Joe Moreno correctly observed that she cited me as “a biographer of Shirdi Sai Baba” (Srinivas, Winged Faith, p. 354 note 24). Moreno was averse to this favourable reference; he insisted upon describing me as “a vanity self-publisher who admitted he is not an academic.” His phraseology is deceptive. I did not need to make any admission, never having posed as an academic. Moreno himself was not an academic; furthermore, he had no books to his credit.

In the same attack feature, Moreno identified me as “a malicious critic of Sathya Sai Baba who has ridiculously accused the Guru of being ‘closely allied with terrorists’ and who fanatically accused Moreno [third person] of being an ‘internet hit man’ and an ‘internet terrorist’.”

These remarks typically lacked context. Moreno had often been accused of fanaticism by victims. My reference to guru-related terrorism followed the reporting of Basava Premanand (1930-2009), the Indian rationalist and major critic of Sathya Sai Baba. Premanand opposed Sathya Sai for many years, contesting the supposedly miraculous feats of that famous guru, which he disproved. Premanand also referred to numerous murders and other problems which he associated closely with Sathya Sai. Many of the details here are unconfirmed. It is nevertheless legitimate (and even obligatory) to cite the output of the major Indian critic.  One is not necessarily being at all malicious in so doing. Amongst other matters, Premanand informed the BBC (quite credibly) that he had been attacked by violent pro-guru extremists.
Premanand composed the significant book Murders in Sai Baba’s Bedroom (2001), a tome reporting notorious events in 1993 at Puttaparthi ashram, where six people died violently in a nocturnal episode intimately related to the guru. Moreno declared this lengthy book to be irrational speculation, a mere conspiracy theory. In contrast, Premanand described his book as “a critical analysis of the records which I could collect, including newspaper clippings.”
Premanand replied to the Moreno dismissal at length, revealing the superficial nature of sectarian argument. The Indian rationalist commented: “I am well accustomed to the ploys of Sathya Sai Baba, his organisation, and other supporters whose agenda is to discredit those who seriously question their conduct and beliefs.” The rationalist also stated:
Now that criticisms are being aired to millions in many countries by the BBC and Danish television documentaries (The Secret Swami and Seduced), the Sai Baba forces are desperate to denigrate and vilify those who speak out against them. (Premanand, Reply to Mr. Gerald Moreno,, Search tab)
In a committed project, Premanand demonstrated how many Indian holy men resorted to “miracle” tricks, including sleight of hand. A speciality of Sathya Sai Baba was to produce sacred ash (vibhuti) in his palm, a supposedly miraculous achievement. Even schoolboys can  easily perform this deception.
left: holy man with Shiva trident piercing his tongue; right: Premanand showing how the trick is accomplished.
Premanand was a phenomenon, for many years steadfastly opposing Sathya Sai and other gurus. He eventually appeared with fellow rationalist Sanal Edamaruku in the Channel 4 documentary Guru Busters (1995). Along with others in different areas of India, they showed how popular miracle displays of gurus and holy men were sheer deceit. Premanand could enact any so-called “miracle,” teaching other rationalists how to copy these tricks. 
He has spent the last forty years investigating miracles and, after witnessing 1,146 of them, he has yet to see one he can’t duplicate through natural methods…. He leads an army of sceptics in ongoing investigations of India’s many god-men. He has been jailed and beaten, his life has been threatened, and his car sabotaged. India’s god-men [primarily Sathya Sai Baba] wield great political power, and number high government officials (including Supreme Court justices) among their followers. (Oscar Gunther and Brian Siano, Premanand: Guru Buster, 1994,

Premanand also revealed that poor devotees of Sathya Sai received “miracle” holy ash, while the wealthy supporters acquired Rolex wristwatches, diamond necklaces, and Parker pens made in America. All these items were palmed via sleight of hand, in the deceptive manner called “miracles” by Sathya Sai Baba. The miracle beliefs thrived on crass superstition. Even some scientists were deceived by “miracles,” adopting a devotee view of the infallible guru. 

Puttaparthi ashram was inseparable from a business complex, including property ownership. The guru’s younger brother Janakiramiah was a multi-millionaire property speculator with a repute for insatiable acquisition. This relative was accused of blackmailing police to shoot four intruders during the bedroom murders in June 1993. As a reward for his supporting role, Sathya Sai made Janakiramiah a prominent member of the tax-exempt Sathya Sai Central Trust, an organisation described by critics as a multi-billion dollar enterprise enabling donations from wealthy devotees to disappear into the pockets of corrupt officials.

Sathya Sai and his Trust received huge donations for charity, while spending too much on “wasteful flagship projects,” to use one description of ex-devotee Robert Priddy. Costly new buildings annually appeared at the ashram, while the guru claimed that he had no property or worldly goods. He charted private passenger jets for VIPs at the Sathya Sai Airport, commenced in 1990 at Puttaparthi (he was not an ecological trendsetter). Sathya Sai enjoyed being driven in expensive motor cars maintained for him at the ashram, including a Jaguar and a Mercedes (he would often journey to Bangalore, site of a second ashram at nearby Whitefield). 

The ex-devotee David Bailey, in an online document The Findings, revealed many of the discrepancies at Puttaparthi. For instance, he reported that the ceiling of a prominent mandir (temple) was covered in gold leaf. Bailey queried the contrast with a landscape of dire rural poverty. He also informed that this temple had acquired 167 chandeliers instead of the original 36.

Devotees frequently made much of the charitable projects associated with Puttaparthi; the anomalies were ignored. Bailey investigated the Sai Baba Water Project, which claimed to benefit 750 villages with money obtained from elaborate fund-raising. He discovered that the grand claim was false. Only a relatively small number of villages, plus Puttaparthi ashram, gained a water pipeline. A Telegu newspaper, of the 1990s, accordingly stated: “Sai Baba, where is our water?  You have cheated us again!” 

Any mention of deficiencies was interpreted by Gerald Joe Moreno in terms of conspiracy and groundless allegation. After the deaths of both Moreno and Sathya Sai, the private hoard of the guru was revealed in two different locations, including substantial wealth and over seven hundred “renunciate” robes of the type he liked to wear. The guru’s following then became notorious for squabbling over the economic endowments of Puttaparthi ashram. Rationalist critic Sanal Edamaruku complained that the private hoard was not accounted for, amounting to “black money.”  The Sathya Sai Central Trust nevertheless claimed to own the hoard, while relatives of the guru protested at events controlled by the Trust. 

The Murders book of Premanand includes many details. The Sathya Sai Airport cost one and a half billion rupees, being constructed at Puttaparthi by the Indian Airport Authority (IAA). Rarely used, the facility is described as being of a private character. Another source informs that Sathya Sai persuaded the IAA to finance the project, saying they would earn 10 lakhs of rupees the first year. This prediction transpired to be totally wrong. The Airport was largely unused for years before the first commercial flight. The occasional VIP arrived at the ashram by private jet. The Sathya Sai Central Trust “apparently ended up owning” the new airport (White Elephant for Sale). 

In 1998, at a hotel near the Sathya Sai Airport, a tragic collective suicide occurred. This was reported by Premanand. The event is viewed as confirmation of the danger in extremist devotee attitudes. Ramesh (aged 42) was a multi-millionaire industrialist and a devotee of Sathya Sai. He was found dead with seven other family members lying unconscious on the floor, plus his daughter who had died of a brain tumour a day earlier. Only one of these people survived. Police concluded that they died of shock at the daughter’s death, having expected Sathya Sai to miraculously save her. Ramesh left a note saying: “I myself have influenced all the members [of my family] to commit suicide to become one with Sai Baba…. All our properties have to be transferred to the Sathya Sai [Central] Trust.”

The same extensive Murders book refers to a legal petition, dated 1994, via the lawyer K. N. Balgopal (advocate for Premanand). This document reported that an Australian lady was murdered in her room at the Puttaparthi ashram in 1993. “The entire incident was hushed up.” The victim was a member of the Sathya Sai Central Trust, being connected with an ousted secretary of that divided body. Trust members were here accused of misusing funds and indulging in illegal activities. Some Trust members were also accused of using local thugs to murder foreign devotees and burn the faces of corpses beyond recognition. “A foreigner was raped at the ashram by a Trust member, but the police hushed up the case” (Excerpts from B. Premanand’s book, online at

Another source reported that, in 1992, a woman was killed and dismembered in her room at Puttaparthi village (Testimony from David Paul, David Paul became a devotee in the early 1980s, and visited Puttaparthi in 1992. A related episode, more well known, is that of a man whose stomach was cut out while he was still alive. These grim events at Puttaparthi are inseparably associated with the goondas (thugs) goaded on by the Sathya Sai Central Trust. 

Premanand reported that his son was murdered by Sathya Sai goondas in a hospital at Bangalore. These thugs also threatened his brother. The home of Premanand was repeatedly burgled by these agents of violent intrigue. They stole compromising documents on Sathya Sai, also related memoranda in the form of photographs and DVDs. A major obstruction to justice was Bhagwati, the Supreme Court Judge, who was conveniently a member of the Sathya Sai Central Trust. All complaints and legal procedures were blocked by the Puttaparthi mafia.

I did indeed accuse Gerald Joe Moreno (alias Equalizer, SSS108) of being an internet terrorist, a phrase which appeared in the title of a web article composed in 2009. That description arose because of his continued hostility, despite my complaints commencing in 2007, complaints which had appeared on two websites of mine. One of those complaints related to the fact that Moreno had duplicated hostile and misleading accounts of myself (found on his website saisathyasai) on a blogspot cycle featuring the pseudonym of Equalizer (i.e., Moreno).
This belligerent excess in my direction was matched by similar gestures against ex-devotees. His manic campaign was determined to offset all criticism of Sathya Sai and Puttaparthi ashram.  Many observers were prepared to credit my description of “internet terrorist.” Moreno had gained the reputation of a cyberstalker.
The Moreno output is classifiable in the basic sense implied by the phrase “hate campaign,” meaning attack blogs that exhibit vehement and distorted arguments frequently tending to libel. See Hate Campaign Blogs. Obsessive multi-entry blogs targeting  the same victim are an indication of strong antipathy. Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer) achieved nine of these inquisitions at blogspot, in addition to his deadly website, described by some victims as the portal to hell. Such treatment can easily arouse retaliation, which may be necessary for self-defence.
Equalizer (Moreno) resorted to an animation device on his blogspot attacks. This device declared a “Campaign to stop Anti-Sai Activist’s Abuse.” The word Abuse here alternated with Defamation, Libels, and Dishonesty. This verbalism reflected the attitude of Moreno that all testimonies of sexual abuse made against Sathya Sai Baba were hopelessly wrong, and therefore all condoning reference to those testimonies was a crime. In Moreno language, any emphasis on critical reporting meant Dishonesty and Abuse.
In this perspective, the victims testifying to sexual abuse were despicable Anti-Sai Abusers. That was the basic gist of Moreno’s aggressive argument about the “Anti-Sai” contingent. This conceptual scheme was viewed by Moreno (Equalizer) as granting him the right to denigrate all critics, who were treated to vehemently contemptuous dismissals.
From 2004, Moreno became the major (though unofficial) web apologist for the Sathya Sai Organisation. His attack site demonstrated fervent “Pro-Sai” enthusiasm, denouncing critics of Sathya Sai Baba. Gerald Joe Moreno also maintained an extensive blog entitled sathyasaibaba at wordpress, which again exhibited the pseudonym of Equalizer, who deceptively claimed to mediate “love and spirituality.” 
Critics objected that the “love and spirituality” decoded to an intensive mode of hate campaign discernible across the spectrum of Moreno web activity. At, Moreno (Equalizer) specifically described his presentation in terms of a campaign against critics of Sathya Sai Baba. 
His strategy on Google Search aroused increasing resistance. Moreno continually accused his critics of “deception.” His entries on Google Search name listings (of his victims) became notorious for disparaging statements and aspersions which showed conspicuously on those listings. See further Moreno and Ex-Devotees.

Kevin R. D. Shepherd

October 2013 (modified 2021)

ENTRY no. 3 

Copyright © 2021 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.

Tulasi Srinivas and Moreno

By Gerald Joe Moreno, Sathya Sai Baba, Tulasi Sriinivas
Professor Tulasi Srinivas
From 2004 until 2010, Gerald Joe Moreno (Equalizer) conducted an intensive internet campaign against critics of Sathya Sai Baba (d.2011), and also critics of himself. Significantly perhaps, his campaign worked against this guru, who did not look good as a figurehead for aggressive denunciations. There were many resentful victims of Moreno taunts and libels, so frequently operating under pseudonyms like Equalizer. Moreno also attacked families and friends of his victims. Ex-devotees of Sathya Sai Baba listed his extensive breaches of etiquette.
Moreno made a very big mistake when he attacked a university Professor in June 2010. See Politics of Religion. This attack occurred at his website and also featured on a blog. Professor Tulasi Srinivas was well disposed to Sathya Sai Baba, and certainly not a critic, a fact which makes the attack particularly discrepant. The web aggressor accused Srinivas of “tattered research,” and described her book Winged Faith (2010) as “poorly researched, highly biased.” He opined that Srinivas was too inclusive of critical ex-devotee reports concerning Sathya Sai Baba, reports which Moreno stridently denounced. The Moreno accusation of poor research resembles his criticism in my direction.
The book of Srinivas was published by Columbia University Press. In his agitation against that book, Moreno negated his depreciatory theme in my direction about self-published works. The truth is that he reflected adversely upon any writing that contradicted his own militant campaign in the cause of Sathya Sai Baba.
Moreno accused Professor Srinivas of “errors, inaccuracies, misrepresentations and subjective inferences.” This disparagement accompanied his familiar refrain that all critics of Sathya Sai Baba are unreliable sources, indeed too ridiculous to merit any credence. In this manner, testimonies to abuse were eliminated.
Moreno even cast aspersions upon the academic role of Professor Srinivas as an anthropologist at Emerson College. “There is little doubt they would all laugh her out of Emerson College.” Moreno says this more than once, the implication being that his version of the controversy would have such an effect of dismissal. In his adamant perspective, the anthropologist was laughable because she had cited ex-devotees who were beyond serious consideration.
Another accusation reads that Professor Srinivas “never attempted to contact Moreno even once.” The accuser is here typically in the third person. The academic was upbraided for describing Moreno as a devotee of Sathya Sai. He had disavowed this orientation on his website in 2005. However, the purported non-devotee programme of attack clearly reveals a partisan attitude; a circumspect tactic was in evidence. I had earlier been admonished for not contacting Moreno, who had a habit of parading received emails online as proof of error.
The hostile Moreno broadcast served to alert some academics to the confusion and misrepresentation created by internet polemic in “guru defender” format.
The book by Srinivas gained different responses. An ex-devotee spokesman urged that the author of Winged Faith had not gone far enough in presenting the critical arguments against Sathya Sai. See Research into Sathya Sai Baba Issues. Cf. my own review Srinivas and Winged Faith.
The Moreno website (saisathyasai) declared “Joe Moreno” as the webmaster. His attack on Srinivas also appeared at As a result of strong criticism, Moreno was now also using his real name on a new blog feature. However, many of his blogs were pseudonymous, a convenience extending from his deposed Wikipedia role as editor  SSS108.
Professor Srinivas had named Moreno in a footnote: “Sanjay Dadlani and a devotee called Joe (Gerald) Moreno have also engaged in such vituperative arguments that they have been banned from contributing material to some portions of the Internet” (Winged Faith, p. 372 note 48). No further details are given. Moreno was banned from Wikipedia in 2007, though not in relation to Dadlani. The blog duel between Moreno and Dadlani occurred earlier, with no resolution emerging.
Kevin R. D. Shepherd
ENTRY no. 2
Copyright © 2013 Kevin R. D. Shepherd. All Rights Reserved.