[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Article : Srh Reorganization
In Article <4tikbr$aff@Maze.Dpo.Uab.Edu>,
Sandeep Vaishnavi <Svaishnavi@Bosco.Meis.Uab.Edu> Wrote:
>>Once Again, How Cute - Now You Wish To Link Me With O.J. Simpson? Your
>>Point, Mr. Vaishnavi?
>
> Just That You May Excel In Obfuscation And Obscurantism, But
>That Leaves You In The Company Of The Likes Of Mr. Simpson (And His
>Lawyers).
Watch It- All Those Big Words Are Draining The Logic From Your Argument.
> Maybe You Really Don'T Understand This Thread; The Claim That I
>Have Made (Repeatedly) Is That You Are Besmirching Iskcon'S Image Through
>Your Revenge Tactics. I Stand By My Claim. That Is The Issue - If You
I Understand Your Claim, And I Also Understand That You Started Off
Your Attack Post With A Lie. Now All I'M Asking Is That You Either
Defend Your Lie Or Go Ahead And Retract The Statement In Question. As
For The Rest Of Your Touchy-Feely Post, I Don'T Really Think I Agree
With It, So You Can Say Whatever You'D Like As Long As You Want To Be
In The Realm Of Touchy-Feely.
>Want To Quibble About Semantics, Go Ahead, But This Is Not A Court.
>Unlike The Criminal Justice System, The Truth Needs To Come Out At This
>Forum.
By All Means, And Just As Soon As You'D Like, You Can Start Working On
Coming Out With The Truth.
> *Hyuk*? You Do Have Some Original Expressions - I'Ll Grant You
>That.
My Apologies For The Use Of American Colloquial Expressions For
Laughter. I Should Have Used The More Proper Pairing Of "Guffaw" And
"Snort," But I Thought That "Hyuk" Added More Local Color.
>>> Look, Vivek, You Yourself Had A Posting Not Too Long Ago Where
>>> You Extolled Your Work For Iskcon (You Talked About A Children'S Book,
>>
>>Ok, Now I'M Seeing From Where Your Mental Confusion Arises - It'S From
>>Poor Reading Skills. Dig Up That Article And Re-Read It.
>
> No, Either You Have Poor Comprehension Skills Or You Are Bent
>Upon Willfull Misrepresentation. I Have That Article And If You Continue
>With Your Skirting Of The Main Issue Involved - Iskcon'S Reputation
>Being Depreciated By You - I'Ll Have To Post That Article.
By All Means, Dig Up That Article, Post And, And Show Me Where Iskcon
Is Even Mentioned _Once_ In Connection With That Children'S Book. I
Suspect That Right Now, You'Re About To Grow Very Quiet, Or That
You'Ll Just Once Again Shift The Focus Of Attack.
>>That Someone Flailed Mr. Shah For Not Supporting Srv. Now, Either
>>Produce Some Evidence For That Claim Or I'Ll Have No Choice But To
>>Believe That You'Re Dreaming This Stuff Up.
>
> Have You Not Been Reading Posts By Mr. Shah And Others? Or Have
>You Ignored Them?
Put Up Or Shut Up - Show Me A Post Supporting The Exact Claim, And Not
Some Variant Of The Claim. The Claim Is That He'S Being Attacked
Because He Didn'T Support Srv, And The Claim Is That There Is Proof Of
This In The Form Of Statements By The Proponents. Now, If That Is
True, Then It Shouldn'T Be Too Hard To Find Those Statements, And If
You'Ve Got Any Integrity, Either Produce Them Or Admit That They Don'T
Exist. As Of Right Now, You Just Keep Mentioning Them, In What I
Assume Is An Attempt To Chant Them Into Existence.
> By The Way, How Much Time *Do* You Have On Your Hands? There Are
>Some Of Us Who Have Work To Do. It Would Be Good If You Could Use Your
>Plethora Of Spare Time To Work For Iskcon'S Benefit, But Alas, That'S
>Not Happening.
I Would Have More Time On My Hands If Clueless People Like You Didn'T
Start Off Attacks With Statements Like:
Sv> What'S Even More Disturbing To Me Is That These Few Individuals
Sv> Are Using Iskcon'S Name In This Vindictive, Vendetta-Like Action.
Those Are Your Exact Words From Your First Post On This Thread, And
We'Ve Repeatedly Asked You To Support That Claim. As Of Right Now, You
Keep On Ignoring That Request, Which Leads Me To Believe That You
Don'T Care About The Lies You Need To Use To Try To Support Your
Argument.
-Vivek
