[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : SRH Reorganization
In article <ghenDvp3Ax.5sL@netcom.com>,
Sandeep Vaishnavi <svaishnavi@bosco.meis.uab.edu> wrote:
> Mr. Pai, you are *so* predictable! When confronted with your
>misdeeds, you attack your opponent.
I showed you your own quotes and asked you to provide supporting
evidence. You not only removed those quotes from your follow-up, but
reply to questions I never asked. You claimed that ISKCON's name was
being used in the reorg. I asked for proof. You then switch to the
topic of "perception" and come up with ridiculous statements:
>Are you, Mr. Pai, willing to state publicly that you have nothing
>whatsoever to do with ISKCON?
Two words, Mr. Vaishnavi - Red Scare.
>bent upon a vendetta (note that 'vindictive' and 'vendetta' are the words
>I used in my original post on this thread and I stand by them).
Note that the rest of that quote has been removed by you - the part
where you say that ISKCON's name is being used. Face it - you lied.
[ about a cookbook I'm working on ]
>>Take on a new meaning for you. That book isn't part of ISKCON, and I'm
>>not doing it for ISKCON. I might end up selling it at some reasonable
>>cost, I might donate the rights to whomever is interested, or I might
>>just go ahead and publish the whole thing on the web for
>>free. However, there's no truth to the claim that I'm doing it for
>>ISKCON.
>
> Oh really? Let me ask again, what Houston temple have you
>designed Janmastami T-shirts for?
I find it odd that I was talking about a cookbook (the same thing you
mentioned in your original attack) and you've now switched the topic
to the T-shirts.
>You denying any association with ISKCON is absolutely ludicrous.
Please show me a quote denying _any_ association.
>The cookbook claim is from your
>own message where you were 'tooting your own horn'
And the "cookbook claim" has been shown to be baseless, but you still
haven't admitted that much.
> Exactly! Who died and made *you* king? You, my dear sir,
>haven't shown it to be within your authority to demand 'proof' of
>perception.
The only proof I've asked for is when you lie in your claims. That
seems reasonable enough. I've even provided the exact quotes made by
you and asked you to defend them. You've consistently removed them in
your followups.
-Vivek
