STATEMENT BY A SRI LANKAN MAN WHO FREED HIMSELF FROM THE FALSE BELIEFS HIS FAMILY HOLD ABOUT SAI BABA
The following insightful statement from a person who has lived under the shadow of Sai Baba and evidently knows the whole game also refutes some of the boasting ignorance and wily defamation spread by the conscienceless guru-worshippers like Gèrald Joè Morèno. Birinavan posted this as a comment on SaiPetition.net, for which it was far too long, therefore the comment is posted again in its entireity here as being a more appropriate place.
My Response: This is the ORIGINAL post submitted to SaiPetition.net: Im a Sri Lankan Male living in Australia. Im not affiliated with Exbaba or any of the other sites critical of SSB. Im just someone who does not want his family to have faith in a false god, conman and a criminal. Im not a devotee of Sai Baba myself but many members of my famlily are.Some have been life long devotees. As a child i grew up being thought to belive in Sathaya Sai Baba and to pray to him when i was feeling down etc. If the allegations are true then my family has been worshiping a paedophille and a conman. Even now they are teaching their kids to worship him. Its sickening. And also something must be done to save the children of India from this menace. He is creating a culture of paedophillia in a country where there is not enough law enforcement offcials/power to counter any underage prostitution and paedophille rackets. He is turning these boys he abuses into future paedophilles.If Sai Baba is innocent then he and the Indian Government have nothing to lose by opening a investigation into Sai Baba'sactivities and his financial activities.
My Response: The following post is what appeared on the SaiGuru.net site. The purple parts are not part of the original post at SaiPetition.net: Im not a devotee of Sai Baba myself but many members of my family are. Some have been life-long devotees. As a child i grew up being taught to believe in Sathya Sai Baba and to pray to him when i was feeling down etc. But i was always a rebellious child and i couldn't see how a this man could be god. As i grew up i started to watch magic shows and realised Sai Baba's tricks were nothing special, and i just couldn't believe all my relatives actually believed the so-called "miracles" of Sai Baba. During my teens i saw the various documentaries about Sai Baba and this i thought would be enough to convince my relatives at least to start asking some questions about Sai Baba. But they were living in self denial. And just wouldn't believe any of it, and said the reporters wanted to discredit SSB. To me this was really scary, these people were accountants, bankers and engineers and the thought that they could be so utterly brainwashed was really depressing. Now i am 20 and i cannot stand to see what Sai Baba is doing. If the allegations are true then my family has been worshiping a paedophile and a conman. Even now they are teaching their kids to worship him. Its sickening. And also something must be done to save the children of India from this menace. He is creating a culture of paedophilia in a country where there is not enough law enforcement officials/power to counter any underage prostitution and paedophile rackets. He is turning these boys he abuses into future paedophiles.If Sai Baba is innocent then he and the Indian Government have nothing to lose by opening a investigation into Sai Baba's activities and his financial activities.
My Response: Consequently, an anyone can see, Birinavan Tharmaratnam was communicating with Anti-SSB Activists and added information that was not included in the original post at SaiPetition.net! Birinavan said, "Im not affiliated with Exbaba or any of the other sites critical of SSB". This is a blatantly deceptive. If Birinavan was not "affiliating" himself with Anti-Sai Sites, why did he publish his email correspondence (that was addressed to me) on their site? Why was he communicating with SaiGuru.net and had them edit his introductory comments by adding more information than what was submitted to SaiPetition.net?
And there are a lot of deluded devotees of Sai Baba on the Internet who are trying to discredit the accusers of Sai Baba and therefore stop any investigation of him. So far they seem to be failing miserably. But the thing i don't understand is why are they so against an investigation if they believe Sai Baba to be innocent? And why is Sai Baba depriving his devotees of outside sources of information, such as the media and the internet? I thought one of the key principles of his teachings/ideology was to seek the truth.
My Response: I am not trying to stop the investigations against SSB. How to stop them when they have not even begun! ((laughs)) I am simply providing additional information that has been purposely withheld from the general public. It is also amusing to point out that Anti-Sai Activists are quick to judge the character of those who are Pro-Sai, yet feel that their character (and the character of alleged victims) does not matter and should not be discussed! Hypocrisy, clear and simple.
The following is a email i sent to Gèrald Morèno owner of http://www.saisathyasai.com/Fair-Is-Fair/
My Response: Here, Mr. Tharmaratnam gives my name. Oddly enough, he never used my name in the email he sent to me. Obviously, someone informed him! The following is the actual email that Mr. Tharmaratnam sent to me (along with his typos). SaiGuru.net corrected the typos for him on their page!
My Response: Notice how Mr. Tharmaratnam addresses me as "vishvarupa.com". When Mr. Tharmaratnam wrote his email to me, he did not know my name. This shows how carefully he read my pages, considering the fact that my name is listed on the bottom to all of my pages!
You sir/madam are guilty of this:
My Response: Notice how Mr. Tharmaratnam does not know my gender! Obviously, he did not know my name or gender when he wrote this email to me. This proves he did not read my site in depth, nor did he do any sort of preliminary research. The fact that the email he sent to me did not have the preceding comments, that were published exclusively for Anti-SSB Sites, shows that Mr. Tharmaratnam fully intended to affiliate himself with Anti-SSB sites.
My Response: This link states the following, "Selective thinking is the process whereby one selects out favorable evidence for remembrance and focus, while ignoring unfavorable evidence for a belief. This kind of thinking is the basis for most beliefs in the psychic powers of so-called mind readers and mediums. It is also the basis for many, if not most, occult and pseudoscientific beliefs. It should be noted that selective thinking works independently of wishful thinking and should not be confused with biased thinking, whereby one seriously considers data contrary to one's belief, but one is much more critical of such data than one is of supportive data." It is amusing that Birinavan Tharmaratnam would accuse me of "selective thinking". First of all, I provide links to Anti-SSB Sites and encourage people to read their articles, in order to clarify my points of contention. On the other hand, Anti-SSB Sites banned me from linking to their sites and fail to provide links to any of my articles or responses! I think this shows who is guilty of "ignoring unfavorable evidence for a belief"! Obviously, Mr. Tharmaratnam is suffering from "selective thinking" and is reacting out of a self-professed dislike for SSB, without doing a proper enquiry about me or my site.
First of all i'd like to make it clear to you that im not a Sai Baba devotee and i never was in the past. But various members of my family are Sathaya Sai Baba devotees.
For me Sai Baba's "miracles" are not the problem. Its very clear to any rational person that these are nothing but cheap magic tricks. And there is enough evidence to prove this, some of which is on your site. If Sai Baba wants to gain more supporters by using magic tricks and deception then i say shame on you to the people who actually fall for it.
My Response: Mr. Tharmaratnam is obviously oblivious to the fact that even Anti-SSB Activists, like Robert Priddy, believe that SSB has genuine, paranormal powers. Robert Priddy said, "Some of what I experienced of SSBís extraordinary and positive powers through many years is undeniable, even after the most rigorous skeptical investigations, and I do not regard him as any ordinary human being." Robert Priddy also believes that SSB can materialize "apports", has "scientifically-inexplicable psychic powers", is "psychically sensitive" and has "shown beyond doubt his extraordinary powers"! Consequently, Mr. Tharmaratnam is also shaming Robert Priddy, the most vocal Anti-Sai Activist, for "falling" for SSB's alleged powers! There are many online testimonials to miracles and healing attributed directly to SSB. Although it is fairly easy to explain manifestations from SSB's physical form as being magic tricks, it not so easy to explain the miraculous phenomena associated with SSB throughout the world. Although one is free to either believe or disbelieve these accounts, the fact remains that there are numerous miracles attributed to SSB that are not dependent on proximity to SSB or his physical form.
But the reason i wanted Sai Baba investigated is the allegations of sexual abuse, corruption and murder. The Indian government doesnt even want to investigate Sai Baba's organisation. Thier reason being that they belive the allegations against him are false. Thier evidence... thats what thier heart tells them to do or Sai Baba is not capable of doing such things. This, in my opinion, is absolutely ridiculous. If Sai Baba is not capable of doing such things why cannot the Indian government openly investigate Sai Baba and his organisation? What have they (the Indian government and Sai Baba) got to lose?
My Response: Where is the proof that anyone in the Indian Government said that they refuse to investigate the SSO or SSB for sexual abuse, corruption and murder" because "that is what their heart tells them to do or Sai Baba is not capable of doing such things"? Mr. Tharmaratnam does not provide any references, names, links or documents to back up this totally unsubstantiated claim. It is apparent that Mr. Tharmaratnam is biased and is willing to believe unsubstantied rumors and allegations without verifying them in any way, shape or form.
I came to your site thinking i would be able to find a rational counter argument and evidence to refute the claims made by skeptics and ex devotees. While i found some parts did provide valid evidence and rational thought. i.e your argument in Video Clip 11 Part 2. And also the common sense that statements from annonymous people cannot be used as evidence (which everyone should know anyway).
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam has already stated that, since the time he was very young, he believed SSB to be a fraud magician and a conman. However, Mr. Tharmaratnam says that he came to my site thinking he could find a "rational counter argument and evidence to refute the claims made by skeptics and ex devotees"! Mr. Tharmaratnam is being clearly disingenuous.
If it is "common sense" that anonymous statements cannot be used as "evidence", why isn't Mr. Tharamaratnam castigating Anti-SSB Activists, who disperse numerous, anonymous accounts against SSB? This is the primary reason why I continually make this point about anonymous stories (i.e., Anti-Sai Activists say that anonymous sources are useless and unbelievable when it comes to Pro-Sai stories, but are believeable and trustworthy when it comes to Anti-Sai stories). Anti-SSB Activists feel they are perfectly justified in using anonymous sources against SSB. Obviously, Mr. Tharmaratnam does not think I am entitled to express my view in this regard! I wonder why? I feel the general public should be aware of this fact.
I found for the most part your site to be a red herring.
My Response: This links states, "Ignoratio elenchi (also known as irrelevant conclusion) is the logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but which proves or supports a different proposition than the one it is purporting to prove or support. "Ignoratio elenchi" can be roughly translated by ignoring the issue; "elenchi" is from the Greek meaning an argument of disproof or refutation. Aristotle believed that an ignoratio elenchi is a mistake made by a questioner while attempting to refute a respondent's argument. He called it an ignorance of what makes for a refutation." Obviously, Mr. Tharamaratnam does not know what constitutes a literal "red herring" logical fallacy! A "red herring" logical fallacy is a position in which one distracts the audience from the main issue being discussed, by introducing another issue irrelevant to the main issue. None of my articles are red herring fallacies because I discuss the main issues directly and openly. One must also remember that "ignoratio elenchi" (aka, a red herring fallacy) encompasses such a broad spectrum of arguments, that just about every type of argument would be a subfallacy to it. This means that if someone does see another as arguing in favor of their perception of the "main issue", they could easily accuse others of resorting to "ignoratio elenchi"! Consequently, Mr. Tharamaratnam actually resorts to a red herring fallacy by trying to divert people from the main issue by accusing me of engaging in a logical fallacy, yet, at the same time, failing to refute any my articles! A classic red herring argument. Perhaps a better example of what Mr. Tharamaratnam is trying to accuse me of, would be an "ad logicam" fallacy. In an "ad logicam" fallacy, the perceived use of fallacies is used as an argument against the validity of the conclusions made. Fallacy arguments can arrive at valid and factual conclusions. Simply pointing out a perceived fallacy, does not negate the validity of the conclusions drawn!
For example for your argument against the Testimony from ex-devotee: Said Khorramshahgol. You do not have any evidence against Said, so you try to discredit him by claiming he's mentally insane.
My Response: Perhaps Mr. Tharamaratnam can show me where I called Afshin (Said), "mentally insane"? I never said that. This shows how desperate Mr. Tharamaratnam is to distort the "facts" in his favor. I am not trying to discredit Afshin. I am simply providing additional, factual information about Afshin (Said) that has been purposely withheld from the general public. I think it is only fair that the general public not only view Afshin's sexual abuse allegations, but that they also view his online behavior and statements against SSB (which happens to be 100% relevant to this issue). Afshin portrays himself as suffering trauma, due to being sexually abused by SSB, however, he turns right around and make jokes (Click Here) about masturbation, bestiality, having oral sex where there would not be "too many witnesses" and ascribing lewd, sexual comments to the Koran! I think the general public is perfectly entitled to know about this type of behavior. Obviously, Mr. Tharamaratnam does not care, nor does he seem to think there is anything wrong with this! I think this speaks volumes about Mr. Tharamaratnam.
"I'm sorry, but anyone who spams any site over 20 times has mental issues. I have never heard of anyone spamming any site from 1,000 - 3,000 times!"
I suppose your a qualified phychiatrist now?
My Response: It is obvious that Mr. Tharamaratnam did not read my articles about Afshin. As a matter of fact, Afshin made this very point (about being a psychologist), to which I responded in full, twice. Click Here to view my first response. Click Here to view my second response. Now if Mr. Tharamaratnam feels that I am not entitled to my opinions (which are backed up with actual posts made by Afshin), I wonder why he takes no issue with Afshin when he called Lisa DeWitt "schizophrenic", "paranoid and delusional", "brainwashed" and a "lunatic"! Based on Afshin's thousands of posts, I said that I felt Afshin had "acute mental issues". An opinion I backed up with statements made by Afshin himself.
And have you considered that he mightve been trying to bring the server down with a DoS attack by spamming?
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam is trying to justify Afshin's spamming by insinuating that Afshin "might have been trying to bring the server down with a DoS attack by spamming"! Of course, this type of activity is illegal and would make Afshin a felon! If Afshin was engaging in this type of behavior, this would make a clear cut case that Afshin had something to hide and had even more "acute mental issues" than the ones I ascribed to him! Funny that Mr. Tharamaratnam thinks this type of illegal behavior is somehow justifiable and could be used to explain away Afshin's spamming! Very revealing.
This whole epsiode confuses the reader and takes the focus away from the question of whether Sai Baba is guilty of paedophillia and sexual abuse.
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam is wrong. Afshin initially did not see anything wrong or sexual in what SSB did to him. Afshin changed his mind, many months later, after he saw a video of SSB allegedly "cheating" with a materialization. Behavior points to character. Afshin's online behavior points to his character. Again, Mr. Tharamaratnam is implying that behavior and character do not count. If this ever went to a court of law, Mr. Tharamaratnam can be certain that Afshin's online behavior would be used as key evidence to discredit the integrity of his sexual abuse claims against SSB. Enough said!
Also you point out that Dr. Bhatia, why did he leave? is sent by a annonymous person and therefore cannot be proved. Thereby making that article invalid. Then you go on to anyalyze and try and refute a article which you have already proved is invalid. Then you go on to compare Mick Brown's interview with Dr. Bhatia with a article you have already proved is invalid.
"The anonymous story says Dr. Bhatia claims that he had sexual relations with SSB for 6 years. In the story related by Mick Brown, Dr. Bhatia allegedly said he had sexual relations with SSB for over 15 years"
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam has already said that it is "common sense" that anonymous articles are not valid. Then he questions me as to why I am "disproving" an anonymous article (when it would have already been invalidated due to it's anonymous nature). The reason (I guess it's not apparent to Biranavan) is because Anti-SSB Activists disperse this article as valid and trustworthy. Anti-SSB Activists do not see anonymous articles as being untrustworthy. However, Mr. Tharamaratnam does not take issue with Anti-SSB Activists, he takes issue with me for pointing out a sentiment he shares!
Again you try to discredit someone in Did Sathya Sai Baba influence the judiciary in 1996?. Instead of ivistigating the article you make defamatory statements against Basava Premanad.
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam is so accurate in his research, he cited the story with the title about SSB's influencing the judiciary in "1996". Actually, the original article stated "1966", not "1996"! My comments, about Basava Premanand, were not defamatory. I took my information, about Premanand, from Anti-Sai Sites!
"this article says Basava Premanad is an "investigative journalist". This is simply untrue. Every single site that talks about Basava Premanand is completely mute when it comes to his qualifications and credentials. He belongs to a rationalist group, a magicians group and is said to be an amateur magician and rationalist. That's it. The silence in regards to Basava Premanand's education might have to do with the fact that he did not get one: http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/articles/fakirbuster.htmlBasava Premanand was thrown out of school at the age of 12 due to a political dispute in which his parents refused to fill in a religion or caste on his school application form. Consequently, Basava Premanand was home taught. One day, Basava Premanand broke a mercury thermometer and hid it under his bed on an aluminum plate, exposing himself directly to toxic mercury fumes (which can cause psychological disturbances). Despite his father being knowledgeable in science, Basava Premanandís father ordered him to wash the plate vigorously, exposing him, once again, directly to mercury. Basava Premanand supposedly experimented many times with mercury, as he claims that aluminum reacting with mercury and moisture produce aluminum oxide ash (vibuthi)."
My Response: This is not defamatory. It is 100% true. I guess Mr. Tharamaratnam did not look at the link I provided in my comments! Everyone can verify my comments for him or her self (Click Here). Basava Premanand is not an investigative journalist! Perhaps Mr. Tharamaratnam can supply me with the resources to show me I am wrong? Again, it is not defamation when the information is true! I think Mr. Tharamaratnam needs to do another search on the internet for a definition to "defamation".
What does it matter if he had a proper education or not? Do you have evidence to prove that school educated people have better investigatory skills than home schooled or uneducated people? and What does all of this have to do with disproving the article?
My Response: I am simply providing the general public with additional information about Basava Premanand. I never said anything about home-schooled or uneducated people lacking investigatory skills. Why doesn't Mr. Tharamaratnam ask Premanand for the evidence that would prove that SSB did influence the judiciary? Premanand (as he usually does) makes all sort of unsubstantiated claims. A perfect example (in relation to the 1966 judiciary allegation) is when Premanand said, "When I went through the magazines published by Satya Sai Baba, it was found that Y.R.Ghorpade and his wife did visit Puttaparthi in October 1965." Of course, don't expect Basava Premanand to tell us which magazine and which publication he found this information in. He fails to do so! However, Mr. Tharamaratnam believes Premanand and takes issue against me for questioning him! Imagine that, do not question Anti-SSB Activists, but question everyone else! Tough luck, Tharamaratnam! Another example of Anti-SSB sympathizers trying to prevent people from making valid and pertinent enquiries.
More defamatory statements;
My Response: It's not defamation, when the information is true. Furthermore, all this information came from Anti-SSB Sites and Pro-Premanand sites!
"This is a review from Basava Premanand. Any review from Basava Premanand is bound to be deeply stained and shaded by his atheistic, rationalistic and skeptic mentality. I have not found any article written by Basava Premanand that deals strictly with facts and figures. He mixes truth with untruth and tries to pass it off as "scientific" and "rational". "
Where is your evidence to back up these claims might i ask?
My Response: Click Here to view an article, from B. Premanand, that supports this statement (scroll down to the bottom of the page). Also, Click Here to view my article about B. Premanand's 1993 police shootings conspiracy theory. Click Here to view B. Premanand's double standards when it comes to anonymous stories.
On Study of SB's Claims and Journey to SB and my personal experience you claim that The Article is False and has No Proof to Support It. Just because the link doesnt work does not meant the article is false and has no claim to support it. The fact that you couldnt find a different source for the article proves how sloppy your research is.
My Response: Mr. Tharamaratnam did not supply me with any "different source" to disprove my claim. This shows how "sloppy" his research is! Also, Tharamaratnam is trying to misrepresent my dot system. Since the article clearly did not fall into my green, yellow or fluff dot categories, it fell into the red dot category. I sort articles according to the proximity of their content with my dot description. Again, Tharamaratnam provides no information to refute my articles. Nothing! Funny enough, a stance he faults me for!
There is so many more things i could point out but im afraid i do not have the time.
My Response: Perhaps Tharamaratnam can focus on one topic, he dissents with, and see if he can disprove any of my points of contention?
So in summary you claim your site is dedicated to finding the truth and unravelling the deception of works that are critical of Sai Baba. But in reality your entire site is dedicated to confusing the reader, shifting attension away from the allegations against SSB and defaming persons who are critical of SSB. None of which has anything to do with the truth. And you dont even do a good job of it, your attacks against authors of critical works lacks evidence.
My Response: In summation, it is clear that Mr. Tharmaratnam did not read my site, does not have a good grasp of the English language, is easily confused and cannot refute any of my articles with any factual information! Funny how Mr. Tharmaratnam demands "evidence" from me, yet fails to demand evidence from Anti-SSB Activists! What constitutes "evidence" and where is the "evidence" against SSB? I think we all would like to know. Mr. Tharamaratnam is implying he knows where the evidence is at.
You yourself admit you are engaged in selective thinking (or as you call it one side thinking) and your justification for it is the Anti SSB site do it so why cant I? Sounds to me like something a 10 year old child would say. So i ask you why i should take you seriously?
My Response: Mr. Tharmaratnam sees no problem with Anti-SSB Activists presenting their view of the evidence, yet has every problem with me presenting my view of the evidence. As a matter of fact, Mr. Tharmaratnam is saying that Anti-SSB Activists are allowed to engage in "selective thinking", but since I made my own site, I am behaving like a "10 year old child" for doing the very same thing that Anti-SSB Sites are doing! Mr. Tharmaratnam does not have to take me seriously. His bias is apparent. My site is for those who have the intellectual independence to view both sides of the SSB debate with an open mind. Until Mr. Tharamaratnam provides me with factual information to refute my articles, it is he who cannot be taken seriously.
Even in your disclaimer you say "All the material on these pages are the sole and original opinions of me". Opinions! Not fact, not evidence but opinions. And this also indicated to me that you have no other sources to back up most of the evidence that you present on your site.
My Response: I provide numerous resources and facts on my site to back up my opinions (unless Mr. Tharamaratnam thinks that people's literal words are not self-supporting facts). Others are free to form their own opinions regarding the resources and facts provided on my site. I am perfectly entitled to my opinion regarding the facts I cite on my site.
Thank you for your time.
PS Im not affiliated with Exbaba or any of the other sites critical of SSB. Im just someone who does not want his family to have faith in a false god, conman and a criminal.
My Response: Mr. Tharmaratnam is being disingenuous. He submitted an email, meant for me, to be published on Anti-SSB Sites, and then claims that he is not affiliating himself with Anti-SSB Sites! It is also clear that he communicated with Anti-SSB Activists (as his original post to SaiPeition.net is not the same as the post that was subsequently posted on SaiGuru.net).
OPEN CHALLENGE to Biranavan Tharmaratnam: Supply me with any factual evidence to disprove my points of contention and I will update my site. Since you have openly stated that I am not supplying factual information, I suggest you post your factual information that would discredit mine.
(SAIGURU.NET) From the editor: To supplement the above, it should be pointed out that Basava Premanand is a foremost rationalist and has been "honoured by the Indian government with its highest award for the promotion of scientific values, campaigns against Sai Baba" .(http://www.telegraphindia.com/1041121/asp/opinion/story_4029697.asp). He has also been interviewed on many international TV documentaries on issues relating to India religions and bogus 'spirituality', including several BBC programmes (incl. Guru Busters' and 'The Secret Swami') and National Geographic TV programmes, to name but a few.
My Response: This story is taken from The Telegraph, an Indian Newspaper in Calcutta. The article was submitted under the "Opinion -> Story" section of the newspaper. Also, Basava Premanand allegedly received the award due to his "promotion of scientific values among the public". The alleged award was not given to him because of his "campaigns against Sai Baba". That is a 100% lie. What is amusing about this is that Basava Premanand has no formal education (even in science) at all!
It is also interesting to point out that this article provides the only reference that makes mention to Basava Premanand receiving the Indian Government's "highest award". Not even Tanya Datta, who interviewed Premanand, makes any mention to the alleged award. Nor do any other sites that profile him, in depth. This includes CSICOP! As a matter of fact, even on Basava Premanand's own site, there is no mention of Premanand receiving "India's Highest Government award for scientific values and campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba". At http://www.indian-skeptic.org/html/byhedwa4.htm (Basava Premanand's own site), it says. "The Indian government has made a grant to Premanand to enable him to make video tapes of his performances and to explain his methods, so that they may be shown in villages throughout the country." There is a considerable difference between a "grant" and "India's Highest Government Award". This is yet another poorly researched propaganda article by Anti-SSB Activists. I have not been able to find any source where National Geographic featured Basava Premanand in any way, shape or form. I even searched the National Geographic home page and found nothing! More lies from Anti-Sais.
Concerning Dr. Bhatia: Though some of the information about his homosexuality came from an anonymous source, other information about him came by e-mail in a reply from the webmaster of one of the most prominent Sai Baba websites on the Internet - saionline.com. They wrote in reply to a critic who mailed them: "We all loved Dr. Bhatia very dearly, but the actual fact is - and you should know this since you feel you are accurate in all your other evaluations - that Dr. Bhatia was a notorious pedophile. We would not have mentioned this if the times were not what it is with ignorant people like yourself spreading incomplete facts." To this the reply made included: "Bhatia told various people for years that he was 'married to Swami'. So how did he get the way you say he is? He told the Daily Telegraph just how. And how"! I mentioned his name for the purpose of drawing attention to this undisputed fact."
My Response: SaiOnline has no proof that Dr. Bhatia was a pedophile or a homosexual. None whatsoever! Oddly enough, Anti-SSB Activists have bashed SaiOnline for not divulging their names! Consequently, all of this information, about Dr. Bhatia, is 100% anonymous and unsubstantiated! This goes to show how Anti-SSB Activists have very low standards when it comes to "undisputed facts"! Also, Dr. Bhatia (allegedly, as Mick Brown could not indisputably identify him) never claimed he was a pedophile or had sex with anyone other than SSB. Now why would SaiOnline be saying that Dr. Bhatia is a pedophile, coming from his conversation with Mick Brown, when no such information was discussed? It is also important to point out that despite Dr. Bhatia's devotion to SSB, he is (allegedly) only talking to Anti-SSB Activists. All this reeks of subterfuge and lies.
Australian White Pages: B. Tharmaratnam 109 Frances St Lidcombe 2141; (02) 9749 5779, Australia; Email: firstname.lastname@example.org