© 1999 VNN
|
WORLD January 20, 2000 VNN5308 Comment on this story Ministry Of Misinformation? BY AIRAVATA DAS USA, Jan 20 (VNN) — Message to Sesa Prabhu, Minister of Justice (see also VNN Story 5288) Dear Sesa Prabhu: Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. On 15 of Junuary you wrote: "I neither posted nor was aware of the posting on chakra you are refering to."But it was posted on cakra that: "Sesa Prabhu, the Minister of Justice for ISKCON, requests that as a warning to potential donors the following be stressed and repeated again in this letter", and "He requests that any information be sent to: sesa.acbsp@bbt.se. If you did not post this, then who did? Someone used your name, who is this person? And how can such a posting still remain on cakras page if it is wrong? On 15th of January you sent to me 2d letter where you wrote: "Subsequent to the initial posting to All COM users and on Chakra (I think it was posted there or at least I did request that it be posted there) I have followed the policy explained below. I have not been contacted by Chakra or VNN for any statement or information concerning this matter. Nor have I authorized anyone to speak on my behalf, nor provided anyone with the statements contained in the text you sent".This statement contradicts to your previous statement. In first letter you completely denied that you posted anything on cakra and now you saying that you "did request that it be posted there". So which version we should accept. In very same day from complete denial you change things to complete acceptance. And who is this person whom you requested to post statement on cakra? This person damaged your credibility because the posting on cakra is full of lies. This posting on cakra gives completely wrong information about what is going on. How could you being Minister of Justice be so irresponsible that you didn't check what this person, whom you asked to make posting on cakra, posted? Further in above text you again contradict yourself. First you said: "I did request that it be posted", and just 2 lines below you are saying: "Nor have I authorised anyone to speak on my behalf, nor provided anyone with the statements..." So which version we should accept? It is seems that you confused yourself. But you should remember that by attacking me unnecessarily you are damaging Muslim Preaching Project. It seems that you are taking all this matter very lightly but for us it is the matter of our life. Do you think that you can continue this investigation by acting so irresponsibly? On 16th of January you wrote to Vipramukhya Swami and Madhusudani Radha Prabhu: "I have just downloaded the article below from the Chakra Web Page. I have been informed that it appears that I am responsible for the article and/or its contents. Please know that this article was not sent by me or requested to be sent by me, nor have I participated in any way in writing the article or providing information for the article, nor have I made any statements or requests for input that are attributed to me in this article."You are completely denying your connection with cakra posting in above statement, but just one day before you wrote: "I did request that it be posted there". But after reading the article you strongly denying it, which means that you realised that something was wrong with this article. If you didn't provide "information for the article". This means that someone else concocted all information, which was contained in the article, and article should be removed. But who can be this culprit who used your name without your permission and posted in cakra that disinformation? It is proper time to start investigation and find out who is this person who is misleading the whole Vaisnava community and creating feeling of distrust and enmity. Furthermore you wrote: "While it is true that the Ministry of Justice has been requested to investigate allegations of misuse of funds by Airavata das, and did request messages to that effect to be posted on COM and Chakra, this article does not reflect the mood or scope of the ministry's work in this particular case or in general practice."Here again you contradict yourself. Just one paragraph before you said: "this article was not sent by me or requested to be sent by me", and now you said that you "request messages to that effect to be posted on COM and Chakra". Please tell us whom you requested to place article on Cakra and as a result "this article does not reflect the mood or scope of the ministry's work in this particular case or in general practice." We can understand from your words that this article contains disinformation and as a natural result you should request cakra to remove this article. Furthermore you wrote: "Indeed, this article makes it sound as if the ministry has concluded that Airavata das is guilty and is out to him. This is not the case. I will acknowledge that, in the light of the electronic escalation represented by this article, electronic media is a less than perfect forum for Ministry of Justice work as it is prone to overstatement. I probably should not have involved Chakra in this matter by my initial request."Here you fully admit that article contains disinformation. Naturally we expect it to be removed in order not to mislead people. But you didn't say anything of this effect. On 17th January Madhusudani Radha pr. wrote to you: "This is so bizarre. We got two articles from this address and they were both written as if they came from you (the first one was the same as what was on COM and both referred to your e-mail address). The second one came with the request to use it instead of the first one, as it was more current, or updated. Do you have any idea who's behind this e-mail address? I didn't suspect a thing, as I had just seen your other e-mail on the X-conference on COM. Besides, many devotees send us mail from other people's mail boxes." Here Madhusudani Radha pr. confirms that cakra's article was sent by you. To save you from being called a liar she suggested that may be somebody else sent it. If it is so then this person should be very close to you. This article called by her as "more updated". It was updated by lies. And you admited that it contains disinformation. So now, 3 options are here: 1) you are lying, 2) somebody around you misleading whole Vaisnava community and you should name this person, 3) this somebody manipulating you and using you for his purposes. Tell as truth, which of these options is factual. And don't try to hide yourself by saying that this my message "will be made part of the case file." I don't believe that you have any "case file" otherwise you would remember whether you requested article be placed on cakra or not. You many time contradict yourself as it was shown above. If you will not tell us which option is factual we will assume that first option is fact. In this case you can't conduct any investigation. How somebody can investigate if he is partial, lying or manipulated by somebody else? How somebody who is confused in such a simple matter, whether he has ordered article to be posted on cakra or not, conduct investigation? Therefore I humbly request Bir Krishna Swami to entrust this investigation to more trustworthy person. Furthermore Madhusudani Radha pr. wrote: "Do you have any suggestions re. what we should post in the meantime? Airavata just submitted an article giving his side of the matter. Maybe we should post that too in order to be fair - at least until we have your conclusions? "But you didn't answer. Neither you want remove your falsifications from cakra nor you want be fair enough to post my article next to yours. What was the final decision we will see now. At first Vipramukhya Swami wrote to you: "Okay. Let us post your letter on CHAKRA ASAP as it stands below".Which means post whole letter from 16th of January. But this letter contains contradictory points, as it was pointed above, therefore later on Vipramukhya Swami changed his decision. Vipramukhya Swami wrote to Madhusudani Radha pr.: "Post the following paragraph on CHAKRA ASAP:Here Vipramukhya Swami admits that this nonsense should be edited "so that it makes sense." But most amazing thing is that despite you admitted to Vipramukhya Swami that article contains disinformation he didn't bother to keep it as it is. It seems like nobody care that this disinformation on GBS's Web Side first of all discredits GBC itself. By reading first article and then your note devotees will thing that you are misleading everybody. Because article's headline is "Warning from ISKCON's MINISTRY OF JUSTICE". And in the article it is said: "Sesa Prabhu, the Minister of Justice for ISKCON, requests..." And after reading article devotees will read your note that you have nothing to do with this article. Who will believe it? Devotees will naturally think that either article's contain is false or your note is false or both of them are false. In this way you will discredit yourself in the eyes of whole Vaisnava community. When devotees will understand that GBC member is misleading they may think that whole GBC body is misleading. By conducting wrong policy as GBC member you casting shade of suspect on whole GBC body. It seems except me nobody cares about it. Actually now I have more concern about GBC than about myself. I am long term GBC supporter therefore I am conditioned like that. Please carefully contemplate and do the needful. Don't sacrifice credibility of GBC to the whim of your friend. Contemplating about person who hides himself behind you I noticed one very interesting fact. Among receivers of your message to cakra was one person by the name Satyanarayana. I couldn't believe my eyes, our dear donor Satyanarayana pr. was right there controlling your conversation with cakra. This shows that Satyanarayana pr. directly involved in writing article posted on cakra. It was him who was using your e-mail box and it was him who placed disinformation in article on cakra. It is he who misled and manipulated you. How you can claim now that you are neutral party? Actually it is Satyanarayana pr. who forced you to place posting on com because he was eager to discredit me and had wrong preconception that I am guilty. He imposed on you this wrong preconception and that is why you so stubbornly keeping article on cakra although you already admitted that there are falsifications in this article. I believe that nobody from readers have any doubts that you are not fit candidate to conduct investigation. Therefore I humbly request Bir Krishna Swami to appoint another neutral investigator and remove posting from com and cakra in order to save GBC from further discredit. In the very beginning of investigation you got confused in simple matter of placing article on cakra. You at least 5 times contradicted yourself. You do not remember whether you have placed article or not. What is then in your famous "case file"? Did you order to place article on cakra or did Satyanarayana pr. order it to you? His involvement in writing article is already proven above. I wonder whether he will allow you to remove the article from cakra or not? Below is more evidence how much you got confused right in the beginning of investigation. On 15th January you wrote to me: "In short, I don't know what you are talking about. I don't even read > Chakra or VNN."However on 27th of December you wrote to me: "However, your recent posting on VNN concerning your preaching activities and requesting donations..."If you are not reading VNN then how did you find out about posting on VNN? And this article didn't contain any requests for donation. From this we can conclude that you are really not reading VNN. This means that somebody MISLED you. Please tell us who is this person? Being Minister of Justice how you can make statement without checking first what is going on? Furthermore on 5th of January you wrote: "Yesterday I placed the following warning concerning your requests for donations on COM and Chakra".If you are not reading Cakra then how do you know about article on chakra? If we assume that you are truthful and really didn't read cakra that means somebody again MISLED you. Who is this person who again misled you? And on the basis of article which you didn't read you placed the warning on com. How could you take such a radical step without checking everything thoroughly? May be this same person pushed you to place the warning and discredit me. But who is this person? Finally, if only reason for placing warning on Com and Cakra was so-called "requests for donations" then already on 27th of December you could ask me to withdraw the article and not to place any more articles of similar content until the end of investigation. You also could request me not to accept any donations until the end of investigation. It will be most intelligent and reasonable solution of neutral person in this situation. But you never suggested anything of this effect. This means you were looking for excuse to begin execution, or may be person next to you was pushing? Satyanarayana pr. was pushing Harivilas pr. so badly that he throw him on you without investigation. And Satyanarayana pr. was pushing you so badly that you began execution without even sending me so-called "very credible complains". I can understand you and forgive you because I also familiar with pushy nature of Satyanarayana pr. Seeing pushy nature of Satyanarayana pr. I told him right from the beginning even before receiving donation that I never flatter donors and if he will give me donation that doesn't mean I will become his lifelong slave. He didn't like it but nevertheless he gave money saying that he wants to participate in Muslim Preaching Project and receive immediate mercy of Srila Prabhupada. I believed him and accepted money. But later on I discovered other motives. At the time of earthquake in Turkey my main concern was prasadam distribution to earthquake victims but he was pushing me badly to start printing books immediately. He wrote to me that he needs it to be done ASAP because he wants to place huge article in HKW to get more money for his Charitable Trust. I really didn't like this idea of wide advertisement of unofficial printing books in Turkey but I kept quite because he was already blaming me in having ulterior motives because of me delaying with printing books. Here I want to make 2 points: 1) Satyanarayana pr. wrote on cakra posting: "he (Airavata) continues to make wide appeals to the general devotee population for more money", and "he continues to widely advertise for more money using the appeal of printing books in the Muslim countries." Actually it was his motivation to use printing books in the Muslim country for making wide advertisement and getting more money. It was his real motivation. He is just reflecting his mind on me and blaming me in things that he is doing. 2) Who has ulterior motives, he or me? So he wanted to use me for generating more money therefore when I told him that if printing house will not collapse during the earthquake books will be printed. And he said, yes go ahead. Although even my karmi friend was asking me immediately leave Turkey. Now, who is after money? Only before printing books I came to know that he is accumulating money through his Charitable Trust. He is a businessman, who knows what he is doing with this money and he is accusing me in misusing money. It is another reflection of his mind on me. Later on I came to know about even more tricky idea he had. He explained to me that he wants to control book distribution and I should always report him how much money collected from book distribution. And after all books will be sold he will tell me what I should do next. And after printing books with this recycled money he will make new advertisement and summon more money. I appreciate this idea, he wants to make me his lifelong slave. He wants to control and manipulate me. Because it is not happening he is now so upset and angry. Therefore Satyanarayana pr. is using you to scare me and make me obedient. But tell him that he will never succeed. And there is no way for him to prove that money was misused because money was used for stated purpose, printing books. Therefore ask him to stop harassing you and me and misleading whole Vaisnava community. Ask him for permission to withdraw his article from Cakra. Thank you very much!!! Your humble servant, Airavata das Comment on this story  Contact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
|
