A clarification

I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Much obliged!

Rashmun wrote:I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

You're a funny guy, unintentionally of course...

Rashmun wrote:I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

.

Rashmun wrote:I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

You sought to defend Diggy with all you had. When I questioned the Method you used to defend Diggy and ridiculed your arguments, you attacked me with everything you had. When all of that failed, you figured you would cut your losses and suddenly claim to have been joking all along. The joke is on you, because it is clear from the record whether you were jesting or in earnest.

I guess the good news is this: when your current attacks on me and Telugus fail, you will eventually say, "I said all those things in jest." In the meanwhile, don't worry at all about people taking you unduly seriously -- you have made sure they won't.

Rashmun responding to Merlot Daruwala when the latter called him a buffoon: i seem to recall you saying that Diggy was an able and competent chief minister. he was chief minister of madhya pradesh for 10 years. how can a buffoon be a competent administrator?

Rashmun about a man he hero-worshiped for weeks: in my opinion all those who are calling diggy raja a clown will be
eating humble pie after he becomes a union cabinet minister in 2014.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka: to begin with, i don't consider Diggy a clown. i think his words are for the most part well thought through and measured--even when he attacks the BJP/RSS wildly there is a method to his madness. i think he is being targeted by the BJP/RSS and an attempt is being made to portray him as a clown--by BJP/RSS-- because of the serious allegations he is making against them.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka: if diggy was a clown, how come he continues to play a pivotal role in the decision making of the congress... could it be that the BJP will stop attacking Diggy once he is no longer the attack dog but a cabinet minister...

Rashmun posting one of his 100+ Diggy News Updates: Excellent point made by Diggy Raja.

Rashmun posting a YouTube video of a dog attacking a boy: the video does represent a metaphor for what Diggy Raja is doing to BJP these days.

Rashmun on his erstwhile hero: My stand that Diggy is an important leader of the Congress and not a 'clown' as some were trying to portray him to be stands vindicated.

Rashmun fantasizing about his erstwhile hero's future: If the Congress returns to power in 2014, one can expect Diggy Raja to be given an important position in the cabinet. One should not be surprised if he becomes the union home minister.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka, as if the latter had conceded a shocking point: i am glad you clarified that you consider Digvijay Singh to be a clown.

Rashmun about his erstwhile hero: Diggy Raja is like Dronacharya to Rahul baba's Arjuna. So Rahul baba's inclusion indirectly means Diggy's inclusion.

Rashmun on his erstwhile hero's statements about the Mumbai blasts: Diggy has said that nobody should be ruled out of investigation in the Mumbai blasts with respect to suspects. he is right.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

You sought to defend Diggy with all you had. When I questioned the Method you used to defend Diggy and ridiculed your arguments, you attacked me with everything you had. When all of that failed, you figured you would cut your losses and suddenly claim to have been joking all along. The joke is on you, because it is clear from the record whether you were jesting or in earnest.

I guess the good news is this: when your current attacks on me and Telugus fail, you will eventually say, "I said all those things in jest." In the meanwhile, don't worry at all about people taking you unduly seriously -- you have made sure they won't.

Rashmun responding to Merlot Daruwala when the latter called him a buffoon: i seem to recall you saying that Diggy was an able and competent chief minister. he was chief minister of madhya pradesh for 10 years. how can a buffoon be a competent administrator?

Rashmun about a man he hero-worshiped for weeks: in my opinion all those who are calling diggy raja a clown will be
eating humble pie after he becomes a union cabinet minister in 2014.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka: to begin with, i don't consider Diggy a clown. i think his words are for the most part well thought through and measured--even when he attacks the BJP/RSS wildly there is a method to his madness. i think he is being targeted by the BJP/RSS and an attempt is being made to portray him as a clown--by BJP/RSS-- because of the serious allegations he is making against them.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka: if diggy was a clown, how come he continues to play a pivotal role in the decision making of the congress... could it be that the BJP will stop attacking Diggy once he is no longer the attack dog but a cabinet minister...

Rashmun posting one of his 100+ Diggy News Updates: Excellent point made by Diggy Raja.

Rashmun posting a YouTube video of a dog attacking a boy: the video does represent a metaphor for what Diggy Raja is doing to BJP these days.

Rashmun on his erstwhile hero: My stand that Diggy is an important leader of the Congress and not a 'clown' as some were trying to portray him to be stands vindicated.

Rashmun fantasizing about his erstwhile hero's future: If the Congress returns to power in 2014, one can expect Diggy Raja to be given an important position in the cabinet. One should not be surprised if he becomes the union home minister.

Rashmun responding to Charvaka, as if the latter had conceded a shocking point: i am glad you clarified that you consider Digvijay Singh to be a clown.

Rashmun about his erstwhile hero: Diggy Raja is like Dronacharya to Rahul baba's Arjuna. So Rahul baba's inclusion indirectly means Diggy's inclusion.

Rashmun on his erstwhile hero's statements about the Mumbai blasts: Diggy has said that nobody should be ruled out of investigation in the Mumbai blasts with respect to suspects. he is right.

not all my remarks were in jest. for instance, if the Congress wins the general elections in 2014 i do expect Diggy Raja to be a cabinet minister. He had taken a vow not to take up any ministership for 10 years after he was defeated in the state elections (after being chief minister of madhya pradesh for 10 years); and by 2014 the 10 years would be up.

The fact that Diggy is not a clown but someone to be taken seriously is evident from many news reports. I will just point out one: He is Number 25 on the Indian Express 2012 list of Most Powerful People in India today.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-most-powerful-indians-in-2012-no.-2130/916156/3

Mulayam Singh Yadava and Karunanidhi are also capable of taking foolish stands (like their support for caste based reservations for OBCs) and yet we do not dismiss them as clowns for occasionally behaving in a foolish manner since we all know that they are influential people. Likewise with Diggy Raja.


Furthermore, there is nothing wrong in Diggy's statement that everyone--including hindu extremist groups--need to be investigated in terror attacks. even the home minister P.Chidambaram has pointed out the involvement of hindu groups in some of the terror attacks that have taken place in India. For instance, here:

BJP attacking UPA govt as Hindu terror being probed: Chidambaram


PTI Jul 25, 2011, 06.11pm IST




Tags:

• BJP
  

NEW
DELHI: Home minister P Chidambaram on Monday said there are nine
documented cases involving right-wing terror groups making bombs and
killing people and BJP is targeting selective ministers because the UPA government has quickened investigations into them.
He said the objective of these fundamentalist groups was to clearly create terror and the government has to deal with that.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-07-25/india/29812056_1_ayodhya-cases-upa-govt-hindu-terror
--------
But clearly it would be unreasonable for a reasonable person like myself to claim that i agree with everything Diggy says because there is a patently clear difference of opinion between us on the issue of caste based reservations for OBCs. (Ironically, Diggy is in agreement with your view on caste based reservations for OBCs.). I do not recall saying this (my claiming that whatever Diggy said is right), as you are alleging i did, but even if i said this it would clearly have been in jest and not to be taken seriously.



Hence my original statement remains consistent with my position:

I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For
instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a
vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever
using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and
even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Maulana:

Whatever I said I did not say it

Even if I had said it was all in jest

Not all was in jest

Even if I said something seriously I did not say it.

Even I said it, it was all in jest..



P.S. I think you have Bi-polar and should ask your meds to be changed.

with respect to the video about the dog attacking the boy which is to be taken as a metaphor for Diggy attacking the BJP (as i explained), of course i found Diggy Raja very amusing playing the role of Attack Dog for the Congress.

Here he is slamming Sushma Swaraj and other top BJP leaders for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and asking since when did the BJP become a party of dancers?

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

So "the comical touch" was in the statements of Diggy Raja, not in your comments about him. None of the things you said in defense of Diggy Raja was in jest; you were defending him in earnest. And now you are trying to mislead CHers with this statement: many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest. Nice.

There may have been something admirable in your quixotic defense and your aruguments esp. wrt Digvijay Singh and his kartoots.

And now you quantify that some of it was/is in jest

But, this thread just goes to show how utterly pathetic & sad you are in your "stands" and how much of your analysis is fair-weather (100%).

Dot this reply, please.

It just will equate to the . (= zilch) that ALL of your analyses will ever matter anymore.

FAIL! Epic proportions.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

So "the comical touch" was in the statements of Diggy Raja, not in your comments about him. None of the things you said in defense of Diggy Raja was in jest; you were defending him in earnest. And now you are trying to mislead CHers with this statement: many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest. Nice.

when i gave the video of the dog attacking the boy or the video of Diggy Raja calling BJP a party of dancers, naturally i was having fun and my posts were meant to be in jest.

i think what needs to be clarified is that the reason you got upset with my Diggy Raja posts has to do with your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have made clear on a number of occasions.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

So "the comical touch" was in the statements of Diggy Raja, not in your comments about him. None of the things you said in defense of Diggy Raja was in jest; you were defending him in earnest. And now you are trying to mislead CHers with this statement: many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest. Nice.

when i gave the video of the dog attacking the boy or the video of Diggy Raja calling BJP a party of dancers, naturally i was having fun and my posts were meant to be in jest.

Yes, you already established that two posts ago -- no need to keep repeating that. What we have just established is that none of your own opinions about Diggy Raja was in jest. Your attempt at back-pedaling seems to have back-fired.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

So "the comical touch" was in the statements of Diggy Raja, not in your comments about him. None of the things you said in defense of Diggy Raja was in jest; you were defending him in earnest. And now you are trying to mislead CHers with this statement: many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest. Nice.

when i gave the video of the dog attacking the boy or the video of Diggy Raja calling BJP a party of dancers, naturally i was having fun and my posts were meant to be in jest.

i think what needs to be clarified is that the reason you got upset with my Diggy Raja posts has to do with your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have made clear on a number of occasions.

.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.

I am all clarified. Now I can die happy.

Can you clarify your stance on emoticons? That would help me attain moksha.

[quote="Rashmun"]

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.

[quote="Rashmun"]

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.[/quote

.

So many deadly .s in your arsenal!

[quote="Hellsangel"]

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.[/quote

.

So many deadly .s in your arsenal!

Loony Gulti keeps pulling words out of his arse while doing Ulti.

[quote="Rashmun"][quote="Rashmun"]

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.

Remember, there is no I in gult!

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.

Hellsangel wrote:Remember, there is no I in gult!

ok then how about a "cult gult in mighty tumult does ult " ?

i.e. ultimate ulti

chams, are you disparaging of andhraites for a reason? any bad experiences you'd like to share? let me also learn. or is it merely in jest (doesn't sound like it though)?

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:Maulana:

Whatever I said I did not say it

Even if I had said it was all in jest

Not all was in jest

Even if I said something seriously I did not say it.

Even I said it, it was all in jest..



P.S. I think you have Bi-polar and should ask your meds to be changed.

Going by the volume today, I think they were changed or the dosage was doubled.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:not all my remarks were in jest.

Of your hundreds of posts about Diggy, I have posted a representative 11 that you agree were NOT in jest. Can you produce an equal number of posts about Diggy that were in jest? Let us see what your sense of jest looks like. Something tells me this may be a fun exercise!

the dog attacking boy video and also Diggy attacking BJP for dancing in front of Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi and calling BJP a party of dancers were in jest. i consider Diggy Raja a powerful and influential person but in his role of Attack Dog there was a comical touch in many of his statements (like 'since when did BJP become a party of dancers?') which i found amusing.

.

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:chams, are you disparaging of andhraites for a reason? any bad experiences you'd like to share? let me also learn. or is it merely in jest (doesn't sound like it though)?

not at all Huz/huf

as usual the rhyme master in me took over

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

This is the complete statement of Diggy Raja on Ramdev in which he talks about Ramdev behaving in a crooked manner towards his own guru who had taught Ramdev yoga:

Rashmun wrote:in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion.

Now, is everything you are saying lately -- including your previous post -- a "personal subjective opinion" or an "absolute opinion?"

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

I interpret this . as an emoticon that indicates the infinitesimal size of the rational part of your brain, after your "clarification" about Diggy has been debunked.

Was the "personal subjective opinion" you posted about Diggy in jest? Or was it an earnest but not "absolute" opinion?

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

I interpret this . as an emoticon that indicates the infinitesimal size of the rational part of your brain, after your "clarification" about Diggy has been debunked.

Was the "personal subjective opinion" you posted about Diggy in jest? Or was it an earnest but not "absolute" opinion?

*

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

I interpret this . as an emoticon that indicates the infinitesimal size of the rational part of your brain, after your "clarification" about Diggy has been debunked.

Was the "personal subjective opinion" you posted about Diggy in jest? Or was it an earnest but not "absolute" opinion?

*

That's an admirable attempt to increase the size of the rational part of your brain. I approve of it. Keep up your efforts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

Rashmun says about his hero Diggy: Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

I am Charvaka and i agree that i am a LIAR and a SLANDERER. I am also a GULT. interpret this . as an emoticon that indicates the infinitesimal size of the rational part of your brain, after your "clarification" about Diggy has been debunked.

Was the "personal subjective opinion" you posted about Diggy in jest? Or was it an earnest but not "absolute" opinion?

.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

The claim in question involved Ramdev kicking out his own guru from who he had learned yoga from the guru's own ashram. As usual, Dishonest PP rips of a sentence of my post and gives only a fragment of it with some crucial words omitted. The complete sentence whose fragment PP gives from my post goes like this:

but i have to say that in my opinion Digivijay would not have made this claim if there was not substance to the allegation.

in other words, this is a personal subjective opinion and not an absolute opinion. my words imply that you or anybody else are welcome to disagree with me.

This serious allegation--of Ramdev behaving in a manner befitting a criminal towards his own Guru--incidentally has never been repudiated or refuted by Ramdev himself. Notice that Diggy had given the precise name of Ramdev's guru. One would have expected Ramdev to claim that Diggy is talking nonsense or at least threaten to take Diggy to court for making false statements in public about him. But he did none of that. In the Indian tradition, one's Guru is held in great reverence and Ramdev is not known to be a detached unsentimental person. One remembers that Ramdev had called Diggy 'Rakshasaputra' (son of a Rakshasa) and Diggy had reacted to this and criticized Ramdev for bringing his father into their dispute.

Moreover Diggy is a respected Congress leader who has been Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. I see no reason for him to cook up a story about Ramdev and his guru and even giving the precise name of Ramdev's Guru since that would result in undermining his credibility. If Ramdev was able to show that Diggy was a liar nobody would have henceforth taken Diggy seriously.

------
i am saddened to note that PP's mad rush to somehow try and undermine my credibility is inevitably resulting in him biting the dust again and again.

.

I interpret this . as an emoticon that indicates the infinitesimal size of the rational part of your brain, after your "clarification" about Diggy has been debunked.

Was the "personal subjective opinion" you posted about Diggy in jest? Or was it an earnest but not "absolute" opinion?

*

That's an admirable attempt to increase the size of the rational part of your brain. I approve of it. Keep up your efforts.
I am Charvaka and i agree that i am a LIAR and a SLANDERER. I accused Rashmun of ganging up with QueenBee against other posters but failed to substantiate my claim by giving any thread where this could be witnessed.

.