by Basava Premanand   

Reply to Gerald Moreno's claims from Comments by Gèrald Morèno - An Indian Sceptic's explanation of miracles see at - October 2004)

Gerald Moreno's comments appear after 'GM' in bold black face and mine in regular case navy blue type.


GM : Of course I knew that Premanand was not the author to this article. That is why I said, "This article talks about Basava Premanand".

Reply : Why did Gerald Moreno not complete his statement here, as he made it before with: "who is well known for spreading lies and conspiracy theories, against SSB?" Is this not faking?

GM : The article was written by Tanya Datta. However, my comment was not based solely on this article. Rather, it was based on both this article and Premanand's own words from the Secret Swami Documentary.

Reply : Why did you not mention this in the article, if your reply was not based solely on this article?

GM : Since the quote was mistyped, I corrected it.

Reply : When the quote is taken from Secret Swami and you knew it then, how can you state that it was mistyped? When did you correct it? If you had known it when you knew that the comments were not based solely on this article it ought to have been corrected before putting it on the web site. Is this not faking "God-man or Con-man"?
Yes I have stated in Secret Swami 10.46.51 : The only person who was a witness to the murders of mysterious deaths that was Sai Baba but you evaded to quote the earlier 10:46:42 statement of Tanya Datta : "Critics say police connection ensured that Sai Baba wasn’t even interviewed despite being one of the witnesses to the events that night. You should remember that the article Godman or Conman was authored by Tanya Datta and she was the interviewer in Secret Swami documentary also. When SSB claims that he knows everything of the past, present and future and that no grass would move without his specific order it is true that SSB is the only witness to all the murders of mysterious deaths and the perpectuator of the 6 murders as the witnesses are not alive and all crimes in the universe.

GM : It now reads: "An article re-hashing the same points over and over. This article talks about Basava Premanand, who is well known for spreading lies and conspiracy theories, against SSB".

Reply : What proof can you give while stating that I am well known for spreading lies and conspiracy theories? How did you come to know this? Your own guess or letters from others who have read my articles? As the article is on my life alone the another has to put the facts. It is not me who authored each article. Just see from this article of yours who is rehashing the same points again and again. Rather than this, you should question SSB as to why he is constantly rehashing and rehashing the same points on his life in all the books published on him.

GM : B Premanand also repeats the lie that, SSB was "one of the key witnesses to the events of that night".

Reply : GM is trying to confuse readers yet again, this time making the completely false statement. It is not I who am lying but GM, in a bold-faced manner too! No one has to my knowledge denied that SSB was present when the intruders were inside the mandir, was warned by a servitor whereupon he sounded the alarm, left his apartment (i.e. fled the murder scene) and locked the door from the outside. His own brother stated this, along with many others. Not even GM, who is so thorough in his denials. This alone is enough to make him a key witness, quite apart from the fact that he was nearby throughout the hours of the stand-off within his ashram, over which he exercise complete control. Four young men, devotees of a key witness, one of whom was regularly sleepijg in the mandir on SSB's permission, were shot down in cold blood. Or does GM dispute even this known, documented fact? Where did he or any others prove that he was not one of the key witnesses of the events of that night. GM should do some actual research for once, instead of hair-splitting so as to cloud the truth.

GM : Premanand does not know this.

Reply : When GM states that Premanand does not know this, he should prove that there were no other witnesses to the murders, or to SSB's presence in his bedroom etc. etc..

GM : He is speculating as can be seen on my article about Basava Premanand's conspiracy theory about the murders in 1993."

Reply : This article has been already refuted that all his speculations were based on his imagination wherein he never produced any proof, and he has himself made clear in a posting on FactNet that he did not read the book 'Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room'.

GM : I accidentally typed "the only key witness" instead of "one of the key witnesses".

Reply : So GM's statement discussed in this article is not true! Good to know that!. But the question here is whether I mentioned "one of the key witnesses" in the article Godman or Conman.

GM : However, this does not change my opinion that Premanand lied about SSB being a "witness".

Reply : On what basis did you form this opinion? Were you one of the witnesses to the 6 murders? Do you have private access to SSB to know this? Where is the proof, which is always lacking from your 'opinions'.?

GM : He does not know that. That is his sheer speculation

Reply : Let anyone judge which of us is speculating without thorough research, proof and documentation?

GM : Click Here to view the correction. I have no idea what Premanand is talking about when he said, "he is an adept in faking even published newspaper articles". Premanand does not cite which "newspaper articles" I supposedly "faked". This accusation is totally unfounded and a bold-faced lie.

Reply : What about GM's proven faking of "one of the key witnesses to the event of that night from Godman or Con-man to "the only key witness?" . Already I have put on web many articles replying to him where others can decide who is doing all the faking, him or I.

GM : What is amusing about this accusation is that all of the newspaper articles I cited (on my pages about Priddy and Premanand's conspiracy theories) were actually taken directly from Anti-Sai Sites!

Reply : Citing newspaper articles and then adding something which is not in the newspaper or articles is faking.

GM : If Premanand claims that newspaper articles were "faked", he is actually casting aspersions on Anti-Sai Activists and accusing them of faking news paper article

Reply : What a devious twist you try! GM is making himself look very foolish by this. Nowhere did I state that the newspaper articles were "faked" without making clear that this was by GM? How do you know who changed the words from "one of the key witnesses" to "the only key witness" in the news paper? I have a copy the article cited and find the words to be exact copy.

GM : Premanand accuses me with no proof (which is the same thing he does with Sathya Sai Baba).

Reply : Is not one proof which I have pointed above enough for you. You would do better to go through my replies wherein I have pointed to your faking and prove they were the true copies of the news papers and articles.

GM : The newspaper articles I cited were taken from the following page (located on the largest Anti-Sai Site on the internet,

Reply : The reply is already given.

GM : My comment about Premanand saying that SSB was the "only key witness" was actually based on the Secret Swami Documentary.

Reply : How could you say actually based on the Secret Swami documentary when your comments were specifically based on Godman or Conman?

GM : Premanand failed to remember his own words, recorded on video. The BBC transcript reads: "BASAVA PREMANAND: Rationalist & Author: The only person who was a witness to the murders of mysterious deaths, that was Sai Baba and he was not examined as, for evidence at all and those students also who were there, two or three students they were not examined at all." [Secret Swami, BBC Text Transcript: 10.46.51] Consequently, Premanand did say the "only person who was a witness to the murders of mysterious deaths, that was Sai Baba".

Reply : I do not fail to remember anything. The word 'only' was uttered there, but it was like a slip of the tongue easily done in a live interview, and quite insignificant really, which is shown by the fact that, in the very same sentence I spoke of other witnesses. Why did GM not show the whole sentence, which was:
"The only person who was a witness to the murders of mysterious deaths, that was Sai Baba and he was not examined as, for evidence at all and those students also who were there, two or three students they were not examined at all" (from the BBC transcript). GM is fishing for a tiddler!

GM : Consequently, my comments were true although the quote I provided was mistyped.

Reply : This is what you said earlier but you have not proved even one percent.

GM : Unlike Anti-Sai Sites, I promptly corrected the typo. I corrected the mistype.

Reply : It was certainly in GM's interest to do so. But what does GM mean by "Unlike Anti-Sai Sites"? You have not given "click here" to prove your Anti-Anti-Sai statement. Which sites?. Are you saying that corrections are never made on exposé sites? Or they do not correct typos/mistypes promptly (enough for GM's liking)? What trivial point-making! Meanwhile, you have many pages needing major corrections on your website, for certain. For example, all the many points I have proved against you which you simply ignore or stubbornly deny without a figment of fact

GM : What "conspiracy theory"? I never wrote a "conspiracy theory" about the 1993 police shootings. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to write about it when no one knows what really happened. I simply pointed out the many problems in Premanand and Priddy's conspiracy theories. Consequently, this comment, by Premanand, is totally unfounded. Furthermore, Premanand does not refute any of my disagreements with his speculations about the 1993 police shootings. Click Here to read my article that discusses the many problems with Premanand's wild speculations regarding the incidents that occurred on June 6th 1993.

Reply : It shows how Gerald Moreno is himself a walking conspiracy theory, and part of this is constantly to assume and insinuate that SSB is innocent of involvement in the murders and the many alleged sexual abuses etc. GM is in fact also part of the widespread Sai movement conspiracy of silence aiming to hide SSB's actual role in the murders and stop him having to face any judicial process, as GM's attack against the JuST group and all who sign the Sai petition calling for investigation further proves beyond all doubt. GM is being exceedingly dishonest. Now, SSB has not refuted any of my or Priddy's theories. I have already replied very early in July itself to GM's refutation, when Murali Krishna gave me a copy of it. I have also filed my reply with a copy of Gerald Moreno's refutation with the Law Enforcement Department early in July.

GM : Unlike Anti-Sai Activists, I correct any errors I make when it it brought to my attention.

Reply : Please prove that you correct any errors you make when it is brought to your attention and you mention the cause for such corrections and the person who brought to your attention. Without these I am unable to believe that when some one points to you the mistake you correct them.

GM : Premanand seems to be repeatedly making the case that he did not say SSB was the "only key witness".

Reply: Now you see that I am not repeatedly making the case that I did not say SSB was the only witness. What I said was that in Godman or Conman I did not state that and it is true and you have confirmed it in your confession. You struggle to deceive.

GM : However, I have indisputably shown that Premanand said exactly that (albeit, not in the God-man/Con-man article).

Reply : GM is repeatedly repeating himself. If you were quoting some other material you ought to have stated that.

GM : Premanand said that SSB was the "only person who was a witness to the murders of mysterious deaths". My comments were based on this background information from the Secret Swami Documentary.

Reply : GM is now repeating his repeated repitions. I did not read in his article that it was what is taken from the Secret Swami Documentary, on the contrary.

GM : My site actually provides voluminous amounts of information, about alleged sexual abuse victims, that has been purposely suppressed from the general public. Click Here to read my Witnesses Section, that discusses the testimonies of alleged sexual abuse victims.

Reply : I find that GM has not provided even one sound piece of information after investigating the victims except your voluminous assumptions, opinions, denials and constant use of words like 'maybe' and 'appear to', all devoid of true or fact-based information or actual investigatory contact with alleged sexual abuse victims.

GM : Regarding Premanand's "deception", Click Here to view screen captures to, Robert Priddy's Ex-Office Bearers Page and the BBC text to the Secret Swami Documentary. Basava Premanand personally made a submission to (which was subsequently replicated on Robert Priddy's Ex-Office Bearers Page) stating that he was a follower of Sri Sathya Sai Baba from 1968 to 1974 and was the "best worker in the SSB Org., Podanur". However, in the Secret Swami Documentary, Basava Premanand claimed that he was never a follower and had been trying to investigate SSB since 1968 itself.

Reply : I have been very much involved in the production of Secret Swami in India. I searched the entire script of the documentary Secret Swami and could not find the words you have stated in your response : The screen capture shows only the following :-
"10.20.34 BP : I have been investigating him since nineteen sixty eight 10.20.38 Tanya Datta : nineteen Sixty eight.
10:20:39 : BP : Sixty eight. Investigating and drawing my conclusions and keeping it as a hobby.
10.20.46 : Tanya Datta : What do you think of him then?"
So this another faking by GM, unless he can point out the exact material.
I got the screen captures to Sai petitions net after "click here ". Who stated that I did not personally make that submission? You have not asked me if I did make that submission, for your information it is I who made the submission, as follows:
Basava Premanand India signed the petition on September 27, 2004. Period as a follower : 1968 – 1974.
Postion in SSB Org : Best worker in SSB Org. Podanur. This is also there "I have exposed all the miracles of SSB and also investigated murders, financial exploitation and sexual abuse of students. Govt of India have to investigate him.

GM : To further the argument Click Here to read an article that was published in the The Independent, on December 24th 2000, where it was claimed that Premanand had "spent nearly 50 years touring Indian villages, drawing crowds of people by demonstrating how "miracles" are performed".

Reply : This is not my statement. This is what Beatrice Newbery wrote. She has mixed two materials together. Did GM show courtesy to enquire with me or Beatrice and the Independent?

GM : When this article was written, Premanand was 71 (he was born in 1930). Consequently, Premanand had been exposing gurus since the age of 21 or 22. This means that in 1968 (at the age of 38, or 16 years after he was a rationalist) Premanand was not a follower of SSB. Why did Premanand lie?

Reply : I have not stated that I was not a follower of SSB. I took the membership of SSB’s Samithi in Podanur in 1968 to investigate his miracles I have documents to prove this. Read the 'click here' materials together and find out why I became a follower of SSB. This is documented in my book 'Divine Octopus and the Health' souvenir published by Geedee Medical Aids long back.

All in all, it is clear that GM is very confused about it all and writes anything and twists anything just because he is in such deep trouble with his facts.


* * *

Response Four:

UNFOUNDED, MISLEADING CLAIMS AGAINST MY WRITINGS - part four e-mail, click here by Basava Premanand

Reply to Gèrald Morèno's claims from

GM: Whether intentional or not, Basava Premanand gave a non-operable link to my site. I have corrected the link above with my main domain URL.

THE FOURTH CRITICISM is found under " Deception" of November 2004 also in the page Comments by Gèrald Morèno - On Basava Premanand, honored by the Indian Government where he refers to the ExBaba page on 'Premanand honoured by the Indian Goverment'.

Gèrald Morèno's Response appears in bold black face and mine in regular case navy blue type.

News at
Sunday, December 04

GM : If Premanand would have read the very link he cited, he would have seen where I stated that I never read his book ("Murders In Sai Baba's Bedroom"). I specifically stated that I had read the hundreds of pages that were taken from Premanand's book and published on Anti-Sai Sites.

Reply : What would you gain by arguing that you have never read the book? You go through all your deception series first and let me know the truth. If you lie again that you have not read the book I will point out the article and para after you confessed that it is not in your article. In the link I cited you have lied that you did not read the book. I specifically cited the link to find how much more you would lie. You only quoted the exbaba sites so that your site browsers do not come to know about the facts of the 6 murders.

GM : It is apparent that Robert Priddy fed this untruth to Premanand (as Priddy has made this claim against me three times so far).

Reply : Do you mean to say that Robert Priddy stated that you have not read the book " Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room? I had requested my staff to copy everything on your site on the murders issue and he did it. I would request you not to bring others in this subject. I am enough to point out to your absurdities with out the help of others.

GM : Priddy said that Premanand's book was "out-of-print" (suggesting it was improbable that I could obtain a copy).

Reply: So you have obtained a copy! It is true that the book "Murders in Sai baba’s Bed Room" was cut of print within a short time of its publication. Even SSB sent his people and purchased some copies when it was first published! May be Priddy does not know that the book was reprinted again.

GM : Now if Premanand wants to make the case that the core of his evidence against Sathya Sai Baba (regarding the 1993 police shootings) has not been published on Anti-Sai Sites, this would mean that his conspiracy theory is based on other "evidence" available in a now "out-of-print" book.

Reply : My findings are not conspiracy theories as you suggest but based on facts as published in the book "Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room". After browsing the ex-baba site after receipt of your deception series article on the murders I find that they have copied some of the main facts from the book. As mentioned by you the book " Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room is not now out of print as it has been reprinted. Moreover when you write the deception series on the murders it was available having been reprinted.

GM : I guess the hundreds of pages of newspaper clippings, post-mortem reports, inquests, the FIR, criminal petitions, pictures, commentaries, the Remand Report and court documents (that were published on the internet on Anti-Sai Sites, taken from Premanand's book) are not the real evidence against SSB!

Reply : It was you who have cited some of the materials from the book "Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room" put on the web site of so your citing these materials are funny as you have expressed.

GM : Funny, because Premanand cited this very material against SSB.

Reply : The eply to you was based on the materials cited by you.

GM : Click Here to read my article about Basava Premanand's conspiracy theory.

Reply : In your article you have not proved anything except creating yourconspiracy theories. These theories have to be proved with documents which you have failed to do. I have already filed with the Law Enforcement Department your article with my reply to prove how SSB tries to spread false hood through you. I donot know what these wobblings have to do with, on the article in telegraph, as the article is based on my National Award.

GM : No where did I question Premanand's nomination for "outstanding skeptics of the twentieth century".

Reply : But you mentioned about CSICOP and so I have to mention that I was one of the 50 persons who got votes.

GM : My comments specifically pertain to Basava Premanand being (as Anti-Sai Sites stated), "Honored by the Indian Government with its highest award for scientific values, campaigns against Sai Baba" (Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. - Ref. 1b). This comment is inaccurate, misleading and deceitful.

Reply : Why did you remove Ref.1a in your new incarnation of your web site. Did you check with the Science and Technology Department about this award and whether there are higher awards; or with the Union Minister of State for Science and Technology? And so you could find out whether the comment was inaccurate, misleading and deceitful.

GM : Click Here to view the article that Premanand is referring to. Just to be absolutely clear, Premanand simply was nominated. He was not named an "Outstanding Skeptic". Others, who received votes, included Johnny Carson (a late-night tv show host), the Food And Drug Administration and The Scooby Doo Gang (a childrens, fictional cartoon based on a speaking dog and ghost-busting characters)!

Reply : I have published this article in Indian Skeptic fully and your not reading it is not my fault, but the question here is whether I was one of the 50 nominees who received votes. Where did you read that I was named as an Outstanding Skeptic? This is what is called faking.

GM : It is amusing that Premanand ignored those nominees and choose instead to highlight his name with Mohandas Gandhi!

Reply : When I stated 50 nominees it would mean them but why I mentioned my name was because the question whether I was included in the 50. I mentioned Kovoor and Gandhi was because we were the three who were nominated from India. I have already sent a copy of my reply to your allegations documented fully to the Law Enforcement Department so that they may understand you.

GM : I do not dispute that Premanand received that award. I dispute that Basava Premanand received "the Indian Government's Highest Award" and that he received this award in part for his "campaigns against Sai Baba".

Reply : Good that you agree now that I have received the award. Regarding your dispute did you verify with the Union Minister of State for science and technology or with the Department of Science and technology whether there are any higher awards for the purpose mentioned in the scrawl?

GM : As one will notice, Premanand is dancing around my main points of contention.

Reply : Yes I have learnt Indian Dance in my childhood but I have not danced around you or your points of contention. If you cannot really understand my explanation you can ask questions and I will try to answer them but not to any one who closes his eyes towards things that I have explained. I have already mentioned that the Government of India does not mention personal names and Sai baba is also included when the citation on the scrawl states and scientific explanation of hundreds of So-called miracles employed by self-styled godmen.

GM : The NCSTC Award is not "the Indian Government's Highest Award". Nor does the NCSTC offer awards for "campaigns against Sai Baba".

Reply : One thing you have accepted that I have received the award and the booklet states that it is a National Award for Science Popularisation. The citation states that it is for my relentless efforts towards promotion of scientific attitude among common people, all over the country, through lecture-cum-demonstrations on and scientific explanation of hundreds of the so called miracles employed by self styled godmen and through books written and television shows conducted by him on the same subject in the country as well as outside.

If you refuse to under stand the meaning of the citation that the award was based on my research and work amongst the people all over the country for scientific explanation of hundreds of the so-called miracles it include Sai Baba particularly. Why don’t you write to NCSTC asking for clarification whether it includes SSB?

GM : The NCSTC Award is not "the Indian Government's Highest Award

Reply : Can you point out any other higher award than the one awarded to me for my participated work of explaining hundreds of so-called miracles employed by the so-called godmen?

GM : The highest award, offered by the Indian Government is the "Bharat Ratna", which is "India's highest civilian award given for exceptional service towards the advancement of Art, Literature and Science, and in recognition of public service of the highest order. It was established by the President of India, in 2nd January 1954" (Ref. 2). Premanand never received "the Indian Government's Highest Award".

Reply : I do not come in the category mentioned by you

GM : Nor did he receive "the Indian Government's Highest Award" for his "campaigns against Sai Baba". Once again, these statements are inaccurate, misleading and deceitful.

Reply : I am not bothered about your belief which is not based on enquiry.

GM : The Bharat Ratna is followed by Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Shri Awards. These are the highest four awards offered by the Indian Government. Premanand received none of them.

Reply : I do not come under any of these categories and I have not claimed that I got there awards.

GM : This discussion is not about me. It is about Basava Premanand.

Reply : I never stated your deception series is a discussion, but you are the person who started the deception series. If you do not care to understand the meaning of "scientific explanations of hundreds of the so called miracles employed by self-proclaimed godmen, it includes Sai Baba because it is impossible to mention millions of such people in India. There are also dozens if avatars of Shridi Sai Baba strecting from Neenakanta Tathaji, Bashea Baba, Narayana Baba, the Baba in coore the recent avatars in Andhra Pradesh itself like Bala Sai Baba, Kaleshwar Baba etc., (many more as you are allergic or fetish about the word etc) do you mean to say none of these godmen include "the self styled godmen" or only SSB does not include?

GM : I have not made any claims about receiving awards that were never given to me.

Reply : How can you get any award when you had not worked for a purpose. I never volunteered for the award. Though this award was offered to me in 1992 I refused to accept the award then. I was ashamed to received it from him. I have documents to prove this. One award you can get for your efforts for trying to prode that all people who criticise SSB are liers, well known for spreading conspiracy theories speculating, amusing tabloid critics questionable involvements, giving false estimations, no formal education, alleged award, paranoia, Sai/ Sex Bold faced lie. These are only from small 5 deception series articles of yours. That is from SSB. You are sure to be awarded by him like the awards given to Dr.Goldstein, Isaac Tigrett etc.,

GM : It is clear that Premanand did not receive "the Indian Government's Highest Award" (a fact that Premanand has not directly addressed). Nor did Premanand receive "the Indian Government's Highest Award" for his "campaigns against Sai Baba" (another fact that Premanand has not directly addressed). My points of contention are entirely valid.

Reply : When you have not clarified from the NCSTC about your points about the Indian Government Highest Award for my field of work whether there are any higher awards. And whether SSB also includes in the citation by self styled godmen" no one would care for your speculation that your points of contention are entirely valid.

GM : Regarding the "challenge" made to me by the webmaster of, Click Here to view my pages about Reinier Van Der Sandt. If there comes a time when I make a claim about receiving an award, I will back it up with factual documentation and information.

Reply : Your pages do not contain anything about the challenge.

GM : Click Here to read the article in question, from The Telegraph. Premanand is misreading my comments. I said, "Also, Basava Premanand allegedly received the award due to his promotion of scientific values among the public". This statement was worded by me (referencing the article in question), therefore I used the word "alleged".

Reply : I checked and found that there was no word "alleged" I have not misread your article. Moreover adding cannot be a comment. Comments are made after the exact words in the article are quoted. Even if it is your comments you ought to have explained the situation for commending "Alleged" which means claimed to exist or to be discribed but without proof; merely supposed.

GM :When you state in the begining that "This story is taken from the Telegraph " The person adding words in the Telegraph article is called a faker and the dictionary defines the meaning as
1. Person who fakes or who produces fakes;
2. One who practises fraud, a swindler.
Your quoting the Telegraph article later in title does not absolve you from the faking.I said, "Also, Basava Premanand allegedly received the award due to his promotion of scientific values among the public". This statement was worded by me (referencing the article in question), therefore I used the word "alleged".

Reply : Why did you word the statement on Telegraph without mentioning that what you am quoting from Telegraph are your comments? Your truthfulness is in slake. You have planned your words in such a way to make people believe that they are quoted from the Telegraph.

GM : The actual quote, from The Telegraph, was "Premanand, who's been honoured by the government with its highest award for the promotion of scientific values among the public, is among activists spearheading a campaign against religious and spiritual heads engaged in illegal and unsavoury activities".

Reply : Here also you have made a mistake. Instead of amongst you have put among which gives a different meaning. Your quoting the exact words later will not help those who have already browsed your web site to know the truth.

GM : As one can see, my statement and the quote are not the same, nor did I parenthesize my statement. It was not a quote.

Reply : How could the browsers know that it was your statement and not the statement in the article. Good if you have understood the seriousness.

GM : nor did I parenthesize my statement. It was not a quote.

Reply : If you go through your deception series articles you can trace many of the quotes parenthesized

GM : Once again, Premanand is missing the point. As a said before, Premanand did not receive "the Indian Government's Highest Award", nor did he receive "the Indian Government's Highest Award" for his "campaigns against Sai Baba".

Reply : I do not know who would value your statements except Sai Baba’s devotees. The statement should come from NCSTC and the Union Minister of state for Science and Technology and not from you.

GM : ". Since Premanand is a stickler for accuracy, he received the NCSTC Award for his "scientific explanation of hundreds of the so-called miracles employed by self-styled godmen". No where does this mention Sathya Sai Baba's name.

Reply : The scrawl also does not mention any other self styled godmen. If it doesnot mean SSB it cannot also mean rest of the self styled godmen. The award is a National Award and is not called NCSTC Award and is sponsored by the Science and Technology department, Government of India.

GM : My points of contention are not slanderous, as Premanand has failed to provide me with any evidence about receiving "the Indian Government's Highest Award", which he most certainly did not receive.

Reply : I have given the evidence to the Law Enforcement Department and you are trying to hang on a thread.

GM : I have already shown, in my previous 3 responses, how Premanand had blatantly and shamelessly lied about me and erroneously accused me of forgery, without providing any proof or citing any examples.

Reply : There 3 response are already refuted.

GM : This points directly to Premanand's lack of character and the validity of my opinions about him. Consequently, the only person guilty of "slander" is Premanand.

Reply : you are the only person to state about my lack of character. No one else. You have not put "click here" to prove your allegation of lack of character and only person guilty of "slander". I am wondering what is happening to you. When I went through your deception series one can very well affirm as to who is lacking character and who is slandering.

GM : This does not address, and is irrelevant to, my points of contention

Reply : If it was irrelevant why did you mention and commented on the news So I had to reply for what the fellowship was given to me and though the government agreed to give me grant I did not accept the grant and gave my services free. You have to blame yourself for including this in your deceptions series which was irrelevant in the particular case.

GM : If Premanand did not receive any grants, then he should ask that the article located at: (which is located on the Indian Skeptic website) be corrected. On this page, Tim Mendham and Harry Edwards stated, "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" (Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.). That is where I got my information regarding the "grant". I guess Premanand's fellow skeptics are mispresenting the facts about him as well.

Reply : How could others know without myself or the NCSTC telling it. It was I who published about the fellowship given to me in my monthly newspaper Indian Skeptic. Here also your guess is false. I would request you to kindly stop sending guess work and speculations when you claim to be very truthful and all others liers. Good you have learnt all the good words used by godmen to slander others while claiming to be the only person with character and truthful. Great!

GM : The Indian Skeptic is a monthly magazine that is published by Premanand (Ref. 4). The Indian Skeptic Website is based on the magazine that bears that name (Ref. 5). Gerald Huber is the person who is the registrant for the "Indian Skeptic" domain.

Reply : When you know that Gerald is the person who is the regestrant for the "Indian Skeptic" domain how can you state it is my own site? Many have taken permission to publish the articles their web site. Gerald Huber (not Gerald Moreno when I donot know) is a very good friend of mine who publishes some of the articles in Indian skeptic on his web site. But Gerald Moreno has not taken any permission to publish the articles from Indian Skeptic on his web site. GM would tell me what is means when he claims that exbaba has stolen his materials and vice versa.

GM : I have already made my case about the inaccuracy of the claims attributed to Premanand.

Reply : it is for the Judge to pass orders on a case and not the accuser and the defendant

GM : What is amusing about this is that Premanand has not denied that he was "Honored by the Indian Government with its highest award for scientific values, campaigns against Sai Baba".

Reply : why should I deny when the government has given me a National Award for my work which is the highest award for propagating scientific attitude amongst the common people? Your bombarding hundreds of time to make a lie appear as truth will not make it a truth.

GM : Consequently, since Premanand refuses to deny that he received "the Indian Government's Highest Award" and that this award was offered to him in part for his "campaigns against Sai Baba", Premanand is feeding this untruth. Consequently, it is abundantly clear whom is guilty of telling lies.

Reply : Why should I accept your assumptions as truth. When I have produced the proof? Who is feeding untruth will be decided by court. Why did you put the citation in par without mentioning that the award was given for my relentless efforts towards promotion of scientific attitude among common people, all over the country through lecture-cum-demonstrations on and scientific explanation of hundreds of the so – called miracles employed by self styled Godmen and through books written and television shows conducted by him on the same subject in the country as well as outside.

Now 70% books and television are mainly on SSB starting with Arthur Clarke’s Mysterious Universe, and Guru Buster and mostly ending with Secret Swamy. I am not prepared to argue who is feeding untruth and who is guilty of telling lies as there are other forums for this.

GM : Premanand is obviously unaware that the Collector of Nellore District and the Hon. Governor of Andrah Pradesh do not regulate the internet!

Reply : But we in India have an Internet Crime Cell and my complaints to the collector, The Governor of AP and the law enforcement department has to be forwarded by them to the Internet Crime Cell.

GM : Yahoo is guilty of publishing far more lies and slander against Sathya Sai Baba than what is alleged, by Premanand, as being published against him.

Reply : Would you give me the web sites of where are more lies and slander against Sathya Sai Baba. I would like to verify whether they are lies and slander. I never knew that permits publication of lies and slanders. I have not alleged as they are fats that if one goes through your lies and slander.

GM : As one can see, my points of contention are not falsehoods. They are entirely valid observations and comments.

Reply : who are the ones who see that your points of contention are not false hood. Why did you not put click here symbol so that the people who browse your web site will know that there are many many Gentlemen like you who see along with you that your points of contention are not false hood.

No one boasts that their contentions are entirely valid observation and comments. Why should you beat your own drum when there are 50 milllion alleged devotees of SSB who will accept your points of contentions even if they are false!

GM : All these enclosures are irrelevant to my points of contention.

Reply : It is true that unless they are irrelevant your points of contention would fail. I thought you were asking for proof and when it is given these proof, become irrelevant to you, when you can get very easily copies of the documents from the Governor of AP, or from the District Collector Nellore or the Supertendant of police Nellore.

GM : Furthermore, no scans were published to these enclosures.

Reply : I thought that it would be better if you get the scans from the government itself instead of my publishing them on the web as I cannot waste my time to reply you when you would come with another argument that they are all faked.

I do not know what prefix I should give you : Miss, Mrs, Master or Mister as I donot know you nor I have collected any of your biodata. I think the best way to name your with the prefix Ji as I admire your great service to SSB to white wash the alligations against him. I wish he should present you with an ward, National Award would not be enough, it should be an International Award for one man to come up with all the qualities of SSB.

Notice: I am not willing to be drawn into further exposing the meaningless hair-splitting and fakings of facts by this small-town pedant and dishonest dilletante, Gerald Moreno. He always exerts himself to muddy the real issues with long, tedious and largely false milling of insignificant details. There comes a point where Moreno's querulous attitude would exhaust anyone. It has been reached and - since I have shown the public what his game is to my satisfaction - I shall not prolong the absurd agony for readers!