by Basava Premanand   

This reply to Gerald Moreno follows on from my first reply to him (click here)

Reply to Gerald Moreno's claims from Comments by Gèrald Morèno - On Basava Premanand, honored by the Indian Government

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

Gerald Moreno, whoever he is, has falsely accused me as follows: “Basava Premanand, author of Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room, speculates and draws conclusions by using newspaper clippings! Basava Premanand, India’s leading rationalist and skeptic, irrationally and septically speculates on what happened on June 6th, 1993” This I have refuted
This has been completely refuted by me. Now, however Moreno admits (surely without fully realising it) that my reasoning is far from being based only on drawing "conclusions by using newspaper clippings" (as Moreno's title strongly insinuates), because in his eagerness to refute me on some other detail, he refers to "hundreds of pages" of materials he had seen on the internet, which are not just newspaper clippings at all, but are listed by him as including "post-mortem reports, inquests, the FIR, criminal petitions, pictures, commentaries, the Remand Report and court documents" (see in the article below). However, there are not hundreds (plural) of pages either. GM defeats himself at every turn. All this alone shows the kind of deceit and misinformation used by GM, which is common to his entire output.
I reply below to Gerald Moreno's continued attempts to slander my reputation and writings. It aims to demonstrate further his ever repeated hair-splitting on his minor points, his side-lining of issues and omission of mention of all the evidence produced by me proving he is dishonest and wilfully inaccurate.

News at Sunday, December 04 (Here is the text from The Telegraph, Calcutta, Sunday, November 21, 2004:- "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.'

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. It is apparent that Robert Priddy fed this untruth to Premanand (as Priddy has made this claim against me three times so far). Priddy said that Premanand's book was "out-of-print" (suggesting it was improbable that I could obtain a copy).

Reply: So has Moreno obtained a copy or not? Why does he not say? It is true that the book "Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room" was out of print within a short time of its publication. Even Sathya Sai Baba sent his people and purchased some copies when it was first published! It was recently re-published. Priddy has never once informed me that GM has read my book, and anyone can see that he has posted that GM had not read it and that GM made this clear on a website discussion board (FactNet). What on earth is GM talking about 'feeding untruth'. Is GM suggesting Priddy has told me GM did read my book? This is another decoy tactic by GM to get away from the real issue of the murders and Sathya Sai Baba's guilty cover-up.

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 : Research by GM cannot find that the book is in print again. It was even available in reprint when GM wrote his deception series on the murders. My findings are not conspiracy theories as GM claims without any substance, but are based on facts as published in that book, "Murders in Sai Baba’s Bed Room". Browsing the ex-baba site after receipt of GM's deception series article on the murders, I find that they have copied some of the main facts from the book.

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 Sathya Sai Baba!

Reply : There are not 'hundreds' of pages there, not even one hundred. Why does GM need to distort and spread untruth so much? Here are the links to all the pages from my book, which has 840 closely printed pages. (one web page) (13 pages) (28 pages) (7 pages)

GM : Funny, because Premanand cited this very material against Sathya Sai Baba.

Reply : The reply to GM was based on the materials cited by him, taken only from the above Internet articles.

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

Reply : In GM's article he has not proved anything except creating his own speculative assumptions or theories. These have to be proved with documents which he has completely failed to do. I have already filed with the Law Enforcement Department his article with my reply to prove how the Sai Organisation tries to spread false hood through GM. I do not know what his confabulations on the article in The Telegraph have to do with as the article is based on my National Award.

GM : Nowhere did I question Premanand's nomination for "outstanding skeptics of the twentieth century".

Reply : But GM mentioned about CSICOP and so I had 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 : The Telegraph, Calcutta, stated in its November 21, 2004 edition the following. "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." It was not stated by Ex=Sai activists but by an independent journalist. So GM's research still holds the same abysmal standard. The website is even linked to wher Moreno read about this. (Click here). Why did GM remove Ref.1a in the new incarnation of his web site. Did he 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, so he 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 his reading of it is not my fault, but the question here is whether I was one of the 50 nominees who received votes. Where did GM read that I was named as an Outstanding Skeptic? This is what is called faking by GM.

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 because we were the three who were nominated from India. I have already sent a copy of my reply to GM's allegations documented fully to the Law Enforcement Department so that they may rumble Gerald Moreno, along with various others who are being reported.

What people should find "amusing" is that GM is so hard pressed as to have to try to denigrate me instead of having facts, documents and showing any genuine understanding on any issue involved.

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 he at last agrees that I have received the award. Regarding his dispututing my qualifications, did he 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 GM or his contrived little 'points of contention'. I will not answer questions from 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 about the 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 : Since GM claims to know so very much about India, is it not the highest award for such endeavours, as The telegraph claims? The booklet about it 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 me on the same subject in the country as well as abroad.
If he refuses to understand 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 doesn’t GM write to NCSTC asking for clarification on whether it includes Sathya Sai Baba?

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

Reply : Can GM 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? That is what the award is for, not for quite other achievements, as GM tries to insinuate.

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". 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. 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

Reply : Very interesting and correct enough. GM is extremely determined to drive home his cheap point, so diverting attentionas much as he can from his other many spurious claims against me and my writings. It seems GM searched on the Internet so as to try to baffle with his bogus research. knowedge. Does he not simply show envy and small-heartedness, also because he uses any possible tiny point to enlarge his own bogus claims and to try to belittle anyone who does not agree with him? Let others judge, GM certainly can't!.

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

Reply : There is no 'discussion' possible with GM in any case, but 'about' him certainly. But he is the one who started the deception series and so he must expect to be under scrutiny too, even if it makes him uncomfortable and he naturally - for obvious reasons - wants to push everything away from himself. The meaning of "scientific explanations of hundreds of the so called miracles employed by self-proclaimed godmen" included Sai Baba only because it was impossible to mention all such self-styled godmen, and he is best known today. There are also dozens if avatars of Shridi Sai Baba stretching from Neenakanta Tathaji, Bashea Baba, Narayana Baba, the Baba in Coorg, the recent avatars in Andhra Pradesh itself like Bala Sai Baba, Kaleshwar Baba etc., (and many more). Does GM mean to say none of these godmen are included under "self styled godmen"?

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

Reply : Exactly! But tell us of the awards that were given to Gerald Moreno and for what, if any. How can he get any award when he has not worked for a cause. I never volunteered for the award. Though this award was offered to me in 1992, I refused to accept it then. I did not accept it. I have documents to prove this. One award GM might get could be for his efforts for trying to prove that all people who criticise Sathya Sai Baba are liers, for he is already known to some for spreading conspiring, speculating without basis, giving false estimations, having no formal education, paranoia, bold faced lies etc. All this only from 5 deception series articles of his. He must hope to get awards like those 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 : GM's repetitive, laboured points of contention say more about him than anyone else!

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 : His pages do not contain anything about the challenge. Has GM nothing to reply to it with?

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 : When GM states in the begining that "This story is taken from the Telegraph". GM has sneaked in his word in such a way to make people believe that they are quoted from the Telegraph. This tries to weaken the Telegraph's statement by adding in the word 'allegedly', and that is faking (ie. a faker is a person who fakes or who produces fakes or who practises fraud, a swindler)?

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". 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 readers know that it was GM's statement and not a quotation from the article. Why does he use quotation marks in the above quote, but change the content from the original? Instead of 'amongst' he wrote 'among', which gives a different meaning. More faking?

GM : nor did I parenthesize my statement. It was not a quote.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 : GM is a stuck gramophone record. I do not know who would value his statements except the blindest Sai Baba’s devotees.

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 : I am pleased GM admits I am a 'sticker for accuracy'. I aim to be so. GM is the stickler for irrelevant accuracy, but that is always to cover up much greater inaccuracy in his other claims.

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 GM is 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 responses are already refuted. Confidently, I let others decide which of us is blatant and shameless.

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

Reply : If it was irrelevant why did GM mention and comment on the news He is the only person to state I am lacking in character. He has not put "click here" to prove his allegation of 'lack of character' and 'the only person guilty of "slander"'. He should be specific. From GM's deception series - plenty of slander and dirty tricks - one can very well affirm as to who is lacking character and who is slandering. Ifhe has a shred of character, he could stand up like a man and post his address, phone number, details of his work, publications (if any) and other qualifications he may - but most likely does not - have obtained!

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 : I had to reply to GMN's allegations as to what the fellowship was given to me for. But though the government agreed to give me the grant, I did not accept it but gave my services free. GM has to blame himself for including this in his deceptions series, which was irrelevant in the particular case. How could others know without myself or the NCSTC telling it?.GM's typical guessing is false yet again for it was I who published about the fellowship given to me in my monthly newspaper Indian Skeptic. When GM claims to be very truthful and all others liers, he should not create half-truths and untruth himslef, as I have demonstrated. Has GM learnt from his godman to slander others while claiming to be the only person with character and truthfuness? Typical!

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 GM knows that Gerald is the person who is the registrant for the "Indian Skeptic" domain, why does he state it is my own site? Many have taken permission to publish the articles their web site. Gerald Huber is a very good friend of mine who publishes some of the articles in 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. This shows him making the same old guesses and an absurd accusation of 'stealing'. That is baseless slander too.

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 : GM really is a badly broken gramophone! 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? His constant bombarding e 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 : Only GM cares about this and why does it stick so much in his gullet? I have answered him sufficiently. Evidently he is doing his worst to dishonour me, also perhaps simply because I - who am not deceived by Sathya Sai Baba - was honoured. Who is feeding untruth will be decided by the courts. Now 70% books and television are mainly on Sathya Sai Baba starting with Arthur Clarke’s Mysterious Universe, and Guru Buster and continuing with The Secret Swami. There are other forums for arguing who is feeding untruth and who is guilty of telling lies about all 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 : Those who are guilty wish to escape the law, yes! 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 may also be visiting India sometime in the future?

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 : What relevance has this? Having said it, note that it is not Yahoo which publishes lies and slander, but others who use Yahoo's services. Yahoo publishes a massive amount of lies and slanders against exposé workers, victims of Sai Baba sex abuses and other crimes. There are very many bulletin boards thereonly promoting Sathya Sai Baba lies, deceptions and cover-ups.

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

Reply : Those are two falsehood in themselves. Why did GM not put 'click here' to connect to the many Gentlemen like him who agree that his points of contention are not false? No one with any sense or good points has to boast that their contentions and cawing repetitions are entirely valid observation and comments. Why should he beat his own drum so much when there are alleged 50 milllion devotees of Sathya Sai Baba who will accept his points of contentions, even when they are false!

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

Reply : It is true that, unless they are irrelevant, his points of contention would fail. I thought he was asking for proof, but when it is given, proof become irrelevant to him. He can very easily get copies of the documents from the Governor of AP, or from the District Collector Nellore or the Supertintendant of Police, Nellore.

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

Reply : I thought that it would be better if he gets the scans from the government itself instead of my publishing them on the web. As is his way, he would probably only claim that they are all faked if I had scanned them.
I do not know what prefix I should give GM : Miss, Mrs, Master or Mister as I do not know him nor I have I been able to collect a single bit of his biodata. I think the best way to name him is with the suffic Ji for those who admire his great service to Sathya Sai Baba to try to whitewash the allegations against him, however self-defeatingly. He should present Gerald Moreno with an award, National Award would not be enough, it should be an International Award for one man to come up with all the worst qualities of Sathya Sai Baba. On the other hand., GM is doing great service to the exposé by demonstrating, so laughably and uncreditably, an example of the blind devotee mentality in action.

Notice: I am not willing to be drawn into further meaningless hair-splitting and fakings of facts by Gerald Moreno, who lacks all authority from anyone and all reasonable credibility too. As one can see, the small-time pedant and dishonest dilletante goes to great lengths to muddy the real issues with long, tedious and largely false milling of insignificant details. There comes a point where Moreno's nagging and dirt-slinging would exhaust any reader and It has surely been reached. I have shown the public what his game is to my satisfaction!

Or go to main series  part one  part two - part three - part four - part five

(I want to thank my skeptic colleagues for relieving work pressures on me by key board work and editing of my answers)  

NOTE! Unless otherwise stated, every article on these pages is the registered copyright of the author and/or website owner and unauthorised copying will be pursued legally . Permission to be sought in writing via the owner of this website