|
Dayarama admits that he has no evidence |
26-10-1999
By Adridharan dasa
Dear Dayaram Prabhu,
Please
accept my humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
You
wrote that the real question is where the marriage money, “Rs. 3 laks
per day + other parties 1.5 lakh per day, food per plate during
marriages/functions, a minimum 375/- to max. 900/-?”
No,
the real question is that Dayarama has no evidence to substantiate his
claims that Radhapada is the only donor. Let him settle this issue then we
can discuss so many financial affairs. As we already mentioned, Dayarama
only brought up this issue once he had been defeated in his claims
regarding who donated what. Therefore he is trying to change the subject.
Either admit defeat in this issue or continue to defend it - but do not
try and pull a fast one by changing the subject.
We
also have many questions about the finances in Mayapur, land purchases
& Harikesa’s missing money as well as 30 lacs forked out to the
Income tax Dept. at the Madras airport being caught red handed after one
of his dollar changing scams. I am sure that Dayarama will be just as keen
to answer our questions.
And
while we are at it, I am sure he will also be very keen to help answer
some questions others have about the collections taking place in Bombay
and Dehli etc.
Anyway
we are happy that Dayarama is very keen to examine ISKCON’s financial
affairs with a microscope, and once the main issue is settled we will
happily assist him in his investigations.
| “When
I saw that Radhapada is not the only donor claim then I responded
from whatever I knew from Adridharan prabhu himself.” |
We
never brought up that ‘Radhapada is not the only donor’ -point since
this was already accepted and settled. It only came up when Radhapada
tried to assert it recently, and then we had to present the facts.
| “I
went and met Radhapada and Chaterjee his secretary. This is what
Radhapada told me.” |
So
now you admit that your evidence is simply the say so of Radhapada -
hardly independent. Compare that with our sources of evidence:
-
The person who sold the property - Mr Vijay Thakkar and his wife.
-
The person who bought the property - Myself.
-
Many prominent industrialists - the donors themselves
-
The GBC - Hari Vilasa - who conducted a whole investigation into the affair.
-
And the actions of Radhapada Dasa and his family.
Since
we have two conflicting accounts, we will simply let the readers decide
who is telling the truth. But please note that apart from Radhapada’s
say so, Dayarama offers no evidence.
| “He
never accepted in the meeting with Harivilas that there are many
others who paid for the property but accepted that there are others
who have contributed towards getting and developing the property and
therefore they should be appreciated, which he still admits
therefore they were called contributors and not donors in that
meeting.” |
Well
this would mean that HariVilasa is also a liar now. It seems that the
whole world is lying except whoever Dayarama happens to be going to bat
for.
| “Also
when Radhapada’s plaque was put up on the property no other plaque
was put up.” |
The
plaque clearly said ‘principal donor’ - meaning there were
other donors. There was no complaint. And please prove that this complaint
letter from Radhapada was mailed IMMEDIATELY. The other plaque was added.
| “What
to speak of being close to him during those initial days Satadhanya
had almost kicked me out of Mayapur.” |
But,
since his child molestation fall-down, Satyadhanya’s
attractiveness has increased for you and your Guru, since after that time
you have all been very keen to engage him in very important affairs of the
society.
| “I
can’t prove it as I didn’t have tape recorder with me. It’s my
clear recollection and not once as I remember Adri told me on two
different occasions.” |
Well
if you cannot prove it, and since it is one persons’ word against
another, that’s why we had an independent adjudicator appointed by the
GBC - Hari Vilasa - decide. So at least accept his words.
Radhapada
‘says’ so many things. But let him prove it. And when Hari Vilasa
looked at all the evidence we presented he concluded from a neutral
viewpoint that he was not the only donor.
Dayarama
admits that he has no evidence - only a claim. We can all claim so many
things. If you wish to have your claims taken seriously please present
evidence, not stories.. Hari Vilas and the GBC have already settled this
issue. So unless you have any new evidence to present to the discussion,
please stay quiet, since you are not adding anything new to an issue that
was already settled by the GBC.