Karishma - guilty by association - then what about Gautam? - Page 4

Originally posted by: sha1

All those things Punz said were not vile in anyway or equal to someone laughing and making joke of something as serious as life and death. Also Karishma knows Punz calls her bimbette and dufrando. But Gautam didn't even know uske peet peeche aisi baatho par Tanna Hassi thi. Until his bro revealed.

wah wat logic to show gauti is a bhola ladka😛 tanna janti hai matlab sunti rahegi bakwaas n tanna was never friendly with gautam ki yu saying peet peeche bola n all but no tanna hassi galat par gautam hassa then chlta hai wah wah 😛

Originally posted by: TheBoss

Agreed. But you do understand that talking about attending ones funeral are some very heavy words and its no laughing subject either. Lets also not forget that this wasn't it all. Ms Tanna herself threatened Gautam with underworld connections and to meet her outside. It wasn't a one time issue. There is a pattern. A sinister one.

Main to agree karta hoon ki it's not laughing matter. Agar mein twist karta like it's been alleged to mein bolta ki all sush implied was that he won't attend finale but will only attend his funeral (whenever it happens) to pay his respects. But I won't as I found those comments as vile and in bad taste ,.. V bad taste...

All said and done... Any act of violence is way worse than words. Repeated acts of violence is just downrite sad... And despite the fact that gauti will not stop from chelagiri of Punz mein still bolta hoon. Not guilty by association :) neither him nor Tanna.

Originally posted by: SoPunk

Technically & Non-technically; KT hasn't taken the Theka (As in contract) for morale policing the BB house. As you are accusing someone of association, you are defend if someone, defying the same ground. Atleast Be consistent with one side of the logic. 😆 Still choice is yours 😉

Originally posted by: SoPunk

Technically & Non-technically; KT hasn't taken the Theka (As in contract) for morale policing the BB house. As you are accusing someone of association, you are defend if someone, defying the same ground. Atleast Be consistent with one side of the logic.😆Still choice is yours😉

That's all I am saying. Same logic applies. Either guilty by association or not. I don't think guilty by assocIation but same logic should apply ;)

Originally posted by: TheBoss

<font size="2" face="Comic Sans MS, Times, serif">By keeping quite it doesnt make them guilty. They are not there to break fights. Had Karishma just kept quite nobody will blame her. Thats the difference. Gautam chose not to interfere because he is not a bodyguard. Karishma on the other hand decided to join in and laugh off. Gautam did not threatened her with underworld connections, nor that he will have her beaten up by his girlfriend. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see whos the aggressor.</font>

But gauti did not kept quiet. He supports Punz openly. Cries for him. He gets in between his fights ... He saves him from nominstions and vouches for him on national TV that Punz will not be violent... If that's not guilty by association then what is ?

To be clear I don't think either one is guilty by association. :) just lets be consistent if one does choose to apply guilty by association for one :)

Originally posted by: karan-007

wah wat logic to show gauti is a bhola ladka😛 tanna janti hai matlab sunti rahegi bakwaas n tanna was never friendly with gautam ki yu saying peet peeche bola n all but no tanna hassi galat par gautam hassa then chlta hai wah wah 😛

Originally posted by: KJasoosChulbulP

But gauti did not kept quiet. He supports Punz openly. Cries for him. He gets in between his fights ... He saves him from nominstions and vouches for him on national TV that Punz will not be violent... If that's not guilty by association then what is ?

To be clear I don't think either one is guilty by association. :) just lets be consistent if one does choose to apply guilty by association for one :)

Originally posted by: sha1

You are on a tangent my friend- Tanna laughed on someone dying topic. Gautam laughed on someone being stupid and duffer.

There is a massive difference- Bolda ladka hai ya nahi uski baath nahi horahi hai. 😉

that was not something small a 50 year old making fun of a girl barbaar n a guy laughing on that comment do yu realize wo ladki waha pe thi usse kitna bura laga hoga n point is agar tanna hassi ek baat pe phir gautam bhi hasta hai so y only tanna is bashed not the other one too

Originally posted by: karan-007

that was not something small a 50 year old making fun of a girl barbaar n a guy laughing on that comment do yu realize wo ladki waha pe thi usse kitna bura laga hoga n point is agar tanna hassi ek baat pe phir gautam bhi hasta hai so y only tanna is bashed not the other one too

Originally posted by: sha1

at the bold - Lets forget association lets talk direct comments- like what she actually said about her BF beating Gautam up. Those were her own thoughts and words no association - which is also ugly just like her laughter by association on someone dying.

Her words were (to his face) .., u will see my love outside :). Only that ... He then said ... Kya aapka underworld connections hain :) to where does it arise that she said her BF will beat him up when those words were never said :) if my memory is failing me on this. Please point me to the epi or the video clip where she said these things that you are stating please.