Hrithik reply to Leaked photo !!! Big Liar with proof !!! - Page 8

Originally posted by: Heisenberg4

Who has confirmed it was at Arjun Rampal's house?, why are other actors there?, the same reason why actors who have no connection to a film get invited to film success parties.   Are these all the pics that were taken that night?, are there pics of other people at the party that have not been released?

Even if this is not preproduction party but a party held by Arjun Rampal, that would mean that Arjun invited Kangana.  So the best "evidence" on Kangana's side is some old pic of the pair of them snapped at Arjun Rampal's house, along with several others, including his ex-wife.  From this we are to assume that they had a social relationship outside of work and friend's parties?

Originally posted by: ponymo

Doesn't matter who invited whom, Kangana and Hrithik appear cosy and are not some random strangers who wouldn't want to look at each other unless it was a film scene. They knew each other well enough and enjoyed each other's company. 

It's the way Hrithik has been disassociating with Kangana that I have a problem with. That is all.

Edited by bigul - 7 years ago

Originally posted by: ponymo

Doesn't matter who invited whom, Kangana and Hrithik appear cosy and are not some random strangers who wouldn't want to look at each other unless it was a film scene. They knew each other well enough and enjoyed each other's company. 

It's the way Hrithik has been disassociating with Kangana that I have a problem with. That is all.

Reread the leaked Hindi emails please. If you thought someone was writing that stuff to you (and probably worse in unpublished emails), you wouldn't try to "disassociate" from her pronto?

Of course he can stop being friendly with her if things go bad but the problem is that he's trying to rewrite history.Edited by anonymous39 - 7 years ago

Originally posted by: Nova19

Reread the leaked Hindi emails please. If you thought someone was writing that stuff to you (and probably worse in unpublished emails), you wouldn't try to "disassociate" from her pronto?

I seriously dont understand why are people behind that "never had any relationship" statement so badly 😆 That was a statement by HR's lawyer said in the context of a relationship after this fiasco. Is it really a rocket science to understand that when these two were working together they obviously knew each other socially. From day one everyone knows this. There are 100s of party pics of Kangana and HR all over the internet. Everyone knew Kangana was invited to Rakesh Roshan's bday party and even HR-suzzi went to her bday. Even in the making of K3 both the roshans have only good things to say about Kangana. So them having NO relationship with Kangana was never the scenario...its just that the lawyers worded it in a wrong way.  Edited by Malika - 7 years ago

Btw, something out of context, I never expected but HR looks quite hot and wild in his drunk avtar😉...That pic with Suzzi is something hun 😎 I mean I have rarely seen him this way onscreen specially coz he does all those goody movies...rly hope he soon plays a real badass guy...would die to see him like that! 

sorry double postEdited by Nova19 - 7 years ago

Originally posted by: Nova19

@ Ponymo and Anon39:  I find it hard to believe that you are ready to convict Hrithik because his lawyer had a poor choice of words when trying to convey they were never close friends or intimate in any way. The most damage this poor choice of words could inflict on Kangana is that Hrithik never considered her more than a work friend. Poor Kangana how that much pinch. 

The opposing player in this drama has been caught in so many lies and half truths I don't have the time to list them. Her untruths resulted in Hrithik being considered a stalker, bully, intimidator, s**t-shamer, misogynist, etc.

Hrithik's big bad "lie"* = denied she was ever a friend beyond work

Kangana's big bad lie = character assassination 

Edit: * The word socially is ambiguous and considering in her emails she makes it sound like she had trouble making simple conversation with him, I wouldn't find it hard to believe he truly never did consider her any thing other than some girl he worked with, until she became some girl who creeped him out, until she became some girl he loathed.

Originally posted by: ponymo

Disassociating from her because she was being a creepy stalker is okay. But to blatantly deny that he never knew her socially is what gets to me. Why not admit you did know her but after this episode you cut all ties with her (if that's true). It wouldn't make people any less sympathetic for him if there is truth to that story. So why tweak reality? This is my problem.

Edited by ChotaBheem - 7 years ago