suchandra Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 ................while I may not be a lawyer I nonetheless have been forced to play one in real life... Perfect definition of an actual dilettante.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 Perfect definition of an actual dilettante.... Of course you've nothing positive to say - [like the others haunting this thread] - well why should that be surprising - yup - you are again posting something which is a pefect definition of 'precipitous'.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 The US Office of special counsel completely took issue with the goons who defaced the picture of Krsna on my locker. They severely reprimanded the Military Command of Trident Intermediate maintenance Facility (NAVIMFPACNORWEST) for allowing abuse, President Clinton intervened by issuing Executive Order affirming my rights, I was given $1,000 and my performance review was upgraded to "outstanding" from "MARGINALLY SUCCESSFUL". The persons responsible for the defacement were no longer working for the Navy. This was a side issue, and resolved almost immediately. Krsna intervened, because he noted the righteousness of the battle. The other stuff was my battle, involved unimportant stuff like feasibility of US naval vessels, ability for the US to properly defend itself, and aN OLD BURNT OUT nuclear worker being mistreated by idiots who only know what is on their office blueprints rather that what is actually installed aboard trident submarines. Unimportant stuff was drawn out for years, my briefs were praised by Federal Judge Klett as being the best he has seen, he was shocked that I was working ex parte. Yet all this stuff went for naught, because I still had to do other things, like live my life, while the DoN employed at least seven high paid attorneys to combat me. During the course I had many victories, a sense gratification only. After awhile, the brief writing becomes an art form, but it is pretty frivolous when you look at it. My greatest satisfaction in the whole ordeal was the fire I set to burn all my briefs and all their perjury briefs and their national security claims. The bottom line, Krsna's issue of being able to play his flute anywhere, including at myt work station, was taken care of immediately. So, separate KRSNA'S issue from all your own, and allow Him to make his presence known. He gives Arjuna advice on how to fight. Arjuna doesnt want to because he likes his enemy, but Krsna has vanquished them, and ALLOWS Arjuna to take credit for de3feating those who cannot be defeated. So, Kuruksetra was KRSNA'S issue, not Arjunas. Find out about Krsna's issue in this battle of yours, let him make you victorious. Cause all you do, despite the thrill of fame as a ex parte expert, is lose. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 ...Find out about Krsna's issue in this battle of yours,... Well it certainly isn't in the 'support' of those [here] who claim to also be His servants... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 over 100,000 articles, thousands of topics are discussed on this forum. You are supported by anyone who even touches the button on your topic, you should be thanking profusely anyone who reads. The thing is, you do not see how support is given. Sometimes, if someone shouts you down, saying, "You are dead wrong, brother", this is the best support youll ever get. Conversely, if someone patronizes you, saying, "go get em, don, continue to use every bit of your time, energy, intellect, engaging in legal gibberish to continue your crusade against Canada (Canada fer christ sake)", this is not support at all, this is not a friend saying this to you. You remind me of my days as a Union rep. My worst battles were not against agencies or management, they were against bull headed clients who refused to believe they dont have a case. You dont have a case, brother. The only thing you have is a topic to present in a righteous way to the Regina and even National news media, but I personally dont think you can do this without getting all wordy. If you want to know why you dont have a case, Ill describe, otherwise, you are not very nice to those who read your topic. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 over 100,000 articles, thousands of topics are discussed on this forum. You are supported by anyone who even touches the button on your topic, you should be thanking profusely anyone who reads. The thing is, you do not see how support is given. Sometimes, if someone shouts you down, saying, "You are dead wrong, brother", this is the best support youll ever get. Conversely, if someone patronizes you, saying, "go get em, don, continue to use every bit of your time, energy, intellect, engaging in legal gibberish to continue your crusade against Canada (Canada fer christ sake)", this is not support at all, this is not a friend saying this to you. You remind me of my days as a Union rep. My worst battles were not against agencies or management, they were against bull headed clients who refused to believe they dont have a case. You dont have a case, brother. The only thing you have is a topic to present in a righteous way to the Regina and even National news media, but I personally dont think you can do this without getting all wordy. If you want to know why you dont have a case, Ill describe, otherwise, you are not very nice to those who read your topic. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa Whatever mahak - i think yer wrong and it's that simple! You devotees here are not acting like you should be and for you to say "to continue your crusade against Canada" means that you haven't a single clue about me or this situation. I think yer all acting like this due to ego and envy - of course you won't admit it but - i think that that's pretty clear. If you want me to be nice then act a little more supportive and - in a constructive manner. Besides- the so-called devotees that have been in this thread railing against me are the same ones who are always posting anti-Semitic crap in my direction - thus I really don't care what they think. My opinions of ISKCON and [many] hare krishna devotees sure has changed over the last couple of years...yup no more rose colored glasses for me - i see all of this - for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahak Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 You have described perfectly why you will lose. Your persecution complex makes it impossible for you to defend Krsna against the ignorance of state representatives. Its all about you, nothing more, and now the ones who are trying to help are your enemies as well. If you dont want devotee imput, why bring it up. Its your topic, if you are so disgusted with those who could care less about your bodily conseption cultural attachments yet are actually concerned that Krsna is getting a bum rap here, then why dont you erase this whole thread, or just talk to yourself asw you always end up doing anyway. And your anti semitic claims are just as bogus as they always have been. My best friends are palestinians, who are semitic. Yasser Arafat is semitic. If anything, your apartheid state of Israel has been more anti-semitic than anyone else. Wah wah wah, poor jews, poor don, always the victim. mahak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Wah wah wah, poor jews, poor don, always the victim. mahak Yah yah yah - sad mahak and - yer always the attacker... I have explained this matter if yah'll cannot hold your attention beyond two sentences then too bad... You never did tell us how you feel about SHRC saying "we don't cover krishna here" - I guess you would let it slide - clearly - you wouldn't defend Prabhuadpa nor Krishna. Prabhupada did tell us that not eveyone coming into the krishna family are devotees - many are among us with other motives - just how many devtoees are there like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 ...he was shocked that I was working ex parte...Cause all you do, despite the thrill of fame as a ex parte expert, is lose. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa So what is the meaning of 'ex parte' - how does that word apply here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 ex parte means acting as your own attorney. As far as how Id deal with the regina government, Id make a media case out of it, not a legal one. When one tries to philosophize to courts, the only response is that its out of their jurisdiction (sound familiar). But the media is not concerned with jurisdiction. They sell papers, and embarassment to the government sells. But you have to know how to frame it, because the public cares less about you and your mistreatment at your job (BTW, you can never prove a negative, just ask anyone who tried to get a settlement on an age discrimination suit against the govt.) than they care about the government. Id present them as fasciswts against honest practice of religion. I supplied you with Clintons Presidential Order, read it for ideas. Because the matters apply to all western euro-centric governments. But you know you may be barking up the wrong tree, and it kinda serves you right. Your ultra right wing fascists have the same ideas. They say only judeo christiaqn religious concerns matter, that muslims, krsnas, etc, dont have the same rights because they were not here originally when protections were granted. And the same goes for your rhetoric against anyone who worships the Supreme Person by the Holy Name of Allah. How can we take you seriously when you deny the rights of muslims to peacefully exist anywhere. So they are against you because you invoke the name of Krsna, saying that his name gives you no special rights. At least they dont shoot you or have the US send you to torture camps of the mossad in Uzbekistan for invoiking the name of Allah. Cant have it both ways, bro, your liberal cause here does not fit your fascist apartheid stated politics. You made your bed, sleep in it. At least some of us are consistant. later, mahak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 ex parte means acting as your own attorney. At least some of us are consistant. later, mahak No Mahak - ex parte doesn't mean what you've posted. Ex parte is a latin legal term meaning "from (by or for) one party" - i.e.: to argue a case in the absence of the other [opposing] party... It doesn't mean "acting as your own attorney" - not even close! So if you have no real understanding of that legal term - what else don't you understand correctly - most everything - yup - it's the most consistant point here with you... Check out this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte Of course - there is much more you could learn from such a site... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Cut the legal double-talk. In two sentences, what happened? Here is where the topic went down the other route - for gHari to say "legal double-talk" - to label it "double-talk" or "gibberish" was ignorant and without regard to the manner in which such things are done. As I noted - judges are not looking for 'two sentences' to become apprised of a complex situation - it is common sense. Also - when presenting any case to a court etc., one has to do so with regard to 'grounds' - which of course must include - statutory citations from relevant enactments - any applicable rules of court and - [if applicable] jurisprudences. The foregoing points must be quoted within a presentation of any case before the courts etc., who cannot understand this? I venture that he didn't read the letters at all - he just saw some some statutory citations and then posted what he did and in that he accused me of double-talk - like I'm trying to blur facts with such a presentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 ...Your persecution complex makes it impossible for you to defend Krsna against the ignorance of state representatives. Its all about you, nothing more, and now the ones who are trying to help are your enemies as well....your apartheid state of Israel has been more anti-semitic than anyone else. Wah wah wah, poor jews, poor don, always the victim. mahak Hey what might be your "complex" - here are your own words on this thread: "...The mormon mafia and the freemasons who control the trident missile and submarine program were behing the willful offense of destroying the picture on my locker...I was even threatened, followed, harassed, all that "black helicopter" crap started happening to me as well as family members..." Gee weren't there any aliens and zionists involved ... See how that worked against your failed complaint process? Did you tell the judge all that? Was the judge a freemason or a mormon and that is why he denied the perjury issues you raised? I do not suffer from a persecution complex if any - I suffer from a 'let me give them the benefit of the doubt' complex! Mahak - I [and my god-brother] have been variously persecuted - including on the basis of faith. We didn't ask for this fight and it didn't come about as a result of having some 'conspiracy complex' [which i think i may be seeing in you and - within more than this thread's postings?]. Even now - after all that has happened to me - I'm quite lucid on the apparent causes and - I'm not seeing some so-called 'mormon mafia and freemasons' conspiracy. I don't see "black helicopter crap" etc., which you described having happened to you and - all that happened to you and - for what - having a dispute about a picture of Krishna on your locker and some whistleblower stuff - give us a break. Don't forget that I even have an 'implant' within my sinus [since June 05, 2002] - it is very well documented and the 'conspiracy complex' argument cannot be thrown at me - even in that! Again - where are the "black helicopters" and 'mormon mafia/freemasons' stalkers and the like to stalk me? It wasn't a grand 'mormon mafia and freemasons' conspiracy behind our abuse - it wasn't a 'Bush cartel' - it wasn't 'the jews' - it wasn't 'the zionists' - NOPE - it simply was and IS - uncouth provincial 'socialist' agencies and - a 'socialist' government insurance company - of course - as countenanced by a socialist NDP government. No "mormon mafia" No "freemasons" - No 'neocon' plots - none of that - so really - just see...the difference in my awareness and thus my presentation of an abuse and you - with your posted perceptions of the causes etc., of that locker/picture experiance - contrast the two - as an unbiased reader would. I'm not attempting to insult you nor to make light - I'm simply trying to get you to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 You are correct. Its been five years since I gazed at all that legal crap. I used the terms "ex parte" incorrectly. What I was referring to is "pro se", which means acting as one's own attorney, waiving the right to any other type representation. Also, I am a writer, so I try to make things interesting. Of course there were no black helicopters, they were white navy vans with their license plates removed that followed me home. You dont live in the PAC Northwest, so you dont know the effect of the ring-knockers in connection with navy, army, air-force and the dept of Justice which operates the federal courts here. But thru Seattle Federal Court, there are virtually no civilian lawsuit victors against the various military branches. You minimize me because Im aware of obvious power brokers and their affiliations with secret societies. Zionists, no, not really. This is LDS country, and they defy openly anyone of Jewish Heritage. But in a sense, same thing. LDS think they are the true Zion dwellers. The (what I call) mormon mafia was just a localized problem with the TRF agency, the doctors in the area had to get permission from civilian bretheren who managed Civil Service workers before they could make their diagnosis. The head of security used LDS geneology facilities to complete his background surveys. So you make me out to be a paranoid to discredit me, thats okay, dont use any good advice I may have. But just remember, your only paranoid if you're wrong, or, just because you are paranoid doesnt mean they are not all out to get you. Your case is Canada, and like you say, youre dealing with lightweight provincial northern hillbillies. Dont you forget who I was dealing with. The base I worked on, if it was a nation unto itself, is the #1 nuclear power in the world, including having more firepower than the rest of the US combined. To think they wouldnt easily black ops me or anyone else dead is pretty naive on your part. But this is not my problem, I have transcended the sense grat of political mundane intrigue. My only problem now is a loosening attraction to spectator sports and my desire to finish typing my opus novel. Good Luck, sincerely, bro, no one said this birth was easy. hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 This aint a bad term to understand, either. Now that Ive been corrected, I did at one time need to know this phrase. Any evidence you submit to any court, you have to simultaneously give to the opposition, otherwise, the court wont accept. The reason this stuck in my mind is that the Navy was allowed to do this on me, they submitted volumes of stuff verifying national security without having to give the plaintiff, me, any such documentation. So, "ex parte" was null and void for one side in my dispute, while I had three consultants' testimonies disallowed due to violation of "ex parte", even though I hand delivered such testimony to the US Attorney handling the Navy's defense. mahak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 While doing your "pro se" case, make sure that you do not spend much time citing actual laws. These laws have no meaning, neither here nor in canada. The only value of written legislation, (ie. Code of Federal Regulations, US Code, and particular act or even Executive Orders) is how they are judged in a court of law. No precedent is established by the legislature, all precedence is established by the Judiciary. The only thing that should be cited in submitted legal briefs or affidavits, testimonies, etc is judicial rulings and case findings. In other words, look up the law, of course, but you also need to know how other courts RULED on such legislation. I wish I had a buck for every law I quoted uselessly. Sometimes, as with my cases, one may come across a law that has never been to court, this is what is sometimes referred to as a landmark case. This is trouble for one doing pro se. This is where I ended. Because mine was a landmark case, dealing with national security going thru changes during a post-911 transition, mine was landmark, and my "pro se" career ended. In order to continue thru US Court of Appeals, my next step, I needed a trial lawyer with constitutional experience. Haribol, ys, mahaksadasa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gHari Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 in court on February 06, 2007 So, we gotta like bustya outta jail or wot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 in court on February 06, 2007 So, we gotta like bustya outta jail or wot? No - but who here really cares what happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 No - but who here really cares what happened? I do! Please share! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Why would we even be reading here if we didnt care. Pick up them arrows, boy, youve got work to do, and reporting to follow. I mean, really, why do you think we dont care. gHari's got the rope, the horses, probably even some alliances with the northern tribes, and is ready for the move. Im kinda stymied because im from the province that has yet to be annexed by Mother Canada, but if things really get bad, Ill call up my Crip friends from south-central, and the eight treys and the deuces will be there. Im even owed by a mossad dude I befriended in the 80s. I like the political battle more than useless (and controlled) judicial battles. A few well placed letters by responsible people can do what 50 lawyers trying to make partner (by being sycopants to all dem judges) cannot. mahak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gHari Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 We never did figure out how Krsna's name became involved in the scuffle. Hopefully the judge did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 UPDATE: Okay so our noted application is proceeding on the point of the government agency's 'sacred' consultations and deliberations - we have to file the other items in a seperate motion and - of course - we shall be doing that. I'll have more to say when the judge has completed this case... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 We never did figure out how Krsna's name became involved in the scuffle. Hopefully the judge did. When the owner/operator of the EN employment agency snidely asked - "what's this krishna thing you're into?" - she had NO RIGHT to ask us that. She claimed that she googled my name [in 2002] and thus came up with some curiosity about it - of course - we do not accept that version from her - we have evidences that she was 'poisoned' by another - however - the employment agency desires to hide that fact. Later - after we called to the human rights commission to arrange for the complaints process we were told - "we don't cover krishna here" - by the commission intake officer [who then hung up the phone right after]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gHari Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Google that long ago? I doubt it. ed maybe, but not Google. Likely when doing reference checks on your resume they heard something about Krsna from a prevous employer. It seems you found out the hard way about the rednecks' opinion of them there airport-harrassling, homo child-abusing idol-worshipping tambourine bald sheet-wearing whackos. Some cities, thanks to large levels of Indian immigrants are developing a little class about Krsna. In Toronto, it is only the really unintelligent and uninformed sector that haven't gained at least some perspective on the issue. Frankly, I think it's all a godly plot to keep devotees out of the bars and away from the bottom-dwellers. If it gets too depressing just read the Gita sections about the modes of nature and the divisions of faith. You will see why they cannot see things clearly; darkness is their karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted February 13, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 ........ width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zrJKbjXh-M"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zrJKbjXh-M" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="600" height="350"></embed></object> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zrJKbjXh-M" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" height="350" width="600"> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvNPFPSZ-AA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="350" width="425"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts