Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007
From: Patrick Hedemark <pdhedemark@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Prabhupadanugas Press
To: Nathan Zakheim <zakheim@earthlink.net>, Mahesh Raja
<mahesh_agtsp@yahoo.co.uk>
Hello Naranarayana Prabhu,
I will overlook your tone and get straight to the point.
Prove to me - that the BBT has to "attack" the claims of the BBTI.
I say that the BBTI MUST ATTACK THE CLAIM OF THE SRILA PRABHUPADA AND
THE BBT. PROVE ME WRONG.
THE "SETTLEMENT" OF THE LAST CASE WILL NOT WITHSTAND THE SCRUTINY OF THE COURT. IT IS BOGUS.
YOU CLAIM THAT THE BBT IS LEGITIMATE. I ASSERT THE SAME.
This FACT - stands alone.
You now wish to pay attorneys to go into court to make this claim and
have it established by the court.
My claim is that it WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1972 BY HDG SRILA PRABHUPADA IN
THE CALIFORNIA COURT ALREADY! IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE RE-ASSERTED OR
RE-ESTABLISHED.
THE BBTI NOW CLAIMS TO HOLD THE COPYRIGHTS. THEY DO NOT - AND WHAT IS
MORE - THEY KNOW THAT THEY DO NOT.
THAT YOU ARE CONFIDENT MEANS MERELY THAT YOU ARE JUST AS SURE OF THE
REALITY OF THE SITUATION AS ANYONE - INCLUDING THE MEMBERS OF THE BBTI!
NOW MY POINT IS: THEY WILL - IF PRESSED - NOT WISH TO FACE THIS IN
COURT. IN THE LAST CASE THE JUDGE TOOK THEM ASIDE AND KINDLY TOLD THEM
- IF I ADJUDICATE THIS, YOU WILL LOSE. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
NOW YOU WISH TO SPEND MONEY TO DEFEND A CASE THAT WOULD AGAIN NOT BE
ADJUDICATED BECAUSE THE BBTI WOULD AGAIN ATTEMPT TO "SETTLE".
THEY BROKE THE LAW, PRABHU. NOT HANSADUTTA OR SRILA PRABHUPADA. WHICH
IS WHAT THEY CLAIMED TO THE RANK AND FILE. BUT THEY DID NOT MAKE THIS
CLAIM IN COURT. THEY COULD NOT. THEY COULD NOT SHOW LEGAL CONVERSION OF
THE ASSETS OF THE TRUST, AND THEY NEVER WILL BE ABLE TO DO SO.
DESPITE YOUR DRAMATICS IN ADDRESSING THIS TO ME, YOU MUST SHOW ME THE
LOGIC OF YOUR ACTIONS.
AS I EXPLAINED: SOMEONE MUST SHOW THEMSELVES TO BE INJURED IN PERSON OR
PROPERTY TO BRING THIS TO COURT.
WE PRINT - IN MASS - AND PUBLISH THE TRUE DETAILS OF THE FIRST CASE TO
THE WHOLE WORLD, THE BBTI IS THEN FORCED TO ACT. THEY WILL HAVE ONLY
ONE OPTION: SUBMIT TO REALITY OR GO TO COURT - WHERE ALLLLLLL THEIR
CRIMINAL ACTIONS WILL BE FORCED UNDER THE MICROSCOPE OF THE PRESENT
LEGAL SYSTEM.
AT THAT TIME - MAYBE - WE WOULD NEED TO PAY ATTORNEYS - HONEST MEN - TO
DO THE NEEDFUL, BUT IT IS THE BBTI THAT WOULD NEED TO SHOW INJURY.
HOW COULD I STEAL YOUR STORE - YOUR WIFE - YOUR CAR - WHILE YOU ARE ON
VACATION - THEN WHEN YOU COME BACK - SUE YOU FOR DAMAGES WHEN YOU SET
UP ANOTHER STORE NEXT TO MINE? THIS IS THEIR POSTION, AND WHAT'S MORE,
THEY KNOW IT.
Kindly show me - sans the insults - WHY IT MUST BE ADDRESSED AS YOU SAY.
I WOULD - AND I AM SURE OTHERS WOULD AS WELL - NEED MORE THAN THE FACT
THAT YOU HAVE A TEAM OF ATTORNEYS "WHO MET PRABHUPADA AND CONSIDERED
HIM SAINTLY" AS JUST CAUSE. THE ESSENCE OF SALES IS RAPPORT. WHETHER
YOU REALIZE IT OR NOT - THEY ARE SELLING YOU THEIR GOOD INTENTIONS BLAH
BLAH... I AM NOT IMPRESSED BY THAT.
WHAT IS NEEDED TO CONVINCE ME IS SIMPLE ENOUGH. THEY MUST EXPLAIN - IN
THE KINGS ENGLISH - WHY EVEN THOUGH THE BBTI BROKE VARIOUS LAWS AND
ILLEGALLY LAID CLAIM TO THE ASSETS OF AN IRREVOCABLE TRUST DULY AND
LEGALLY ESTABLISHED IN THE CALIFORNIA LAW - THE "VICTIM" OF THE THEFT
NEEDS TO ASSERT ITS CLAIM IN COURT WHEN ALL THE LEGAL PAPERWORK AND
RECORDS ARE THERE AND ARE IMPREGNABLE.
I do not find such logical explanation in your words—only passion, and
though passion is good, it needs to be led by the head. So kindly offer
me justification for this "tactic" in the overall strategy to increase
book distribution!
Respecfully,
Praghosa