Finally, well, its a start and I will of course sign.
I would be interested to know more about the police file, too.
Any info?
It would be better if we could work together.

Critical speculation is not denunciation, please try to lay aside any attachment to Hansard's bogus system enough to recognize the distinction. Having a 'belief' is indeed a subjective and individual experience, but any sane and reasonable mind would concede that this only exists within the perceptions/awareness of those who claim to have experienced whatever state or event. It has no objectiveness of itself.

For example I may well be thoroughly convinced by the psycho/emotional benefits of believing in the existence of Santa Claus, after all that is my experience and no on else can dispossess me of that 'reality'. However, that does not mean that an objective and rigorous examination of the known facts cannot convincingly demonstrate such a figure did not actually exist. Any objection I may have towards such an enquiry could not be sustained, in terms of any reasoned or logical defence. My opposition would be based upon a form of emotional denial.

I am beginning to think that some of Hansard's former associates suffer from this 'flat earth society' condition, a case of 'don't confuse me with the facts as I have already made up my mind'. This refusal to acknowledge the truth of Hansard's deception, and the curious desire to believe in the 'Dur-Con' fantasy, flies in the face of a wealth of information and testimony which has already exposed the myth. Denial of course can only be maintained for a limited period, before it is completetly overtaken by the facts.

So none of Hansard's unquestionning acolytes knew anything about the reported abuses? Seeming violations took place behind closed doors, while an atmosphere of spiritual tranquility and healing pervaded the centre? No shared sense of responsibility, or ethical concerns, just a cosmic ignorance, clouded by adoration of Hansard and his Dur-Con invention? Well if we are to accept a number of accounts which have appeared on this forum, it would seem the most appalling sexual and emotional abuse was inflicted, yet the fact is nothing was done to expose such behaviour. That is not an accusation but a factual observation. Those who blindly followed Hansard should ask themselves if such apparent violations could have been carried out in a vacuum. Why was it that Hansard was seemingly able to carry out such reported abuse for so long? What made him so confident that he could apparently behave in such an odious fashion, without fear of challenge or justice?

Hello All,

In dealings with Christopher Hansard did anyone encounter Michael Lyons/Singh aka "Dr. Mohan". Please see more information about him here:


[board.culteducation.com]


Peace.

Jeffrey, your expose of Hansard only appeared this year while the Rick Ross forum opened the end of last year. Prior to that, most people’s experience of Hansard was a thriving practice in London, a number of successful books with major publishers and numerous public appearances around the world. Abuse is a complex and cunning process. If it were not it wouldn’t work.

I think that the people who are contributing to this thread deserve respect and support. Through this we might achieve our shared purpose of putting a stop to Hansard’s activities.

Hansard has been publicly and openly playing this game for fifteen years now. Are we to condemn the bon community for taking so long to react? They were well aware of him when I broke contact with Hansard fifteen years ago.

Firstly, you will not be aware that prior to 1995 there was no Tibetan Bonpo in the UK, I know this for a fact. Indeed even now there are only four Tibetan Bonpos in the country, so I do not know exactly to which 'community' you refer. Secondly the majority of Bonpo are based in Tibet, those in exile live in scattered and isolated locations in the Himalayan foothills of India and Nepal, far away from the well-oiled deceptions Hansard engineered in Kensington and Chelsea. Would you inform me which Tibetans were working or associated with Hansard during the years when the reported abuse was taking place? If you have any firm information on this please do inform me and I assure you here publicly I will take this matter up to the relevant Tibetan authorities. Until such time as you are able to clarify that, would I be correct in concluding that it was not Tibetans, Bon or Buddhist, who were prostrating at the feet of Hansard, whilst clients were being abused?

I understand fully that these are sensitive issues, but those around Hansard who are in possession of a conscience would question their role, their lack of challenge, their silence, approval, and evaluate if they can be considered complicit in the reported catalogue of abuse, which was inflicted upon clients as 'Dur-Con'. It is a convenient excuse, and a denial of personal responsibility, to rationalize such inaction by projecting upon Hansard a range of 'dark arts', 'cosmic powers', and 'hypnotic energy' that rendered, intelligent human beings into compliant unthinking automata. As I sugested previously, it is highly unlikley that these apparent abuses were committed in a vacuum of ignorance, particularly given the number of years it seemingly occured. Somebody knew the story and kept their mouth shamefully shut, and I do not have any respect or support for such collusion, no matter how exotic or rarified the excuses. My sympathies are given to those who reportedly suffered as a result of Hansard, and to the genuine Bon culture of Tibet which he abused and exploited.

What is actually known, or been clearly stated, about sexual abuse by Mr. Hansard?

1. Actual sexual assault?
2. Actual sexual interference?
3. Inappropriate touching?
4. Inappropriate verbal comments?
5. Unethical invitations?

So the guy was sleeping around, and was sleeping with his assistant/apprentice or whatever she was. He may be a cad but this fact is somewhat irrelevent, other than that it speaks to character.

The subject of emotional or psychic abuse is a seperate issue.

Lieing, or maniupulating or other forms of spiritual betrayal is another seperate issue.

The exploitation of free labour is another seperate issue.

Misrepresentation of the Bon tradition is another seperate issue.

To know the truth here these issues need to be clearly deliniated, and spoken to. Otherwise, any of these things, to the outside observer, may or may not have actually happened.

Moderator. I have written two long letters and they were eaten by the internet. The log in was done then when I pressed submit, I hopped back to log-in like my letter had never existed, nor my log-in. Sheesh, this is a lot of writing!

Mr Bowe, you are really showing yourself to be quite a fanatical lunatic. If you just like the sound of your own voice why don't you stare at yourself in the mirror and shout out your ungrounded opinions because it really seems most of us here are really quite bored with you and your dogmatist rants and don't bother to read them anymore.

I am sure there is a greater Tibetan cause that would benefit greatly from your particular brand of enthusiasm but you are in the wrong debate here. You clearly have no experinece of the issues at hand and have nothing constructive to contribute.

Please just do us all a favour and shut up!

Actually Jeff, most Bon practitioners rejected the shamanic side of their history quite a long time ago, in favour of zhang zhung. Therefore it might be that Hansard uncovered something of that which Bonpos knowing nothing about. Only a clear, unbiased deconstruction of what he has taught could reveal the truth or lie of that. In view of Tibets history of warfare, secrecy, and patriarchy I find it absurd to think that we or anyone else knows the whole truth, including Bonpos. Hansard may be a skunk but we are never going to know the truth if we hang him first, skin him, and mount him on the arch marking the entrance to the City. Isn't the truth more important?

Hello

Well I have been spending to much time reading these messages and I am getting tired of it all, especially some of the boring rantings of some. I don't care about the bon or the zhang zhung the Tibetan cause or Dalai Lama's
I don't mean at all to disrepect anyone here who are believers.
I do care that the truth about this lunatic be told and he be dealt with. I have had to live with the results of his influence on my own wife and the attempt to gain control of my son. To see this person be taken down from this pedestal he has purched himself gives me nothing but great pleasure. The only question I have is how we can make this man be accountable for his Con.