mediatoruk:

If you are not a "practising lawyer" you have no qualifications whatsoever to offer anyone legal advice.

Your assumptions regarding libel/slander law are wrong and rather than being helpful to anyone are instead grossly misleading.

Others have previously threatened the Ross Institute with international litigation, but legal advice from practicing attorneys was sought that specialize in such slander lawsuits.

In brief, I am not concerned and am well represented.

Again, you have no professional basis to make any meaningful comments in this area. And your observations regarding Internet law reflect this fact.

You come across as little more than an "Internet troll" attempting to somehow subvert this board.

Hi Moderateor,

To highlight:

Quote

"If you are not a "practising lawyer" you have no qualifications whatsoever to offer anyone legal advice"

-Again, I said I was not attempting to offer legal advice. Please be claer on this.

Quote

"Your assumptions regarding libel/slander law are wrong and rather than being helpful to anyone are instead grossly misleading. "

-Grossly miselading? Fair opinion but I would dispute this much. Anyone who did the appropriate research would freely find I am talking from UK statute, UK case law, UK perspective.

You are taking this from A 'Rick Ross only' prespective. My posting discussion was from the perspective of the people who have posted, too.

Just found this article, pretty interesting, and worth a read:

[news.independent.co.uk]

Quote

"In brief, I am not concerned and am well represented. ".

-

I am not trying to attack you or make a case against you. This has nothing to do with me, although it is rather fascinating and interesting you must admit.

Thanks.

mediatoruk:

You again have demonstrated your gross ignorance regarding Internet law.

The lawyers for the Ross Institute have researched this issue.

Your assumptions regarding the law are wrong.

The actual issue would be venue. That is, where would a lawsuit be heard regarding a US Web site?

Care to cite a specific court decision that concluded on this specific point?

The Google case you linked to is interesting, but it is pending, not definitive and/or finally decided and upheld.

You say, "This has nothing to do with me."

Sorry, but you really come off as someone that is personally and emotionally invested in Hansard and is only here to subvert this thread through veiled threats and provocation.

Quote

The case you linked to involves a serch engine (Google) and not a Web site run by anyone in the US.

- With all due respect, if you are as versed as you say you are, you will know that case law provides a backbone for other similar and related decisions. Yes, this involves a US web search engine you are corect, run by a US company. I really doubt this case will be sucessful, but if it did, and you have obviouslky been following it closely too, it would provide a very interesting precent for ALL overseas businesses (vis-a-vis the UK) operating sites that are freely accessable from countries outside that jurisdiction.

Quote

The actual issue would be venue. That is, where would a lawsuit be heard regarding a US Web site

- I agree totally, you make good point. Thats a grey area, and can come down to where the information contained postings was being read but that is not definitive.

Quote

Care to cite a specific court decision that concluded on this specific point?

-You know as well as I do there are as lot of cases and none are definitive, some persusive. I can recall the Yahoo cases a few years back.

I'll give you points on the cross-border internet site issue.

This still leaves the case with libel, in regards the people who are posting. As you said earlier though, I don't want to intimidate anyone from posting. So best leaving that discussion for another time and place bewteen us, Moderator!

Thats all from me. Thanks for the discussion though and appreciate your free speech policy.

mediatoruk:

I never claimed to "versed" in Internet law, but do rely upon legal advice from reliable experts.

Now you claim that we "agree totally," and that you "doubt" the case you linked to will "be successful."

Again, your posts reflect the behavior of an "Internet troll."

You also lied when you said, "This has nothing to do with me."

Previously you posted here under the name "Frank Black" and openly admitted that you were associated with Hansard personally as a client.

Please understand that you broke the rules and are now banned.

Posting under two names is not allowed.

To whom it may concern:

Everyone on this thread should take note that Hansard and/or his fans are trolling here and that my previous suspicion regarding "Frank Black" has proven to be correct.

Frank was trolling and quickly accumulated 10 posts so that he could use the private messaging feature.

It appears that Hansard and/or his people are running scared.

Rick,

I think you were a little heavy handed here. I understand why you would be a little thin skinned in respect to legalese. However, the author brought up interesting legal issues which goes through many people's minds when posting here, and it was simply an oppurtunity for you to have the law clarified. It is also an oppurtunity for you to clarify what this board is about. Remember, Brits are not that familiar with the kind of freewheeling conversation common to these boards.

In my opinion, these boards are a lot like Speaker's Corner used to be. Anybody can say whatever they like, and be challenged accordingly, but in the end what people say may or may not exist outside of their own minds, and everyone knows that.

Don't they?

We should be aware that muddle and confusion are CH party tricks

Moderator...a note of appreciation for your reasonable and effective deconstruction of that individual's attempts at intimidation. As to legal threats I am sure there are number of people who would value greatly the opportunity to examine, in a court of law, the claims and activities of Christopher Hansard, or any of his supporters.

It would be very interesting indeed to observe Hansard’s [i:39e9576e65]Dur-Con [/i:39e9576e65]story being exposed under the objective scrutiny of the court. Moreover, it would provide an opportunity to investigate and address the reported abuses, and the role of those associated with Hansard?

One wonders who would be called upon to furnish, what would be desperately needed, and convincing testimony, to authenticate his story.

Call ‘Urgyen Namchuk’ To The Stand

Hansard’s mysterious ‘teacher’ does anyone, including the Master of Dur-Con know his whereabouts? Is he still alive? Perhaps relatives of that elusive ‘Tibetan’ can be brought forward? Or selected members of ‘his’ so-called ‘gNam tribe’ could be flown in, from where exactly? Maybe the Immigration Department of New Zealand could provide documentary proof of his arrival in that country?

Call Doctor Egbert Asshauer To The Stand

Ah! the German writer/researcher of Tibetan Medicine who praised Hansard in a book he wrote on the subject, he could surely prove a strong witness? Problem is that Christopher Hansard ’borrowed’ some copyrighted words of Doctor Asshauers and then asserted, in writing to me, they were the comments of HH the Dalai Lama, in recognition and support of Hansard!. The good Doctor assured me he threatened Hansard with legal action about this issue. Not such a reliable witness after all?

Call ‘Professor Amdongyapa’ To The Stand

Now this individual’s testimony should carry some weight and who better placed than an ‘academic’ who (according to ‘his’ review of Hansard’s book on Amazon) is in contact with the family of Hansards ‘teacher’. At last someone able to convincingly authenticate Hansard’s claims. The only difficulty is that not one Austrian University has heard of this ’individual’, who is stated on the review, as being from Vienna. Furthermore, this ‘person’ is, puzzlingly, completely unknown to the Tibetan Community in Austria.


Call 'Tsevegar Rimpoche' To The Stand

Now we are getting somewhere! A quality witness, no less than a Tibetan Lama, who can surely endorse, as genuine, Hansard’s Dur-Con. After all this ‘lama’ did write a glowing review of Hansard’s book on Amazon. Moreover, he is (according to the review) based in Dharamsala, India, and as a Buddhist Lama will be very easy to locate. Oh dear! problem is that incredibly despite several enquiries no Tibetan in that small Himalayan hill town has ever heard of such a person.

Call 'Dorjong Rimpoche' To The Stand

How fortunate, yet another Lama who can testify to the genuineness of Dur-Con, not only that but this ‘person’ has actually “taught Bon to many people in the East and West“ (according to his Amazon review of Hansard‘s book, submitted on exactly the same day as ‘Tsevagar Rimpoche‘s review, what a coincidence! ). Unfortunately there is no such place, in Mustang, Western Nepal, as the Tajit Bon Retreat, which is the address cited in the review.

Call 'Tsering Damchog' To The Stand

Now this person, who just happens to have also written a Amazon review, more fulsome praise of Hansards book, actually claims to be aware of Hansard‘s ‘teacher’ and ‘clan’. Now perhaps the case can benefit from some authoritative evidence in support of Dur-Con, particularly as this ’person’ is also a Bon ’teacher’ and thus makes for a very credible witness. Sadly, however the establishment (given in the review) as ’his’ address, the Nagpa Training School in Sikkim, Iindia does not exist. This could raise some difficulties in tracing this ’person’? However, perhaps the [i:39e9576e65]Master of Dur Con [/i:39e9576e65]has another address, and can indeed call upon ’Tsering’s’ testimony. Let us hope that the prosecution does not cross-examine’ Tsering’ on his supposed attendance at a Tibetan Medical Conference in Berlin (at which the review states he was present) as the prosecution can call upon genuine physicians of Tibetan medicine who were formally participating at that conference!

Such is the likely roll call of ‘individuals’ who could ‘authenticate’ Christopher Hansard’s Dur Con story. I, for one, cannot wait, particularly when contempating the probable, and very real, testimony and witnesses which could be assembled for the prosecution!

I found that to be a very educative exchange. Thank you rmoderator and farewell Frank Black.

Has everyone noticed that www.kum-nye.org and www.bonmedicine.co.uk have been taken down from the Internet?

Have you also noticed that www.bonmedicine.com is now only concerned with selling books? There is nothing of Christopher Hansard’s autobiography.

Now why would Christopher Hansard remove his autobiography from the Internet?

If you have concerns about Christopher Hansard and would like help stop him from practicing medicine please go to:

[www.gopetition.com]


There is another petition gathering signatures for presentation to local authorities and the police asserting Christopher Hansard’s right as ‘a member of the public’ to practice medicine.

If any of the signatories to that petition browse this forum I would like to ask them if they honestly believe that Christopher Hansard is a real life ‘thunder being’ who only drops in on planet Earth every 700 years and consciously designs in advance his life?

I would like to ask them if they think that the comments and experiences documented here on this forum are simply some mean and weird invention or do they accept that lying, bullying, sexual abuse, misdiagnosis are simply part of the medical toolkit of a ‘Master Physician of Dur Bon Medicine’?

I note that those curious characters Professor Sonam Amdongyapa of Vienna and Dorjong Rimpoche of Nepal have now disappeared from the ‘defend Christopher Hansard’ petition.

If you are really a friend of Christopher Hansard I would suggest that you would do better to support him in seeking medical help rather than investing your efforts in propping up this tragic invention, which is now crumbling around him.

If you or anybody you know has experienced ANY form of abuse in dealings with Christopher Hansard please do take your story to ‘Witness’.

[www.witnessagainstabuse.org.uk]

You can email them or call the helpline on 08454 500 300