If you want to read this paper from starting please click on the below links:
- Where is Poison? (Part-1)
- Where is Poison? (Part-2)
- Where is Poison? (Part-3)
- Where is Poison? (Part-4)
- Where is Poison? (Part-5).
- Where is Poison? (Part-6).
Clinging To the Abhorrible / Further Questions for Dhira Govinda
| Part | Title | Page in PDF |
| 7.1 | Responses Evade Relevance, More Clarity Requested | 1 |
| 7.2 | Stale mate, Tie, Or Sudden Death? | 5 |
| 7.3 | For one who is Honored, Dishonor is worse than Death! | 6 |
| 7.4 | Strategic Questions Like a Grand Jury | 8 |
| 7.5 | Concluding Thoughts | 9 |
| KEYS: For origin of comments in this dialogue. | |
| Black | = mayesvara dasa commentary |
| Sky Blue | = Scriptural & other documented evidence. |
| Small Dark Blue | = URL links to supportive external sources |
| Green | = Dhira Govinda & other P-Con propaganda (Like: Kill Guru Become Guru (KGBG)) |
Highlights of Part-7:
- A jury is not interested in how things seem to you. Truth is determined by definitive evidence some-times assisted with the focus of an opinion that is acquired by an expert witnesses.
- Further investigation was done as Tom Owens requested. We got one of the best toxicologists in South India to study the cadmium allegations and he said there were NO symptoms of cadmium poisoning. We got an LA detective with 30 years of experience in criminology and he said no sane district attorney would ever take the P-Con seriously based on the flimsy allegations that have so far been presented. What payoff is driving you to completely disregard the testimony of these expert witnesses. What is driving you to cling so tightly to Nico’s well documented mali-cious agenda, madness, narcissistic reputation and your own prejudicial opinion?
- It is embarrassing how much focus you give to the presence of the word “poison.” That alone proves absolutely nothing as I elaborately explained in section: 6.1 The P-Word Alone Means NOTHING! How closely did you read that chapter?
- Chapter 8 is all about Dr. Morris work and it is 50 pages long. If you got the impression that I took his research “Lightly” what did I specifically write to give you that impression?
- You may not have reached the same degree of celebrity as Dr. Phill, but you do have your own fol-lowers that look up to the example you set. As a highly trained counselor and personal coach, you know that the biggest opportunities for one’s own growth hides behind the things that we have the greatest re-sistance to look at. All of this applies to me as well and I have found that it gets easier to admit our errors after one does it a few times. In regards to the P-Con, there is a big significance between the motive of those who continue to promote it and why I felt compelled to write DECEPTION. It has now been shown that much of what was included in the opening assault “Someone Has Poisoned Me” is misleading, an-tagonistic, and in several cases intentionally dishon-est. Although Nico and yourself offer diplomatic statements about simply wanting to know the truth, the P-Con itself is aggres-sive, accusatory and offers no sign of genuine truth seeking. Those behind the P-Con are the aggressors and it is my moral duty as a brahmin to defend devotees who are falsely accused of MURDER! Especially now when I have irrefuta-ble court-worthy evidence that vindicated them.
The material that has been used to attract P-Con support fails to meet the standards of evidence in modern jurisprudence which is the best system we have to administer justice. It may still have many flaws, but it is far more re-spectable then taking the law into one’s own hands by rousing up a lynch mob possie. It is clear that Nico do not feel Senior devotees deserve this minimal amount of legal protection… he has petitioning others to join his lynch mob mentality. But don’t you feel devotees are entitled to at least that amount of protection? Nico has clearly stated he prefers this matter be heard in the form of the (prejudicial) public opinion. That is a euphemism for a lynch mob be-cause no court would hear this case. At best it rests entirely on the way a few people interpret some short phrases in a conversation on November 9th 1977.
To read Part-7 in full kindly see the attached pdf: