[nfbmi-talk] Fw: MCB Public Comment - December 2011

[joe harcz Comcast]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Terry Eagle" <terrydeagle at yahoo.com>
To: "'joe harcz Comcast'" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 9:22 PM
Subject: MCB Public Comment - December 2011


> This pulic comment is in response to the messages and communications I 
> have
> received urging me to apologize for my vocalness during the Mark
> Rothenhauser case portion of yesterday's meeting.
>
> I feel no obligation to apologize for my vocal and public action during 
> the
> meeting in vigorous advocacy for the Board hearing the truth about the
> corruption involved in the presentation of the documents considered by the
> Board, and publicly used byJohn Scott to trash Mark Rothenhauser, and
> attempt to deflect or shift the blame and burden of proof to Mark,and 
> using
> documents that were never introduced at the hearing, orI defeated their
> admission to the record by my vigorous volunteer representation and 
> advocacy
> for the truth, at a disadvantage, caused by James Hull, Constance Zanger,
> Pat Cannon, the conspiring corrupt Administrative law judge's refusal to
> provide documents in a format usable to me and my licensee client, and I 
> am
> forced to show up at hearings with a reader I pay out-of-pocket because I
> know the materials used in a hearing presented by theMCB  SLA will 
> continue
> to not be provided in a format that is usable to defend my client from the
> failure of program staff to do their mandated job, and their corrupt 
> illegal
> acts, while they get taxpayer paid readers to advance their corruption.
>
> despite the overwhelming evidence I have exposed, or have attempted to
> expose publicly and otherwise in writing, only to have that evidence 
> ignored
> or further shoved under the carpet.  And I am to be concerned or worry 
> about
> Credibility?  And I am expected to sit back silently, while the exposed 
> and
> documented corruption, favortism, and pay-offs continue for some, while 
> the
> lives of other blind persons are literally destroyed?  Not to mention the
> enhancement of the lives of sighted persons at the expense of blind 
> persons.
>
>     it serves no noble cause or justice to arrive at the correct result 
> for
> the wrong reason, while ignoring or turning a Pat Cannon eye to the
> corruption underlying the continued injustice that violate the basic and
> fundamental due process rights of any citizen and literally destoy the 
> lives
> and livelihood of so many blind persons as I have seen done over the last
> four years, by the corrupt actions by Constance Zanger, James Hull, Pat
> Cannon, Leamon Jones, and their conspiring uncle Tom blind persons who
> benefit financially, sexually, and  through the protections corruptly
> granted them when they don't follow the exact same rules that are
> selectively enforced by the persons named and unnamed above.
>
> The showdown with John Scott could have been easily avoided, since I
> requested a recognizable "Point of Order" having to do exactly to the 
> advive
> formerly advised by Tom Warren to the Board having to do a complete and
> record being before the Board before even considering and deliberating on 
> a
> case.  I simply attempted with my valid "Point of Order" request and
> subsequent comments were to simply point out that of the 14 documents
> presented to the Board via email by Sue Luzenski, documents six, eight,
> eleben, twelve, and thirteen were never part of the official record, and
> further, the email that  was repeatedly referenced and used byJohn Scott 
> to
> publicly trash) Mark Rothenhauser was obtained through ex parte
> communication  frome BEP, admitted under the discretionary authority of 
> the
> administrative law judge.
>
> Hhow many times does it take for a case to come before the MCB Board to 
> get
> the facts and truth on the tableto stare in the face of the Commissioners?
> I assure this no sick Polish joke or trick question.  And the answer 
> should
> be very obvious-the anser should be obvious-once and only one time.  But
> recent history shows that is not the case.  .  The truth must come out, be
> recognized by the Board, and dealt with the Boars about the corruption 
> that
> occurred in the Rothenhauser case, and it will be done either through
> further administrative means or through litigation that the the Board will
> be forced to address and deal with the consequences of such rights
> enforcement and corruption by the agency staff once again.  So when all is
> said and done, and the fallout is dealt with the Board, I am confident it
> will be my vocal action at the meeting to get to the truth will ultimately
> be recognized and judged as correct, and will further be seen as an 
> attempt
> to protect the integrity and street "creibility" of the Boar, which I
> strongly sought to do, only to be threatened by John Scott to act agains 
> my
> client because of my insistence for incorporation of the truth.  I frankly
> don't care about my credibility because I know in my heart what I do and
> speak seeks to get to the truth, is my divinely inspired mission, and is
> solely designed to bring about good over evil, and if Jesus could accept 
> the
> will of our Father, endure and overcome the brutal pain and death of the
> cross for me, then I can endure what I must, as I am called to follow in 
> His
> ways.  Jesus was seen during his life as a rebel and judged harshly for 
> his
> search and demonstration for the truth thruth his words and actions, so I
> have a great role model to follow and guide me without worry about my 
> street
> cred here on earth.  And yet, you and the other Commissioners can relax in
> the comfort that I don't see myself angrily overturning tables as Jesus 
> did
> to get to the Truth!  So put away the proposal for bullet-proof table
> skirting and and security rent-a-cops.  And given my client service record
> with MCB, I doubt that Voc. Rehab will pay for me to attend the 
> marksmanship
> training at MCBTC.  Oh silly me, I forgot that was abolished as
> inappropriate for we the blind.
>
> Unfortunately, there is an attempt by the Board to appear so fair and
> uninfluenced by any party in any given case, that a common sense approach 
> to
> get to the truth is totally thrown out the window, only to have the entire
> process coming crashing to the street or sidewalk, guaranteeing injury to
> innocent bystanders.
>
>  How many times must I state I'd much rather be using my time and talents
> to be assisting operators with their business success, over revealing the
> corrupt, evil motives of incompentent staff and administrative hearings
> system, which to date nobody wants to confront and address.  Believe me, I
> do not see my role as us against the Board-we should be partners on the 
> same
> page toward thruth in action, the same way we on the Ad Hoc Committee is
> functioning so well as partners within a process.  The contempt toward me
> and others like Hazell must be curbed, if we are to survive as a viable
> agency serving the needs of blind persons, rather than the agendas of
> sighted staff an other sighted persons.
>
>
> Terry D. Eagle
> (517) 372-7552
>
>