272

Notice that the same option I talked about in another blog related to communicating through other than this corruption guy for those with him was also somewhat open to the guy himself. In other words, unlike me in my position, he could have delegated the responsibility to a different face that acts appropriately and would only return to him for merit related decisions.What was that on the procedural part of the negotiation that could not be handled by anybody else and had to be done under his directions? And we are asking this question for someone who makes people do all those things we see. But again, it is clear that he was playing all sides.  

271

I think that the time from 23 august when I made that last offer to this day involved multiple extensions. My  guess about how that went on is that the guy initially took the first extension in  exchange for the 30 days for executing the offer I mentioned in it. He then used that time to work on dragging those inside beyond what they initially accepted to go to get further extensions later, which is a behaviour pattern of his I talked about before, by changing their view  about his reaction to the preceding offer that gave him the choice .

Also, if there are multiple extensions, do you think that he really intended to comply with them but kept changing his mind in this shallow way? Frankly speaking I hesitated to answer that and ignored it until I remembered how, when I suddenly decided to answer his messages, I did not find him taking the risk of really leaving a single related message which shows the depth of his handling to the matter. 

270

Notice that I did not change the word "corrupt" to "chaos" in the title of this blog because I changed from what I wrote earlier. But I wanted to use a more comprehensive description that also include a significant part that seems to be undertaken because of moral reasons. I had no such issue with the lower courts since the difference between what they did and what they could have done was nowhere like here.

269

Like I said before, this guy was never left alone to his actions like the ordinary person would have been even with much less of what this one did and continued to do. The ordinary person would have been much more left told those are your actions and you are responsible for them and only if he shows some significant sincerity in trying to correct and change path from what he did a new path could open. On the other hand, a new path was much more easily opened for this guy . Then, also like I said before, even with this path he did not show what is anywhere to being sufficient efforts indicating that no negotiation door was opened to him before taking this court on the path he took it with him. Yesterday, in addition to that, I noticed how his insistence and not giving up on the plans and games he plays in front of those inside this court may actively show the difference between when he really wants to do something from when he plays around and use it as an excuse. 

268

You would think that by now this guy should have learned a long time ago that I so often know when he is behind things that happen to or around me without showing that. But no, his dilution of control still pushes him to play on himself obvious lies. So, while what I write about him is publicly available for him to respond, he apparently adds to his capability of communicating with this court or others what I cant see to respond, conducting on me, ironically enough, tests for character or quality attributes that may not lead the way he like to use them because I know he is behind them and, aside from other consequences of that, I may not be willing to be restricted by the false world he tries to force on me. 

267

I think the corruption guy convinced that judge in New York to issue that order only after he made a promise to settle that case merely in exchange for the issuance of that order. So in case he is squeezing others because of some past compliance or performance issues he should know that if this case settles for less than the offer in post#250 then not only it would not settles the New York case with it but the demand for settling that case would be in total with this settlement more than that offer in post#250.

266

Back to the guy himself. It seems that he did not take the offer, at least partly, because he wants to act like God and not in response to a deadline or an offer not sufficiently submissive. This same control issue seems to be also a reason in his going to this court. It is not that he really found me unwilling to settle. His actions were far from sufficiently supporting such claim. He simply did not want to act in compliance with what he was required to do because it means he is under the control of something. So he cancelled the control of this court, at least to my eyes, with the denial of my petition, to put me in a helpless position while he makes his contact attempts like God not under the control of anything.

By the way, I still don't know how that plan of denying my petition was intended to work. Supposed that I settled because of the thought that I am powerless with that denial how would that be just? Or was it supposed to merely serve the extremely unneeded purpose of telling me that those inside do not like the position of being against other judges?  

265

Again, beside the lack of morality in being on the side of this guy, there also seems to be a sever lack of dignity in existing there not even as partners but much more like slaves following his wishes no matter how much there is believe in the lack of wisdom in his choices. This actually was one of the things that I thought about seeing when I changed the offer in post 245 to the one in 248. That post removed even more any excuse for the inaction to call on this guy to take the offer or no longer be supported by those on his side who believed it was relatively a good choice, and I think there were many of them, if they do not accept to follow like slaves. Yet, there was still support for him afterwords like nothing changed.

264

On top of everything else , I just want to know if those who kept conspiring and working for the service of this guy against me really think he made good choices in his response to the offers I made or are they just that shameless in showing the level of their being slaves to him? 

Aside from other things, earlier before giving this guy the choice of post 248, wasn't I who  wrote all that complaining about how he always given new options to avoid ends that are supposed to be the consequences to his choices? So what was encouraging the imagination into a different reaction from me toward his reaching this end? He even has access to my thoughts about my understanding to what is going on, which suggest what I could choose to do, published on this board.

In addition, my requiring no phone use unless necessary in the first option of post 248 did not even counter his choice of insisting only on that communication medium to play his games with one that is mine. Instead it only required the exclusion of one medium and that is not the same as insisting on one.      

263

Compare the choice given to this guy to how I was put in a position lacking clarity in even indicating how what was going in dealing with the matter after the denial of my petition should be counted as internal or external to the process let alone a visibility to the consequences that is anywhere close to the one provided to this guy.  

262

Just in case somebody had lost his calendar, here is a little reminder. 

This corruption guy has been where there is a clear choice provided to him to settle this matter since August 13 and of which only between four and five days it was required for him to deliver his acceptance not through the phone.

261

Continuing with the post below:

However, to be more sure that I am doing my part here, I responded back to that phone call by leaving a message on the number the phone call came from stating that the guy should only call me if he is representing the other side or trying to resolve the issue on their behalf.  

260

Continuing with the post below

The caller did not state his relationship to the matter or even just that he wants to take a role related to solving the matter in general let alone in the direction of a settlement. All what he said is that he wants to ask questions related to the lawsuit. So there is not here what sufficiently calls on a reasonable person to take that call as something that could potentially resolve the matter or that it represents the other side in a way that other side would stand behind. Therefore this call cannot be reasonably counted as a valid communication attempt from the other side requiring a response back from me.

259

I spoke earlier in POST 244  about the kind of voice mail this guy left and here we go again with THIS ONE  . Is this how one would show or state representation for the other side in order to get a response back?   

258

If those in this court really thinks that it is even a little bit probable that this guy was unable to know my cell phone number then that could show how they are dangerously in a different universe regarding the situation with this guy. The FBI and CIA may fail to know it much before he does. Not only he knows the number but I have been witnessing what very strongly indicate to me that my location gets tracked and reported to him based on my cell phone despite that I set that capability to off.    

257

The corruption guy did much of what he did in my second case in New York despite his situation here. Even at this stage of the case he apparently did not hesitate to make the district judge issue that order. What would one do in face of such arrogance and corruption? You saw what choice he made with the recent second chance I gave him. This whole thing of dealing with this case while the petition is denied is probably also a result of his arrogance and need to be in control to begin with. I said that five years ago when he did all what he did in the stock of Viking Systems. I even wouldn't be surprised to see, despite all what happened here,  not just in the district court, if the case in New York reaches the appellate court, he would play like he did here if he can do that. I probably would be surprised if he doesn't do that.  

However, while it may seem insufficient as deterrent, and although I don't think I need to do this, at least partly for the sake of those inside this court, who apparently tried to manipulate me externally like an object where I cant see the choices that could be counted on me and negotiate from the position of having my petition denied , I decided to make the settlement offer mentioned in post # 250 for this case also include settling my case in New York.

256

Aside from the question of morality and quality of persons running the government here, I just want to know, how legally is it acceptable to engage in the deceptive practices even those supposedly in law enforcement local, and especially, federal government have been doing in service of this corruption guy? What kind of a deterioration is this for these things to happen publicly like there is nothing there? If sinking low convert itself to mass this country would be a black hole because of these things. 

This is not just quality sinking but one that is related directly to justice and applying the law.How could false claims like those made about the attack in Chattanooga go without prosecution?

In addition, locally here, the FBI has been having fun, for months now, making false claims about the existence of a gang, apparently operating only here, that abduct or hold bank executives or their relatives and try to force them to draw from their banks. 

How could anyone tolerate such dirt?

     

255

The guy is still required to act within the generally accepted behaviour when making his phone contacts. That include leaving a clear message stating the issue to which the call is related and the contact back information if his call is not answered. That is only required once until a contact back is made to him in the same way described here.

254

That, in #253, was combined with how the guy was trying to bully and threaten me away from making high demands. Then I noticed the potential similarity to the game he played in the Viking Systems stock where he gave those inside the capability to sell shares based on market price no matter what it reaches (for a stock that moved from below a penny to over a dollar a share within probably around 45 days) while he himself kept the price under pressure there (Although that was with help of the agreement itself through the empowerment of the big competing sides to get shares through less competition). I realized how the guy might not even had the decency to come with a new plan but was simply recycling that one to be used with something involving me again.

But that is far from being the whole thing here because the guy's believe in his power to manipulate people to do what he wants them to do apparently took him far off. While he was threatening me (indirectly of course) not to make high demands to resolve the issue, it seemed that he was also encouraging me to continue to fight. Understanding that fight as being related to my reaction to his phone calls highly strengthened and made clear a very probable picture and plan here.  

253

I had to see through the meaning of signs like that of  how the corruption guy was trying to distract me to steal time in short periods which did not sound to me to fit any suitable level of desperation here for someone not having a time limit on his attempts, or pretended attempts, to make a deal with me resolving the case .    

252

He had all his choices in front of him. I, on the other hand, the best assumption for what happened to me from this court is that I was being manipulated externally like an object. 

251

From the beginning of this matter in the market, through the courts, and to this point, the path of this corruption guy was one of clear choice making one after another. Actually, the making of choices seems to fit him at least sometimes more in a way crossing that of just selecting them to entirely inventing those choices for himself.

It is hard to find something calling for holding someone responsible for his actions more than this pure path of choice making. I even gave him what could be a second chance for an earlier choice inside it with the offer that expired today.   

250

THE NEW OFFER

The offer in post #248 has expired and I did not receive the required acceptance response. The guy has made his choice.

The new offer, which can discontinue any time before acceptance at the will of this speaker, does not contain the phone condition attached to the expired offer but the amount number has every digit in it changed to nine ("9").   

249

I checked and found no message, voice mail or otherwise, already left from the corruption guy before I posted post # 248 declaring his acceptance to the offer in post #245. So the offer in post #245 was replaced by the offer in post # 248 without the offer in post # 245 leading to any implementation first.     

248

CHANGE OF PLAN 

Despite how I was put in the dark not knowing my choices in what happened here, I decided to give this corruption guy even more choices for him to use from his already seeing every thing position.

The settlement offer in post #245 has changed. The amount is still the same but he needs to clearly inform me of his acceptance of this offer through reasonably acceptable communication method except the phone (both landline and cellular). In addition not any required part in signing or executing the settlement through the phone will be considered done unless it is accepted by the other party for it to be done through that or because of its being the only reasonable way of communication available.

   

On the other hand, if he wants his voice mail messages to count, he wouldn't need to wait long for that. All what he needs to do is not to accept the settlement as I mentioned above and it will expire on its own by the end of Saturday 8/22/2015. Then, unless for some unforeseen reason, no later than Saturday 8/29/2015, I intend to provide another settlement offer where he wouldn't need to restrict himself by what I said above .

The choice is his.

In both cases the settlement should be signed and completely executed no later than 30 days from being accepted by both sides.

Again, reasonable and acceptable behaviour is required.

However, I still intend to restrict myself by the earlier settlement offer if there is already a message from him stating his acceptance of it in my voice mail.