THIS IS THE REAL DAWN NARET’
*******************************************
GOD BLESS THEM EVERYONE…
MAY THE PASSING OF THESE BLESSED CITIZENS MAKE US MORE DETERMINED TO REJECT THE ENEMIES OF DEMOCRACY.
*******************************************************
THIS ARTICLE IS A “RE-PUBLISHING” OF MY ORIGINAL
“CHENEY EMBARRASSES BUSH WHITE HOUSE WITH PROPOSAL FOR PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD”, BY DAWN NARET’
(SORRY, SOME PHOTOS STILL NEED TO BE INSERTED)
**************************************************************
CHENEY EMBARRASSES BUSH WHITE HOUSE,
WITH PROPOSAL FOR
PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD”
BY DAWN NARET’, MARCH 24, 2008

**********************************************
NATIONAL FLAG OF THE
COUNTRY OF “PALESTINE”
PRONOUNCED “PHILISTINE”
BY BIBLE AND BY NATIVES

**************************************************
DEFENDERS OF PALESTINE (photo)

*****************************************************
MAP OF THE “COUNTRY” OF PALESTINE

***********************************
IRAQI HOMELAND DEFENDER AND SHITE CLERIC -
EX-VICTIM OF SADAM HUSSEIN

*********************************************
FLAG OF LEICHTENSTEIN
***************************************************
CREST OF LEICHTENSTEIN

VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY

POSSIBLY SAYING, “I WAS BETTER AT POLITICAL SCIENCE THAN AT HISTORY, GEOGRAPHY, RELIGION OR ISRAELI DECEPTIONS….BEWARE OH ‘SCRIBES OF ISRAEL
******************************************************
**********************************************
PALESTINE, IRAQ,
LEICHTENSTEIN AND
AMERICA…….
WHAT DO THEY ALL
HAVE IN COMMON ?
TOGETHER, THEY ARE
ALL ONLY A SMALL FRACTION
OF THE CURRENT TOTAL
GLOBAL AGGRESSION
AND THEY ARE ALL
VICTIMS OF OCCUPIED
TERRITORIES
FLAG OF LIECHTENSTEIN (photo)

****************************************************
CREST OF LIECHTENSTEIN (photo)

THE TRUTH…
THE WHOLE TRUTH…
AND NOTHING BUT
THE TRUTH !
THE COUNTRY OF PALESTINE HAS EXISTED AND REMAINED ALWAYS, AND REMAINS TODAY, A SOVERIGN, INDEPENDANT NATION, SINCE BIBLICAL TIMES IT WAS “FORCED” TO CEDE A PORTION OF ITS LAND, TO THE COMMUNIST RUSSIANS IN 1948.
THIS WAS WHEN THE WORLD REFUSED TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS OF PALESTINE AGAINST COMMUNIST AGGRESSION.
TODAY, THE COMMUNIST ISRAELIS’ (DIFFERENT PEOPLE FROM THE RELIGIOUS, SINCERE, JUDEAN ISRAELIS’) ARE DECEIVING THE WORLD ,THAT THEY ARE POSSESSORS OF ALL THE LAND AND WILL POSSIBLY CONSIDER CEDING A PORTION TO THE PALESTINIANS…..
WHAT ! ! WHO IS COMPLETELY BACKWARDS OF THE TRUTH ON WORLD HISTORY ? ! !
(THIS IS A VERY LONG 4 PART COMMENTARY, THAT I JUST HAD TO GET OFF MY CHEST, BEFORE I DIE……)
PART ONE – IS AN IMPORTANT CONCERN OF HOW WE, AS A NATION, ARE HANDLING FORIEGN AFFAIRS AND PARTICULARLY OUR ATTITUDES TOWARD MUSLIMS AND THE MIDDLE EAST.
PART TWO – IS PRIMARILY A SMOKERS RIGHTS VALIDATION OF HOW CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, OF SMOKERS ARE BEING BANNED. BUT, I HOPE ALL NON-SMOKERS WILL READ IT ANYWAY, BECAUSE I EXPLAIN A THEORY THAT THE NON-SMOKERS ARE BEING USED AS PAWNS, IN A GLOBAL ENCROACHMENT OF WORLD DOMINANCE AND DO NOT REALIZE HOW MUCH HELP THEY ARE GIVING THIS GROWING CANCER.
PART THREE – IS AN EXPANDED COMMENTARY ON THE “CURRENT CIVIL WAR”, THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE BEING EXPOSED TO, VICTIMIZED BY AND ENSLAVED FOR, WHILE WANTING TO BELIEVE THAT IT IS ONLY COINCIDENCE.
PART FOUR – IS AN EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVE ANTI-AMERICAN ECONOMICAL WARFARE, THAT HAS BEEN AIMED AT THE ECONOMY OF THE UNITED STATES, WITH THE INTENTIONAL, SPECIFIC GOAL OF SEIZING THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
“Cheney Embarrasses Bush White House, On Statehood For Palestine” begins here:
In reading a Pittsburgh Tribune news article, “Palestinian state ‘longoverdue’ – Cheney”, of Mar. 24,2008, I could not have felt any more embarrassed, for our apparently biblically uneducated and spiritually unenlightened V.P., than I did at that moment.
Poor Mr. Cheney is not the first to commit the atrocity of geographical blundering, in discussion of Palestine and the history of the Middle East, and I ‘m sure he will not be the last.
The issue is, Palistine is already a COUNTRY!…..WHY would it require consideration as a State??
The COUNTRY of “Palestine”, is a western pronounciation of the original and current name of the COUNTRY, which is pronounced “PHILISTINE”, in the bible and in the modern language of the residents there.
PHILISTINE IS “PALESTINE”.
It is ALREADY a country….has always been a country, since BEFORE the time of Abraham,……continued to remain a country after a PORTION of it was occupied, fought over and finally recognized, by Global Peace Advisors, as the STATE OF ISRAEL.
(repeat – photo) MAP OF THE “COUNTRY” OF PALESTINE, (PRONOUNCED “PHILISTINE” BY THE BIBLE AND THE NATIVE RESIDENTS LANGUAGE OF ARABIC

(photo) PHILMAP11
(photo) lgmap11.JPG
Unfortunately, according to the current international rules, this procedure, of aggression and forced seceding, continues to be an accepted mode of global government transfer of power and recognition
So, America would have to be treated the same as thus and such. What would we do, if we were invaded by aggressive terrorists or Communist aggressors.
My father immigrated here, before World War 2, because the Communists took over his homeland. I would have had an entirely different life, a better life, if I had been born in his beautiful country, before the ugly aggressors spoiled it.
My father and his siblings left. Those who did not leave either fought and resisted silently against the government or became part of the communist party, by force.
(photo) VADUZ, LIECHTENSTEIN.
Those who maintained silent resistence, would probably be called “Terrorists” today, with the ease that the term is being misused against innocent defenders of homelands who are fighting against communist aggression.
Many of the so called “TERRORIST” groups, being so labeled by the U.S. and other Western Governments, are actually the original, authentic owners of lands and historical decendancy, that has been invaded and now robbed of all their possessions and their country, so they are desperately fighting back.
I state this info and share photos of my fathers country, because Communist Aggression arrived there and created great misery for the people.
Now, I am convinced it has arrived here…………..more realistically physical, than the 1950’s “We will bury you, from the inside…” – (slow infiltration plan) quote of Nikita Crusczchev, but in an aggressive, fully matured and fully assuming authority under every possible disguise and manipulation of legislation and economics of this country.
Would WE, AS AMERICANS, not do the same thing, if an aggressive group came here and announced that the U.S. Government “does not exist anymore” and the aggressors, therefore own the country and all the people now?
How VIOLENTLY might we fight back ?
AS VIOLENTLY AS NECESSARY TO GET THEM OUT OF OUR COUNTRY !
That is what the Palistinians have been doing for 60 years, with no compassion or help given by any other country.
That is what the Iraquis are doing now, only it is the U.S. that has “OCCUPIED” their land and holds the keys to their treasury.
(photo) MUQTADA ALSADR WAS A SHITE COUNTRYMAN VICTIMIZED BY SADDAM HUSSEIN,
FORCED TO ORGANIZE IRAQI DEFENDERS…..AGAINST THE “BATHE” PARTY OF SADDAM’S GOVERNMENT.
THEY WERE NOW RETURNING AS “THE AMERICAN MANAGED GOVERNMENT”…..ALREADY SHOOTING THE SHITES’ THAT THE AMERICANS SWORE TO GO THERE AND SAVE FROM SADDAM.
NOW CALLED “INSURGENTS/TERRORIST?” BY U.S.
WHO DROPPED THE “SAVE THE IRAQI SHITE PEOPLE BALL”………?
WHO ACCEPTED THE COMPLIANT ASSOCIATION OF MUTADA’S SHITE GROUP, INTO THE NEWLY FORMED GOVERNMENT, AS “CO-OPERATIVE COUNTRYMEN”,
AND AND THEN OUSTED THEM, WITH REFUSAL TO PERMIT THEIR OPINIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR PROTECTIONS FOR THE SHITE PEOPLE.
NOW YOU CALL THEM “INSURGENTS/TERRORISTS” BECAUSE THEY FIRE BACK AT IRAQUI SUNNI FORCES OR U.S., WHO ARE STILL KILLING THEIR VICTIMIZED PEOPLE ! !
THESE ARE HORRIBLE ATROSITES THAT OCCUR WHEN THE PEACE KEEPING BRIGGADES ARE MANIPULATED AND DECEIVED AS TO WHO THEY ARE HERE TO PROTECT.
The USA and many Christian groups, also became deluded into believing that all nations must back and support the State of Israel, because it is “written” so, in the Bible.
That’s it ! Bottom line ! God demanded it, or even the Christians will go to hell if they do not comply. (?)
WHO’S BIBLE says this? Our King James version of the Christian Bible contains all the promises given to the Israelites (NOT Israelis), who were given that name by God, because they were the decendants and followers, who were obediant to the teachings of the Laws “of the God” of ISRAEL (later named Abraham).
But, it also continues with additional facts and orders, from the same God, found in Isaiah, Judges and 1st Samuel.
These occurred AFTER the Egyptian exodus and AFTER the mercy of forgiveness, given to them for worshipping the golden calf And THAT, it is also “written”, in:
Judges Chapter 10 verses 6 through 14, (I wrote this out for the sake of those non-christians, who may not comprehend “JUD 10:6-14), as well as numerous pages of historical reading in the books of;
Judges, 1st Samuel and Isaiah, on the country of Palestine/Philistine and the aggressions against it and against the other middle eastern countries, by these people calling themselves after the Israelites, but not following the Laws of Abraham, in their actions…
(PHOTO)DOME.jpg
These writings, and all similar writings found in 1st Samuel, Judges and Isaiah, support the “OTHER” people in the Middle East, and must be looked at by these “peace seekers” and taken AS seriously, as they took the MIS-information about our “condemnation”, if we don’t support only Israel.
In JUD 10:6-14, we read:
(6) And the Children of Israel did evil AGAIN in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim (Satin), and Ashtaroth………(and a long list of others)……..And forsook the Lord and served him NOT………..
(7) The anger of the Lord was Hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hands of the Philistines and into the hands of the children of Ammon (Jordan)……………….
(10) And the children of Israel cried out unto the Lord saying, “we have sinned against thee, both because we have forsaken our Lord and also served Baalim “. (Satan)………….
(11) And the Lord said unto the children of Israel, “Did I not deliver you from the Egyptians and from…..(long list of other mercies)……
(13) Yet ye have forsaken me and served other gods, wherefore I will deliver you NO more.
(14) Go and cry unto the gods which ye have chosen. Let them deliver you in the time of your tribulation.
Does THIS sound like God will condemn ANYONE who will not support Communist-backed Israel?
God himself is condemning those members who chose satanic gods and practices, over the God of Israel.
I think the good Jews of Israel have learned a great lesson, and have tried to remedy the weaknesses and errors of their ancient ancestors.
But, in my opinion, the Israeli GOVERNMENT needs to be guided and overseen with a clear understanding of their TRUE status and position, which is minimal and inferior to that of the government, of the COUNTRY of PALESTINE.
They need to accept and realize that they took a portion…..But NOT the COUNTRY.
They need to realize that the PORTION they took, is in great peril of being lost, with continued resistance to peace and co-operation with the leaders of the COUNTRY of Palestine, and nearly every other country, on the globe, that will no longer tolerate their blatant refusal to stop aggressive attempts to seize and destroy other settlements in the COUNTRY of Palestine.
History has proven that EVERY TIME the Israelis have agreed or signed a Peace Treaty, they have VIOLATED it within 1 to 2 days, with renewed attacks or oppressions against the neighboring populations.
These crimes against humanity can no longer be tolerated.
(photo long st.)
This is the “Honorable and Just” attitude, that all of the Middle East has been patiently waiting for the United States to stand on, in its evaluating and negotiating all proposals of Peace in the Middle East.
(photo – 4)
The United States, MUST STOP erroneously supporting the continued Communist-backed and supported, criminal and terroristic acts, of the government of Israel, against the natives of the COUNTRY of PALESTINE/PHILISTINE, and all other Middle Eastern countries….
READ ALL OF:
EXODUS,
Joshua 4:23
Numbers 27:23,
Joshua 3:1
Historically, the Hebrews repeated their offences of paganism and these later writings condemned the Israelites for rejecting the mercy and returning, once and twice, and as many as thirty times again, to the practices of paganism and rejection of the practices of the Law of Abraham
(which all good Jews follow) and for warring with the loyal natives of these countries who DID obey the commandments of God.
They even warred with the Hebrews of Judah, who are our modern day “Good Jews”, of the orthodox, conservative and reformed sects of Judean Jews, in every country.
Is this an attitude of bigotry, or anti-semantic?
Absolutely NOT! I happen to be very PRO-JEWISH for the Jews who conduct their lives in compliance to the Laws of Abraham.
(photo) MOM_AND_BABY.jpg
I ADORE and RESPECT JEWS!
I feel more compatible with most Jews than most Christians, for the main reason that the Jews don’t attempt to come off as ‘perfect piety in the flesh’.
They make jokes of “trying harder when you’re second” and such good humored non-self-inflation, that you can’t help but to love them. What’s not to love?
The problem comes in when the non-compliant-Law of Abraham members of Israel and all of their seized geographical areas, and the non-Jewish, uneducated political aggressors, from other countries, team up in evil doings and make the “REAL JEWS” look bad !!
Now I must condense, to have space to make my point.Mr. Cheney, before you erroneously spout out any more embarrassing rhetoric, about Palestine seeking the right to become a state………
(WHOEVER SUGGESTED THAT PROPOSAL ! !).
Palestine is the COUNTRY, already in existence and continuing to exist as a COUNTRY since Biblical times ! !
You should look in a “Strong’s Concordance”, for reference information on every sentence, in the bible, that contains the name “PHILISTINE”, which IS “Palestine” and which IS STILL AND ALWAYS WAS, the spelling and pronunciation of the name, of the COUNTRY of Palestine, in Arabic
(which is THE middle-eastern language of the people of all the middle-eastern countries).
We appear absolutely STUPID, every time a non-middle-easterner spews on about Palestine becoming a “STATE”.
Why should they request the right to become a state, when they are already a COUNTRY?
They never ceded their country when the Communists, financially and militarily, backed and sent, Russian Jews and Russian Christians AND RUSSIAN ATHIEISTS, to help the Palestinian Jews to seize a portion of the COUNTRY of Palestine from the natives of Palestine, those who were the residents in this Biblical COUNTRY for thousands of years.
I already quoted a Russian Christian, in my article :
“An American’s view of Islam”, available in the Library of Congress, copyright Oct. 1992), explaining why the Russians, who wanted the Russian Jews OUT of their land, had come to Palestine to take the Land for them and the Palestinian Jews (inspired to cecede from Palestine), and admitting that he was 1 of the original warriors who took it.
He was under the employ of Communist Russian personnel and financially backed by Communist Russia.
That backing was maintained, quietly and continues even today.
The Palestinian Jews did indeed “SECEDE” from the COUNTRY of Palestine and created the “State of Israel” (choosing the name themselves), in 1948. I revealed only the 1st name, of this witness, which was “Alex”, in my 1992 article.
Today, it is necessary that the world leaders recognize that the COUNTRY of Palestine was NEVER erased and will never cease to exist.
(photo – bridal dress)
(photo) – bridal-dress)-ramallah.jpg
But, also as a nation, we must separate the Russian people from the Previously -Russian Communist Government.
They (the Communists) no longer dominate the political decisions and do not control Mr. Putin or his people and are not the philosophy of the many good Russians who have migrated to this country, ever since heroes like Mr. Lek Walenska and Mr.Putin, achieved a democracy and a freedom to travel, that they never had under Communistic rule.
The good Jews are not our enemy, the good Muslims are not our enemy, the good Russians are not our enemy………so who is?
We find that answer in the Bible, Ephesians 6:12;
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”. (In the end times, it is not nations or principalities that you will war against…but against the forces of evil holding authority in high places).”
You cannot name a country or a people as the enemy. That is the predicament governments have been facing, the last 3 decades of unexplainable twistings and turnings and increased turmoil worldwide.
These are the same evil forces that constantly lured the ancient hebrews back into pagan practices and ungodly acts.
So, it is the same force of evil that lures previously honorable politicians and governments to be blinded, of the truth and to err in judgment, committing “crimes against humanity and nations” and even against “their own people”.
Israel was a prophet of God and later, god bestowed the name of Abraham or Abram on him, and his followers then followed the law, of the God of Abraham. So the Israelites were the obediant followers of the phophet Israel, now Abraham, who taught them the laws of God (hence, the laws of the God , of Abraham,).
They were, at that time, still called Israelites (not Israelis, nor the modern-day Russians who invaded the country of Palestine). The Israelites were also a portion of the Hebrews, taken as slaves in Egypt and liberated by Moses, during the exodus with Moses.
Moses could have just rounded them up and left, but the Egyptian army would have just followed and attacked them.He tried to get the Pharoh to agree to their exit and promise to not follow them.
But after many weeks of proving that the God of Abraham was stronger than the pagan Gods of Egypt, the Pharoh was still not frightened of the God of Moses and refused to release the people.
Finaly, after some frightening displays of miracles, Pharoh feared that this God might be stronger than his pagan god and he released the Hebrew slaves to leave with Moses. It was during the Exodus, that Moses was divinely given the Ten Commandments.
Moses had gone up into the mountain, to pray and was spoken to, directly by God, and the Ten Commandments were etched onto stone tablets, at that time. He descended the mountain, excited to give this gift to the Hebrews and found them worshipping a golden calf, that they had built in his abscence.
Moses ROARED at them, insulted them for the pagan activity, then told them God would forgive them, if they destroyed the pagan idol and returned to him to obey the Ten Commandments.
They returned and then wandered 40 years, on foot, from Egypt north to Jordan, heading for their “promised land”, that God had said would be their settling place for all time.
(Here begins extention of part one – location of the “promise land”)
Joshua 1:3, King James Bible
“And Joshua rose early in the morning; and they removed from Shittim, and came to Jordan, he and all the children of Israel, and lodged there before they passed over.”
The book of “Exodus”, Which is also the “TORAH” gives the entire account, step by step, city by city, of the Israelites leaving Egypt, in the far southern tip of the middle east, and traveling north, to the “Promise Land”. Moses died along the way and his younger brother Aaron took over as leader.
There was a rebellious bunch (the ones who built the “golden calf” to worship), mixed in with the obediant believers (the true “Jews – obediant believers”). The rebelious ones were still practicing paganism, learned during their childhoods in Egypt, while the hebrews were held as slaves there, and did not turn from it.
They wanted only warring and looting of cities, everywhere they went. They were warned, by God to “not war with these people…this is not the land I have promised you”. They kept traveling north, along the west side of the Jordan River, with the river and the country of Jordan on their right, as they headed up north.
They were as far up as Syria, and were told to “NOT war with these people”. Syria is very far north of Gaza and Cannan and Jerusalem, and Syria was STILL not their promised land.
Then, at Shittim, around Iraq and Iran, which were BOTH one region of Persia, in those ancient days, they were told to cross OVER the River Jordan. This would take them RIGHT, toward the east to cross over Jordan.
Controversy has sprung up, that Gaza or Cannan or Jerusalem or Palestine/ancient Philistine was promised to them, but THIS IS AN UNTRUTH.
They were ordered to NOT war with Syria, while UP THAT FAR NORTH and they were told that “this is not the land that I promised you” and they were ordered OVER the River Jordan at Shittim. This placed them in ancient Persia, or Iraq and Iran.
(photo) MAP11
Abraham’ homeland was in persia and his wife, Sarah, is definetely buried in Param, Iraq.
Now why would God send them to Persia ?
This was the land of their tribe. This was the land of their inheritance. There does exist, a very large Jewish population, to this day, that are possibly true , authentic decendents of the original REAL “Israelites”.
But these folks in Palestine/Philistine are not the same people.So,
IF Americans truely BELIEVE that they MUST obey the bible….
Then SHOW MORE RESPECT AND CONSIDERATION TO; THE IRAQIS’, IRANIANS, PALESTINIANS, SYRIANS AND JORDANIANS ! !
Now, remember, these folks are ALL cousins with the Jews.
The first born child of Abraham, was Ismael born of Hagar,…and he is the accepted ancestor of the Muslims.
The second born son of Abraham, was Issac born of Sarah,….and he is the accepted ancestor of the Jews.
These folks SHOULD NOT BE WARRING ! !
Now, here is a MOST IMPORTANT BIT OF INFO………..The Muslims hold their ancestor Ismael as their link and evidence of original and authentic decendancy from Abraham.
So, By their blood line to Ismael and by their even more important obedience to the laws of God…….THEY ARE ALSO “ISRAELITES” OF A PURE GRAIN ANCESTRY.
Decendants and followers of the laws of the God of Abraham.
The Muslims ADORE abraham.
They hold him in very high regard. When the Kabaha’ was built as the Holy Shrine, in Mecca, The Holiest of men were given the decision of what would be placed in there. One of the most valued posessions, that they decided on was o small group of stones that are said to have come from a hand built prayer alter, built by Abraham, while he was traveling in the arab territories.
The Holy men argued over who should have the honor of placing them in the shrine and it was Islamically agreed that all 4 men should have the honor. They placed the stones in the middle of a blanket and the 4 each took an end of the blanket and together, in peace and islamically, they carried the stones to their place of honor and rememberance.
They remain there still today. These are the stones of the prayer alter of Abraham, their ancient ancester, through the blood line of Ismael.
This does NOT reduce the authentic claim of decendancy, from Abraham, of the Jews, and the entitlement of the Promised Land, because the Muslims know that they are not the ones taken as slaves to Egypt, or who were guided out of Egypt to cross the river Jordan.
They were staying in all their own various lands that they had migrated to, over thousands of years, and were living lives obediant to the laws of the God of Abraham, which were essentially the same as the “Islamic” laws of today.
That’s why Muslims believe that Abraham was the 1st Muslim. Because they believe that he was the first to truly devote himself to obedience of the laws.
By the time of Mohammad, the laws had been forgotten, erased, changed or ignored, during a rebellious wicked period of humans and had to be restated by the angel Gabriel, to Mohammad, who took had them written into the book ,”The Holy Quran”, and taught them to his people who rededicated themselves to the laws of the God of Abraham, giving the name of “Islam” to the religion, which means “PEACE”.
So we have the Jews AND the Muslims proven to be blood line “Israelites”. We have Abraham as a baby born in Iraq, where his ancestral home is and we have BOTH Muslim and Jewish decendants of his living in iraq and Iran.
These are all GOOD HOLY PEOPLE. The problem is, as it always was….”the builders of the golden calf” are still living among them, disguised as one of them, still possessed and controlled by evil, still impostering the faith, of both the Jews and the Muslims, depending on what they wish to accomplish…they can be either.
We have those people, combined with the cash and global dominance intentions of the communists, who are compatable to them in their atheistic beliefs and lifestyles and they serve as tools and co-operatives, around the globe to disrupt, create division among the people, cause distrust in the governments, inspire civil wars, bring down governments loot all the economy and enslave all the citizens.
That’s what they do, they’ve been doing it for eons and they are doing it today.
They are imposters of the faith, in every faith.
They are imposters of the people, in every level of government and daily industry. They are imposters of authority, slandering, terminating and destroying viable business foundations. And they are imposters of humans, doing evil destructions with no conscience or compassion toward those who’s lives they are destroying.
The United States is under attack by them, and does not reccognize it as an attack.
They work occultly, behind the scene, undercover,behind disguises and false identites.
They have recruited the blacks, the southern rich and poor, the north, east and west, the same, always blending in and pretending to be one of the regular people.
They lure the regulars into vulnarable situations, until they have something to blackmale them with or use it to control their co-operation. The blacks have been one of their strongest armies.
They were promised full freedom from prejudice and control of the land, if they joined in. Many blacks don’t even know that there are several levels, higher up than their regional leader, who are white and controlling “all yawls asses”.
They are cunning, appear professional, have all the right education and respectable backgrounds but, they are theives and murderers hoping to take over this country for their own personal profit.
They are all over the world, with these intentions and have sucked in several of the largest and formerly stable governments to co-operate with their “GLOBAL ASPIRATIONS”, which they always give the impression that the new recruit will come out a winner, but in the end…..they keep no witnesses, to the deception they pulled off. No one will win except them. Who ARE they??
They are every weak minded, spineless, lazy, selfish, arrogant, rebellious, militant pea-brain that allows themselves to be lured into evil, blackmailed, controlled and used as a tool to turn their government over to communist rule. It is the same in every country on the globe.
We cannot be babes in ignorance about what motivates some groups to do evil. We cannot allow ourselves to trust in superstition. And we cannot continue to support a government that is clearly committing “CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY”, and use the excuse that the bible tells us to support them. BUNK ! !
The bible also continues to tell you additional facts and orders,from the same God, found in Isaiah, Judges and 1st Samuel, whichoccurred AFTER the Egyptian exodus and AFTER the mercy of forgiveness,given to them for worshipping the golden calf.
What is the problem ? ? These Imposters ! !
That’s my strongest theory, based on many decades of watching their patterns and practices. There are simply imposters posing as both sides and instigating problems between them, because they want to get rid of ALL of them and take their lands and wealth.
In the State of Israel, we have a communist government, that moved in there and took the land from the Palestinians, in 1948, using the russian Jews as the excuse and their scapegoat and then as their “poster Boys” to collect sympathy and donations.
The “Token” Jews, sat up in front, on the government balconies, they were sincere and honest. Moshe Dayan, Golda Meir, Rabien… but were controlled by the communists, while accepting foriegn aid and donations from Americans and all the world during the HOT years of the Cold War with Russia.
They did all they could for their people and they were honorable leaders. They were as compliant as they could be to the communists, but NEVER gave up their priorities to their religion and to their people.
That same parental love and protection, is not available to modern day Israeli Jews. It is all about Money and Power, much the same as the citizens of the United States feel they are being neglected and placed in vulnerable situations, unfairly, by the activities of war and aggression by their parentally protective government.
READ ALL OF:
EXODUS,
Joshua 4:23
Numbers 27:23,
Joshua 3:1
I am going to expand expression on some very important issues here, that are relevant to the swirling occult activity, that is occurring and injuring our American society.
These activities are, in my opinion, evidence that the American citizens are under the constant manipulation and controlling efforts, of Communist Aggressors, to very discreetly and permanently, erase the freedoms and the Constitution of Democracy in this country.
The key word is “DISCREET”. They prefer that you do not even realize that dangerous changes are being made, to our laws, to our economy and to our thought processes and philosophies, that motivate our unconsciencous and ignorant acceptance of their evil doings….because they always present them as “good benefits” that always have ulterior motives and serve no good at all except to further reduce freedoms and democratic rights.
These issues are a division tool against the people, with 3 specific examples examined being ;
smokers vs. non-smokers,
blacks vs. whites
and blacks vs. blacks.
This occult activity seeks to divide and conquer, while it presents itself as a non-threatening entity, and often as a positive, friendly, public information source on the good benefits of socialism.
They are only 1 group of several infiltrators who have been recruiting and manipulating, for decades, on all our college campuses. Now, those grads are in government jobs and corporate management positions.
Or worse, they stand available, to the side, ready to come in and takeover or reorganize our “needs” when asked to do so.They lure us to believe that Socialism is not really a baiting lure of the Communist Party and that what co-operation we give the Socialists, will not be helping any of the Communists to expand or openly seize control of the Socialist Party.
Even though the Communists have nurtured it, in every country, since its infancy and also lured the arrogance of people to believe that the Socialists nor the Communists will never try to seize control of the world.
We have manipulations of Communism occurring right here, right now. They are in the form of breaking down freedom and rights and our sense of safety and security. They are dividing to conquer. IE: Non-Smokers against smokers, blacks against whites and blacks against blacks.
We have credit bureaus now empowering discrimination by rejecting people for housing and employment, “on their say so”, with “bad credit reports”. Etc…….etc………etc.Meanwhile, much of our housing industry and national economic slump has been attributed to credit rejection on “willing to buy” consumers.
WHO GAVE THEM THIS STATUS OF GAGEING A PERSON’S TENANCY OR CREDIBILITY? WHO GAVE NON-BANKING INSTITUTIONS (such as potential landlords and employers) THE RIGHT TO SEE PERSONAL CREDIT HISTORIES?
These credit reporting agencies have already created loop-holes in our constitutional “NON-DISCRIMINATION IN JOBS AND HOUSING” LAWS.
Why would a landlord have the right to trespass into your credit history?
Are you able to take his building on your back and escape with it, leaving him a physical loss?
There are eviction laws and processes that protect him from ANY loss if a tenant enters financial crisis and cannot pay their rent on time.
HOUSING OR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION IS AGAINST THE LAW, UNDER ANY EXCUSE.
Potential employers have now also begun to take the “CRIMINAL TRESPASS ROUTE” by demanding an acceptable credit report, before hiring.
JOB DISCRIMINATION IS AGAINST THE LAW, UNDER ANY EXCUSE.
What right would they possibly have?
They are not even paying you in advance or fronting anything that could amount to a loss to them. What could they possibly offer as an excuse for this criminal trespass?
And worse, for the possibility of illegal job discrimination?
These lapses of Proper Judicial Protections, for the citizens, are a main source of economical decline in this country.
If citizens are left vulnerable to criminal trespass and illegal discrimination in jobs and housing, they are left without income, spendable cash or taxes due, that contribute to the ever revolving cycle of cash flow for the whole country.
Somewhere, in the “white-collar insanity revolution”, a decision was adopted that “blue collar Americans” were “the enemy” and were not to be given any benefits, rights, protections, or consideration, in the decision making process of national management and planning of both business and administrative arean as of National Policy Makers.
We have been licked into the ever expanding jowls of the encroaching Socialist/Communist beast, who trains its “owned peoples” that they will have NO FREEDOM, NO RIGHTS, NO PRIVATE BUSINESS, NO JUDICIAL PROTECTION, NO NOTHING THAT IS NOT SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE “PARTY” ! !
We are almost completely there. NOW.
Mr. Cheney, can you see the problems?
Can you see why it is not permissible to assume that a country does not exist, just because a radical Communist influence, that already seized a portion of that country, wants international acceptance that the remainder of it is now up for grabs?
Can you see the portions of the United States that have already been seized?
4Because, they have set up “twins”, functioning as government, that call themselves as “Senator” and “State Representative”, etc. and are ready to go into full function at a moments notice.Should we make you apply for Statehood?
Could you handle the economical and judicial responsibility, or should we just turn the treasury over to Israel so it does not get foolishly spent?
Do you recall when the U.S. guaranteed Arafat $600M, to develop and stabilize the Palestinian government? The U.S. handed the money over to Israel, Why?
There are many questions to be resolved, but whether the COUNTRY of Palestine should apply for Statehood is not one of them.
WHAT IF…America was invaded by an outside country of people and they blocked off our food supplies from entering our cities?
WHAT IF…They also blocked off our roads and obstructed us from getting to our work or recieving income…?
WHAT IF…They came storming into our homes and forced us to give them up or to live in only one bedroom, while they walked around carrying gunsall day?
WHAT IF.. you took it to court to complain that these people would not get out of your house and you were told that even the 400 year old deed, that has been passed down from generation to generation, is not good enough to prove that you are the owner?
WHAT IF…these kinds of loss of Judicial Protections were evidence that they had taken over our Judicial Systems as well and were also taking the white house and the state capital positions?
WHAT WOULD YOU DO? Would you have secret meetings with your neighbors? Would you gather together your hunting rifles? Would you try to form a make-shift army to protect your homes and your families?
Would you fight back and demand them to back down and remove themselves from your property “OR ELSE”?
Do you think that you would be labeled a “TERRORIST” ?
These are the very things that the Palestinians have been suffering with for 50 years, AND ALSO THE THINGS THAT THE IRAQIS’ NOW.
When the U.S. first went to Iraq, it was to free the citizens from a dictator, that was killing his own people.
These were the Shites and the Shites Kurds. The Americans were praised and appreciated by most of the Iraqi people.
But when they did not turn the government over to its own people,they became uneasy. Then, we know that outside “infiltraitors” began arriving and created confusion as to who was who and who was the enemy.
Soon, America was announcing that they are hunting and killing the “Kurdish Infiltraitors” and the “Shite Militia”. These were the people we went there to save !! Why were we now killing the Iraqis’ ??!!
Did they discover “imposters” of Iraqis’? I CLEARLY read accounts of Iraqi Shites being called the enemy.
Was it possibly because Sheik Muqtada Al-Sadr had gathered his neighbors and formed an army and were trying to defend their lives and their homes?
The Holy Quran forbids aggression or first hit wars. But, permits self-defence and even commands Muslims to stay in their homes and defend their homes, if they are invaded. Is this possibly what the Al-Sadr group has been doing?
Trying to get the Americans to give up the government of their country and get out?
WOULD WE BE DOING THE SAME THING ?
What about after they labeled us the “infiltraitors”?
Would we feel frightened that they are no longer trying to help our country, but that they are actually murdering the residents of that country?
How did all this confusion and role reversal begin?Iran was being blamed for supplying military weapons. Iran is a Muslim country.
Muslims are obligated to provide help and assistance to any Muslim country under attack or invasion. It is Commanded, by the Quran, and considered a MORAL DUTY.
Are they now looked at, by the U.S., as indirectly attacking the U.S., because they are giving the protection to the people that the U.S. has been killing?
Is that why we are now hearing so much retoric about “BAD IRAN”?
Iran is MUSLIM! They will NOT stand by and watch their kindred people being murdered, not even if they themselves had had wars with them, and I am relieved that they are giving the help that they provide!
Why are these babies being pushed through this HORROR ?!! These were people at peace, for the most part, except between them and their dictator leader.
And suddenly, America came and tore a hole in their country and economy and now they are all homeless and hunted and unemployed unless they accepted the rule of the American managed government.
They were NOT the people who attacked Kuwait either, they were the victims of those people. Remember, they are shites.
Saddam was sunni and his army was sunni sect religion and bathe party politicos. They were always against these shites and treated them deplorably.
Now America is backing the same sunni army that attacked Kuwait, and hunting the shites down, as “insurgents” ? ?
Has the ghost of Saddam Hussein possessed their brain? ?
Al-Sadr was a compliant co-operator in joining in and wanting to be a part of the new free government of Iraq.
The people were not resistent to U.S. guidance, but the U.S. would not leave and would not let them have fair say and authority over the Sunni Government Folks, who had been the army of the dictator!
They possibly would have accepted it more, if they had been given more representation and say in it.
As far as they could see, it was just about to become the same ol’, same ol’ that it had been before, with the Sunnis’ in charge and the Shites in victimization.
America needs to follow the example of IRAN and stop insisting that they act according to the same IMMORAL code and conduct that the U.S. has been acting.
All this may have seemed as though I veered far off the course of Palestine…..But that is far from the facts.
First, I wanted to show the similarities between what happened to the Palestinians and how they became labeled “TERRORISTS”.
Next, I wanted to show the simili of how these things have almost repeated themselves, in Iraq, only now the invaders are the Americans.
And I also wanted to inject a shake-up of the American thought process to clear the retoric and automatic brain reflexes, that we have been brain-washed with and bring it to a personal level and comprehension, of what these people are going through and why they are completely changing the character of their lifestyles and philosophies….because they have no choice!
They MUST Defend or Die!!
This is no longer something that we can tsk tsk about…what a shame…oh well, got to do the ironing…
People, WAKE UP !!!
It is our boys who are over there killing innocent people under orders and while they are over there and having their lives put into unnecessary increased danger from the unplanned and unapproved slautering of civilians. our boys do not want to be doing this and their relatives, at home do not want their lives put in jepardy, while on “peace keeping” assignment and their families do not want to become the “victims of revenge”, that this kind of insane, inhuman activity could result in.
LOOK AROUND…we are living a current civil war “right here” with loss of Judicial Rights, and corruption everywhere that we COULD be the next country to face invasion.
We need those boys to get OUT OF THERE TODAY !!
The signs are everywhere.
We already have Americans fighting Americans and nearly ALL of our Judicial and Government System has been eroded to blatent victimization and intentional criminalization of the American citizens and the courts approve and help our abusers and invaders!
read my personal evidences at:
“STALKING CRIMINALS ON INTERNET” IS A BLOG SITE WHERE I EXPOSE THE CORRUPTION THAT I AM BEING ABUSED WITH.
I am still waiting to see what got the Americans so confused that they started to attack the very people that they went there to save?!!
Please support a “UNITED STATES CITIZENS AGAINST DIVISION OR DESICRATION OF FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS”.
DAWN NARET’
P.O. BOX 2315
PITTSBURGH, PA, 15230-2315
*****************************************************************
“How corrupt employees, at the pa state dept. of transpertation stold my pa driver’s license and possibly sold my identity.”
CLICK ON LINK: www.stalkingcriminalsoninternet.blogspot.com
to view ALL letters and documents, including the official court order, that they defied.
**THEN COME BACK HERE, BECAUSE THIS ARTICLE CONCERNS MORE THAN JUST MY PERSONAL ISSUE.
YOU ARE AT: http://www.dawnnaret.wordpress.com
“HEY BUDDY, CAN YOU SPARE A LATTE?”
CLICK: doc3.doc here, to view ONLY pdf physical copy of ”COURT ORDER”, forbidding PA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION to cancel my license until a judge has determined that they have a valid excuse….WHICH THEY DO NOT !!!
YOU CAN SEE THE PHOTO COPIES OF “ALL” THE LETTERS AND DOCUMENTED CORRESPONDENCE ON MY OTHER BLOG SITE: “STALKING CRIMINALS ON INTERNET” AT: http://www.stalkingcriminalsoninternet.blogspot.com
TO VIEW ALL LETTERS AND DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THIS VICTIMIZATION AND ATTEMPTED CRIMINALIZATION OF AN INNOCENT U.S. CITIZEN. THEY WILL BE UPDATED AS THE COURT BATTLE PROGRESSES.
IS IT A COINCIDENCE THAT AT A TIME WHEN 911 IS BRINGING ABOUT ACTIVITY OF INCREASED “BORDER PATROL” TYPE IDENTITY INSPECTIONS, AND WE CANNOT TRAVEL ON PUBLIC TRANSPROTATION, WITHOUT PHOTO I.D., THAT PA DEPT. OF TRANS. IS YANKING AS MANY PA DRIVERS LICENSES, AS THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH, EVEN IF THEY HAVE TO GO BACK 20 YEARS, AND THERE WAS STILL NOTHING THEY COULD USE AS A VALID EXCUSE.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ALL THESE CITIZENS WHO ARE NOW FORCED TO EXIST WITHOUT LEGAL I.D.?
IN MY OPINION, THIS IS AN ATTEMPTED CRIMINALIZATION PREPARATION PROCESS. YOU MAY BE ABLE TO PROVE YOUR IDENTITY, IN OTHER WAYS, BUT IN THE MEANWHILE, YOU COULD BE HELD TO ACCOUNT AND UNJUST CHARGES OR ASSUMED GUILT, IN A MATTER UNTIL YOU DO CONVINCE THEM.
I READ, IN THE NEWS, THAT MEXICO IS COMPLAINING OF AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM, MOSTLY ON ITS SOUTHERN BORDER. BUT IN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH, ALMOST OVERLOOKED, WAS A QUOTE, FROM A “U.S. BORDER PATROL” PERSON STATING THAT THE U.S. HAS BEEN TRYING TO MAINTAIN CONTAINMENT, ON ITS SIDE, AND IT IS AWARE THAT MEXICO HAS BEEN ARRESTING PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE LEGAL IDENTITY ON THEM ! !
THAT WAS THE U.S PERSON, SPEAKING OF TRYING TO MAINTAIN CONTAINMENT ! ! THEY ARE TRYING TO KEEP US IN-N-N-N THE U.S?
IF YOU WANT TO VISIT MEXICO SAFELY, YOU JUST NEED TO SHOW YOUR U.S. I.D. NO PROBLEM WHEN ARRIVING OR LEAVING. BUT, APPARENTLY, THESE PEOPLE COULD NOT ENTER LEGALLY, OR HAD THEIR I.D. STOLEN WHILE VISITING. WERE SOME TRUELY TRYING TO ESCAPE U.S. VICTIMIZATION AND DANGERS?
WHY ARE WE BEING VICTIMIZED SO? WHAT IS THE MOTIVE FOR CREATING A SITUATION THAT COULD LEAVE CITIZEN’S SO VULNERABLE TO MANY BAD EXPERIENCES? ARE THEY HELPING THE IDENTITY THIEVES? ARE THEY THEMSELVES, THE IDENTITY THIEVES OR THE ILLEGAL PURVEYOR OF STOLEN IDENTITIES? THIS IS AN EXTREMELY SERIOUS MATTER ! !
BECAUSE I AM A LOYAL AMERICAN…I CHOSE TO BELIEVE THAT THESE ACTIVITIES ARE BEING CONDUCTED BY CORRUPT EMPLOYEES OR IMPERSONATORS OF GOV. EMPLOYEES AND NOT THE TRUE POLICIES OF OUR STATE GOVERNMENT. BUT THAT COMFORTING BELIEF WILL NOT SPPED A RESOLVING PROCESS, SHOULD I ENCOUNTER 1 OF A POSSIBLE MILLION BAD EXPERIENCES THAT COULD RESULT FROM NOT HAVING A LEGAL PHOTO I.D.
BUT BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THESE CRIMINALS, WHO EVER THEY ARE, HAVE CHOSEN TO DEFY A COURT ORDER AND JUST SENT ME A 2ND AND A 3RD LETTER OF THREAT TO CANCEL MY DRIVERS LICENSE. They just changed the cancel dates and are trying to steam roll right along. I am trying to get copies of all these letters on here. It will be done!
(I DID MANAGE TO GET A COPY OF THE COURT ORDER OVER HERE, CLICK BELOW ON FILE ”dc_2501623″. IT NEEDS TO BE ROTATED TWO SPINS TO BE UPRIGHTED. SORRY, I TRIED TO SAVE IT UPRIGHT, BUT PDF FILES CANNOT BE ALTERED.)
dc_2501623
The citizens of PA are being harrassed, terrorized and in many cases, forced to leave state, due to these abuses. 20 years ago, I had a temporary residense in ALABAMA.
I legally turned in my PA license, when I arrived and recieved it as renewed, when I returned to PA. When I left ALA and returned to PITTSBURGH, PA, I was not under any suspension or cancelation when I left. I could have kept my ALA license, but I did not want it, any longer, I was going back to Pittsburgh, PA.
For 20 years, I have had my PA license back, renewed 3-4 times, with no violations. Now they want to refuse to renew it for some trumped up excuse that, according to their new national computer system, I have a problem in ALA that needs to be resolved.
I contacted ALA and got my written record from them. “License cancelled when I left state, no violations, no problems”.
I gave this to PA and they issued me my license. Scroll down at the end of this notice to see the new license, with current “fatter me” picture. 1 week later, they sent me a letter that they want that license back, but I can appeal if I want to.
Just more harrassment. I already gave them the 3 year abstract, from ALA, which is all that is required with this national computer license check system, WHY IS PA GOING BACK 20 YEARS TO TRY TO FIND AN EXCUSE TO HARRASS ME AND CANCEL MY LICENSE?. That is abusive and illegal intrusion. They only have a right to review the 3 year period that the other states review.
The verification from ALA was not accepted. so I got a COURT ORDER to stop them from their criminal activity, until I can get some legal, honorable members of our justice and political system to take a look at these horrible abuses.
In spite of a court order, they blew it off and RESENT the letter with a different cancel date to stagger appeals hearings, thinking they can imprison me in this state with repeated abuses.
I have had the same license number for 45 years. If I should lose that number, an identity thief could have it issued to them and be accepted as the authentic dawn naret!
They did this to me with my P.O. Box 505, Pgh., Pa 15230 address that I had about 15-20 years. now, I requested to have my old number box back, that I closed when I moved to ALA, and guess what? I am told that I cannot have it back unless I pay 3 years rent on it !! What the heck is THAT ?? That is corrupt employees !! I did not owe any rent on the box. The system is that you pay by the 10th of the month that your paid time expires in and if no renewal payment is received, they lock you out. You never get a chance to get 3 years behind !
They have kept me from having my original P.O. Box number and now they are trying to keep me from having my original drivers license number. If I let them get away with cancelling my PA license, I cannot travel outside the city of Pittsburgh on public transit of plane, train or bus!! You have to present a valid current photo I.D., before they will issue you a ticket now.
I suppose that is has a lot to do with homeland security, and I don’t mind………..as long as I am still free to travel at will !!
I asked the PA Dept of Trans. “What will I do, if they should succeed in taking my license, even temporarily, until I can get the legal truth straightened out ? Will I have to use a State Photo I.D. ?
Guess what his answer was …..”WE don’t issue State Photo I.D.’s to people who have had their drivers license canceled.” (I’m screaming a seamans’ cuss vocabulary to shame by now, inside my head !….) You cannot get a State I.D. if your license has been canceled…..Isn’t that what the State I.D. was created for, was to provide verified photo i.d. to those who DO NOT DRIVE ?? !! How can they get away with these imprisoning abuses ?!
Now, since I am a disabled person, living on social security disability, that, I believe in my soul, is already being embezzeled of two thirds or more of the cash benefit amount, now I stand with a more serious chance of NOT being able to protect myself, by stopping the identity thieves from having my address changed to theirs or moving out of state, with MY social security income, and leaving me totally penniless of income….AGAIN !! And I can’t go, because I’m not allowed on any public transportation without I.D. !!! It’s almost as if the State is helping to make things easier for identity thieves
DO YOU SEE A CONSPIRICY HERE ???? And I have witnessed that every time someone mentions “conspiricy”, they are dragged off to a psych consult and soon institutionalized and declared “incompetent”, so their income is no longer turned over to them and they do not manage their own affairs any longer, but an court assigned person, whom they might or might not have ever known, takes over the receiving of their social security check and they are given “allowances” from this person, which are supposed to amount to 100% of the social security check. But some judges and Depts. of social services have determined that a % of the check may be kept as a service fee for managing the victims money.
I have witnessed instances where a person receiving $1000 a month benefit check, was only getting $30 of the money handed over to them by their assigned person. ABUSSES !!
I also scream abuse because I suspect that my identity has been sold by corrupt criminal employees of PA STATE GOV. or criminals trespassing into their computer systems and using their form letters, signed by their legal employees. I am also suspecting that it was sold by corrupt staff of a woman’s shelter that I was forced to stay in, while waiting for disability and section 8 housing, that I am still being refused on and discriminated against, after 3 applications I was never given any housing although, while sitting there the 2nd or 3rd time filling out yet another application and being told that there is a 2 year waiting list, I witnessed the young black female clerk make a phone call to a cousin and tell her that the money is coming in on Tuesday, and to be here at 8am and she will get the cousin all signed up…..ABUSE !
And now, guess what, someone, using my name and gave the section 8 office in west moreland county, an application with an address that I; never put on applications and which was never put on my drivers license and luckily, I recieved a letter about the application in the mail, and will follow-up on to investigate.
It was approved for section 8 in West Moreland County, 2 months ago, but I never got the letter in my P.O. Box in time to accept, even if I wanted to. Did they back date it? Was it held out of my mail box? Why did it take 2 months to get to me?
It is toooo strange also, that I have, in the last 1 month been thinking that I need to get out of Pgh. City and get to better air, for my health. West Morland County has been 1 of the 2 areas I had thought to look into. But, It’s too late, there is already someone there using my name and I will have to fight off the duplication and slander, because these people are criminals….they do not lead clean, wholesome lifestyles the way I do.
I am currently fighting to stop them from canceling my drivers license, which has been in good standing for 20 years!
I will publish these letters as soon as possible with the whole story, although, publishing is getting harder and harder, because I am a poor person on social security disability, I cannot afford my own computer and have to go to the Carnegie Library, Pittsburgh, PA to do all my computer work. AND YES, I HAVE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS… THESE ARE ALL VALID MISERIES THAT I HAVE TO PUT UP WITH EVERY DAY AND I AM GETTING VERY SICK AND TIRED OF IT ALL.
This Library was at one time a very reputable institution that was donated to the citizens by Andrew Carnegie, a 19th century industrialist who was philanthropic in many areas of life and endowment projects in Pittsburgh. But times have changed, The trust fund that Andrew Carnegie set up to manage these free public Libraries and a super large Museum of Art, Natural History, and just about everything under the sun, has been seized by people, who, in my opinion are not of the caliber to be entrusted with an endowment trust as large as the Carnegie Institution.
One of the board members has recently been imprisoned for fraud and embezzelment from city government accounts where she worked as an employee. the caliber of the people are extremely questionable. I hold the opinion that 70% of the treasures in the museum are missing and have been replaced by recent cheap displays of no value.
and beyond the museum, the computer dept. has been sabotaging work and in my opinion obstructing the poor people from accomplishing any basic needs work, like job hunting and house hunting. We have such a problem with trespassing and obstruction that you files disappear completely, get converted to encoding without your permission, get removed from your floppy disk completely e-mail is erased and diverted temporary files that are supposed to disappear are still popping up by accident 3-4 months later while you are fighting with the machine to give you back your work that it just stiled off the screen and up pops a file that was stolen 3-4 months ago.
The illegal system has already been under investigation and I hope that they take it all the way to removing the current system completely, because we cannot even respond to e-mail resume’ submission on corporate accounts.
I wasted years of effort job hunting in the public library, only to find out now and to obtain evidence that these horrendous acts of discrimination and obstruction have been intentional practices of the staff of a very criminal system. I never give up effort and I will get all the letters online one way or another. It was a fighting miracle that I got the copy of the court order on here, even if you do have to click to view it, at least it is visible.
dawn naret’
******************************************************************
DOCUMENTED LEGAL BATTLE WITH THE PA STATE DEPT. OF UNEMPLOYMENT. I SERVED AS MY OWN ATTORNEY, AND WROTE EVERY WORD OF LEGAL COMMUNICATION MYSELF. – DAWN NARET
EXIBIT #1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
NARET v. UCBR NO. 1742 CD 2004 (2004) BY DAWN NARET’, ATTORNEY FOR THE APPELLANT
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:This is an appeal of the final determination of the Unemployment compensation Board Of Review, (hereafter referred to as UCBR), which ruled, on July 17, 2004, that claimant was not entitled to Unemployment Compensation Benefits, (hereafter referred to as UC Benefits).
On February 7, 2004, the Unemployment Compensation Department ruled that the claimant was eligible for unemployment compensation benefits under section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law
On March 12, 2004, a service-contract company from missouri named TALX filed an appeal to that determination claiming itself non-legal agent of the employer. A hearing was held April 21, 2004 before referee, Marilyn Gunden. A local employee of the employee was present to represent the employer.
The claimant was late to arrive and was denied during two (2) phone requests to allow her a few more minutes to attend the hearing or to deliver a written testimony to be evaluated before a final decision.
The referee held a 15 minute hearing with the employers representative while the claimant was on the phone but was denied the opportunity to testify. The referee decided on May 17, 2004 in favor of the employer and ruled that the claimant was not eligible for unemployment compensation benefits under section 402(e).
On June 1, 2004 Claimant appealed the decision of the referee with the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (hereafter referred to as UCBR) and forwarded written testimony to the UCBR as instructed by the referee’s office.
On July 21, 2004 the UCBR ruled in favor of the referee and denied the claimant’s request to have the decision remanded. The presiding board members were: William A Hawkins, Chairman Eileen B. Melvin, MemberRichard W. Bloomingdale, and MemberClaimant sent the UCBR a request for reconsideration and was denied a reconsideration.Claimant is now appealing to the honorable judges of the Commonwealth Court of Pa. A brief was hand-delivered by claimant on October 8, 2004 and was rejected by an unnamed person.
FACTUAL HISTORY:
On February 21, 2004 The Unemployment Compensation Department “Notice of Determination”, listed a fact finding survey of the employer.the employer denied willful misconduct
WEB SITES:in the findings of fact:1. The claimant was last employed on February 5, 2004
2. The claimant’s job title was LPN Charge Nurse.
3. The claimant was discharged as a result of “unsatisfactory work performance”.
4. The claimant had been warned about the unsatisfactory work performance.
5. The claimant worked to the best of her ability.Based on the employers testimony in the fact finding survey, the Unemployment Compensation Department rendered a decision of eligible for UC Benefits pursuant to section 402 (e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.On March 12, 2004 A service-contract company named TALX, from missouri, filed an appeal to eligibility, claiming itself representative and non-legal agent of the employer. Their appeal was charging willful misconduct that was already denied by the local employer. an appeal hearing should not have been grantedOn April 21, 2004 A hearing was held at 10:30AM before referee, Marilyn Gunden. The representative for the employer, Ms. Donna Bowman, Director of nursing, arrived and was invited to inspect the file. She looked at the already existing file containing documents #1 through #31.
The referee stated that she would now enter items #1 through #31, (that were not presented by Ms. Bowman), into the record if THERE was no objection, and Ms. Bowman was sworn in for testimony. The claimant was late for the hearing. She phoned in to request a short recess of a few minutes untill she could arrive. The request was denied. She was told that the hearing had already started and she was too late to attend.
She phoned back a second time to request permission to drop off a written testimony, including evidence to be evaluated before a final decision by the referee. The request was denied. She was told that she would have an opportunity to present testimony to the UCBR, in an appeal process available to her if the referee decided in favor of the employer.
The hearing lasted 15 minutes and the claimant was on the phone twice, during that time, trying to attend or at least drop off written testimony.
On May 17, 2004 the referee made a determination in favor of the employer and reversed the original determination of eligible to not eligible.
On June 1, 2004 claimant filed an appeal to the UCBR, and mailed to them a 15 page initial cover letter plus 50 pages of example correspondence she had had with her superiors, aiding them in having full knowledge of problem areas and reporting her efforts to inspire state and corporate compliance and efficient functioning in the facility.
She requested a timely review, by the UCBR, because UC Benefits were immediately cut off upon the referee’s decision of not eligible.
On July 6, 2004 A letter of inquiry was sent to Mr. Bill Truskey, Legislative Liaison for UCBR from the honorable Mike Sturla, PA State Representative to attempt to aid the claimant, his constituent, in ending the financial duress being suffered while awaiting remanding by the UCBR upon examination of all the testimony and evidence presented.
On July 21, 2004, three (3) months after the referee’s hearing, the UCBR supported the referee’s decision and denied eligibility of UC Benefits based on; “the entire record of the prior proceedings, including the testimony submitted at the referee’s hearing”.
There was no due process available to the claimant. Her testimony and evidence were not even evaluated in the appeal. There was no appeal process.
Her testimony was rejected from being accepted into the record. The discarding of the testimony of the claimant was stated to have been done because; “The claimant has not established good cause for her actions. The claimant’s request that the record be remanded for additional testimony (the claimant’s ONLY testimony) is denied as she has not advanced proper cause for her failure to appear at the original referee’s hearing.”.
Page one (1) and page two (2) of the 15 page initial letter filing appeal to the UCBR gave a clear explanation that the claimant was indeed attempting to attend but was forbidden to attend and also forbidden to deliver written testimony.
On July 28, 2004 claimant submitted a request for forms to enter an appeal with the Commonwealth Court of PA., in the event that a reconsideration would also be denied by the UCBR.
On July 29,2004, following a telephone request, a written request for all transcripts and records of the hearing was e-mailed to the UCBR.
On July 29, 2004 a five (5) page brief request for reconsideration, citing the list of items being appealed, was faxed to the UCBR.
On July 29, 2004 Claimant also post-marked and mailed a 34 page hard-copy letter to the UCBR, making a formal request for reconsideration and listing specific arguments to the final decision. The specific arguments from this letter were used in the original brief presented October 8, 2004, on pages two (2) through thirty-three (33) of the “brief of petitioner” portion listed in the table of contents. (That original brief was rejected and this one is a re-submission of brief.)
On July 29, 2004, The same day the e-mail and faxed requests were received by the UCBR, the staff of the UCBR prepared a packet of several form letters, acknowledging receipt of communications, but did not include any copies of the record of the hearing.
On August 4, 2004, five (5) days later, UCBR denied the request for reconsideration leaving the denial decision standing as final.
On August 5, 2004 claimant filed official forms, requesting an appeal to the decision of the UCBR, in the Commonwealth Court of Pa., prior to the 30 day deadline of August 30, 2004, and following the denial for reconsideration.
On September 2, 2004 a motion was filed and approved requesting permission to submit fewer number of briefs to the Commonwealth Court of Pa. claimant had still not received copies of hearing records that were imperative to the preparation of the court brief.
There was also a discrepancy existing with the name of legal council for the UCBR, listed on the order to submit a brief by October 12, 2004. Council listed was Clifford Blaze, Esquire, c/o UCBR, respondent. Unable to locate a phone # for attorney Blaze.
On October 8, 2004 Claimant traveled to Harrisburg, Pa and hand delivered five (5) copies of brief to the Commonwealth Court of Pa. prior to the October 12, 2004 deadline.
Also, one (1) copy of brief and certificate of service were delivered and accepted by ms. Denise Roddy, Supervisor of UCBR, 10 th floor Labor and Industry Bldg., Harrisburg, Pa. Ms. Roddy signed the receipt of acceptance and explained that Clifford Blaze, Esquire had left his assignment as legal council for the UCBR in August 2004 and she was currently handling appeals for the UCBR. Claimant had still received no response to two (2) requests for copies of hearing records, but was forced to submit a brief before the deadline.
On October 13, 2004 five (5) days later, claimant received an order of rejection of brief with a full list of required form, but no listing of any specific inconsistency to acceptable form. There was also no copy of brief returned with the order.
This created great unfair demand to create and submit a new brief because no indication was given as to why the original had been rejected. The new deadline for submission was November 12, 2004.
On October 25, 2004 claimant e-mailed a third (3rd) request to the UCBR to please expidite the July 29th telephone and e-mail request for copies of the hearing records.
On October 26, 2004 that e-mail was responded to and a transcript of the taped testimony of the employers representative was forwarded to the claimant by Gerard M. Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Council for UCBR. However, on page two (2) of the transcript a reference was made to documents #1 through #31 being placed into the file before the employers representative arrived at the referee’s office. The representative was given an opportunity to look at them and then they were entered into the record and the representative was sworn in to begin testimony.
On October 25, 2004 claimant mailed a hard copy letter to the Commonwealth Court requesting, “to re-open records of this proceeding for the reception of further evidence.” and also requesting a verification that all major testimony and correspondence, from claimant to the UCBR, were available in the file presented to the Commonwealth Court of Pa.
“My main concerns are that you have copies of: 15 page initial letter to UCBR requesting an appeal, a 50 page packet of sample communications to my superiors and a 34 page letter requesting a reconsideration of the UCBR denial of my request for an appeal. and an authentic copy of corporate termination rules to be included.”. (none was presented to the referee, termination policy and “just cause” requirements were accepted on hearsayof the representative).
On October 26, 2004 a response to that letter was prepared and mailed to claimant by Mr. C.R. Hostutler, Deputy Prothonotary/Chief Clerk. Verification was given of the presence of a 15 page initial letter, a 50-page packet of sample correspondence to superiors and the five page brief request for reconsideration that was faxed on July 29, 2004.
It was discovered that the hard copy full request for reconsideration, with itemized points of dispute, that was post-marked the same day, was not included in the file. There was no mention of records and transcripts of the hearing that were available.
“If you believe the record is incomplete, you may file a motion to modify the record with this court.” The motion to modify the record was the letter he was responding to. The request to re-open the records for reception of further evidence was already submitted.
On November 3, 2004 claimant e-mailed a forth (4th) request for full release of all records of hearing, specifically documents #1 through #31 that were entered into the record on page two (2) of the transcript, but not identified or quoted from during the hearing and not presented by the employers representative during testimony. (Claimant is now facing a deadline of November 12, 2004 for re-submission of brief.)
On November 8, 2004 The 4th request to the UCBR for the remaining records of the hearing, specifically documents labeled #1 (one) through #31 (thirty-one) have not been forwarded for inspection or consideration in the preparation of the replacement brief demanded by C.R. Hostutler, Deputy Prothonotary/Chief Clerk.
Claimant is therefore requesting an immediate remand or reversal with prejudice on this case due to lack of timely release of records that are imperative to the preparation of the brief.
We are now four (4) days from the deadline of November 12, 2004 slated for submission. It is inconsistent with PA Code 101.54 which requires timely release of “INFORMATION FROM THE FILE” that are necessary for the preparation of a brief.
Updated 2-25-07 by Dawn Naret’ to merge the original file “Statement of the Case” with later update and continuation of the chronological activity.
Current Contact Info:Dawn Naret’, P.O. Box 2315, Pittsburgh, Pa., 15230-2315
STATEMENT OF THE CASE2-26-05 UPDATE OF CHRONOLOGICAL ACTIVITY
BY DAWN NARET’,
ATTORNEY PRO SEDOCKET NO. 1742 CD 2004
NOVEMBER 10 Post-mailed Official Motion by Appellant to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice to Commonwealth Court. Included a duplicate copy of the 34 page letter, requesting re-consideration, that was not appended to the record by UCBR, as verified by Mr Hostutler, Chief Prothonotary. E-mailed copy and Certificate of Service to Gerard Mackarevich .
NOVEMBER 11, 2004 Phone call from Mr. Don Wagner, Prothonotary clerk, requesting Copy of Certificate of Service for Motion to be forwarded. Acknowledged receipt of Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice.Provided Fax # 717-787-9559. “no hard-copy follow up required”
NOVEMBER 11, 2004 Phoned P. Michael Sturla, Pa State Representative to request permission to have faxing done by his staff. He agreed to leave written permission for assistance to be given Monday – I declined immediate need.
NOVEMBER 12, 2004 Discovered that E-Mail to Deputy Mackarevich was returned by the UC Dept. staff with a note that this should be sent to Commonwealth Court (??).Faxed copies instead to number listed on Deputy Mackarevich’s stationery 717-783-5027. – “Successful Transmission” – From F&M College Campus.
NOVEMBER 12, 2004 Also faxed copy of Certificate of Service to Mr. Wagner, per his request, at number provided, “Successful Send” – From F&M College Campus.
November 14, 2004 Prepared Addendum to Motion of the Appellant to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice and faxed to both Commonwealth Court at the number provided by Mr. Wagner, Prothonotary Ofc. And to Deputy Mackarevich at his ofc. Fax number. Included a cover letter with a 5 th request for the remaining records, specifically items #1 to #31. Transmission Incompleted at F&M College Campus. Resent both from Office of P. Michael Sturla, Pa State Representative. –”Successful Send” left copy in his office file.
NOVEMBER 26, Received copy and Certificate of Service for 11/24/04 Motion by UCBR to Dismiss Petitioner”s Appeal, submitted by UCBR Counsel, Janet M. Tarczy, Assistant counsel for UCBR. Motion, in its text, acknowledges receipt of; 10/25/04 request for records that was E-Mailed to the same address; as the later Motion by the Appellant to Remand, that the staff refused to accept for Deputy Mackarevich. Therefore, this was a correct number and the delivery should not have been refused.
The text in the Motion by the UCBR to Dismiss, also acknowledges receipt of my 11/8/04 Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice, plus Addendum, plus cover letter making the 5 th request for missing records.
NOVEMBER 29, 2004 Prepared Opposition to the Motion by Janet M. Tarczy to Dismiss the Petitioner’s Appeal.
NOVEMBER 30, 2004 Faxed copies of Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss to both Counselors Mackarevich and Tarczy at UCBR and to Commonwealth Court, using same correct fax numbers. – “Successful Transmission” from the office of P. Michael Sturla, Pa State Representative. Left a copy of this plus 5 other letters of communication, pertaining to this case, in his hard copy file.
Transmitted E-Mail msg. and attachment of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss document to his Legal Liaison, Pat Coller to make available in his system file.
DECEMBER 6, 2004 Received notice from Prothonotary’s office that this case will be dismissed, per request of UCBR, due to lack of reponses or evident interest from appellant, IF a brief is not submitted by Dec. 15, 2004.
* Prothonotary Clerk is still refusing to submit the motion to remand or reverse with prejudice TO THE JUDGE, as is required to be done, immediately upon receipt. The prothonotary clerk is ALSO still demanding submission of a brief which was deemed a canceled dead-line requirement, upon the submission of the motion to remand or reverse with prejudice.
BRIEF WAS NOT SUBMITTED – BECAUSE LEGAL PA PROTOCOL CANCELED IT AS A REQUIRED SUBMISSION, PENDING INVESTIGATION, BY THE JUDGE, INTO COMPLAINTS OF LACK OF COOPERATION FROM UCBR.
THE UCBR HAD 20 DAYS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES TO THE COMPLAINT AND NEVER OFFERED A DEFENCE. THEY INSTEAD FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS THE APPELLENT’S CASE. A CLEAR REJECTION OF PROPER PROTOCOL AND FINAL EVIDENCE THAT VERIFIED AND VALIDATED THE APPELLANTS CHARGE OF NO COOPERATION.
CASE WAS DISMISSED AND CLOSED 12-15-04 BY DECISION OF THE ATTORNEY FOR THE UCBR COMMANDING AND CONTROLLING THE PROTHONOTARY CLERK.
(The official Judge never heard of it or saw the evidence – the PA Judicial System was to corrupt to follow the proper procedural process).
(JUNE 27, 2007 “ STATEMENT ” OF EVENTS UPDATED, BY DAWN NARET’, FOR WEB PUBLISHING)
ON DEC. 13, 2005, APPELLANT WAS EVICTED FROM APARTMENT FOR NON-PAYMENT OF RENT. HAVING NO WHERE TO GO, NO MONEY AND NO VEHICLE, SET OUT ON FOOT. WITH A PULL TOTE. ALL PERSONAL BELONGINGS WERE LOST, INCLUDING FAMILY PHOTOS, HISTORY, ANTIQUES AND PIECES OF ORIGINAL ART, COLLECTOR PRINTS AND LITHOGRAPHS
.
APPELLANT WAS FORCED TO SEEK SHELTER IN THE LOCAL TOWN HOMELESS SHELTER.
OVER-EXPOSURE TO INSECTICIDE AND A DEPLORABLE ENVIRONMENT, NOW FOLLOWED THE RECENT ON-SET OF DETERIORATING HEALTH THAT WAS INITIATED WHILE EMPLOYED AT THE LAST JOB POSITION.
THERE WERE CONSTANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS CAUSING AN ABNORMAL INCREASE IN THE OCCURRENCE OF RESPIRATORY AND INFECTIOUS ILLNESSES AMONG STAFF AND RESIDENTS.
APPELLANT WAS HOSPITALIZED AND DIAGNOSED WITH C.O.P.D., CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE AND PERMANENT LUNG DAMAGE.
APPLICATION FOR SOCIAL SECURITY MEDICAL DISABILITY WAS FILED AND APPROVED AND APPEALANT COULD NEVER WORK AGAIN.
THE CASH BENEFIT FROM SOCIAL SECURITY WAS ONLY $940. PER MONTH WITH NO MEDICARE COVERAGE PERMITTED FOR 2 YEARS. (8/17/08 ADDED - PA STATE HAS BEEN ILLEGALLY TAKING A GARNISHMENT OF 15% , WHICH #1 IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE GARNISHMENT IS FORBIDDEN, WHERE THE SOCIAL SECURITY MEDICAL DISABILITY IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME. AND #2 WHEN IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO GARNISH, IT CANNOT EXCEED 10% OF BENEFIT CHECK. THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN SEIZING MY FEDERAL INCOME TAX REFUND, FOR 22 YEARS AND HAVE, 1N 2008, SEIZED MY FEDERAL “SPENDING STIPEND” BONUS REBATE. THE ORIGINAL LOAN WAS $5000. THEY HAVE SOLD IT AND CHANGED COLLECTORS SOMETIMES 1-3 TIMES PER YEAR.
Each one of the new take overs (some working out of the same office and phone number, but using a different name and using an excuse to add new charges) they have each added service fees and interest amounting to as much and more than the monthly payments bringing my current balance to above the original loan, after 22 years.
THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA DEMANDED A GARNISHMENT, FOR A DELINQUENT STUDENT LOAN, TO BE SEIZED EVERY MONTH OUT OF THE BENEFIT CHECK, REDUCING INCOME TO $750 PER MONTH AND CANCELLED STATE MEDICAL COVERAGE THE SAME DAY THAT FEDERAL DISABILITY WAS APPROVED.
STATE AND FEDERAL SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES CONTINUE TO ACT WITH OBSTRUCTION AND PREJUDICE, IE: SECTION 8 LOW-INCOME HOUSING APPLICATION WAS REJECTED THREE TIMES FOR LANDLORD EVICTION OR BAD CREDIT REPORT. ALSO ACTION HOUSING AGENCY REJECTED APPLICATION FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING, DUE TO BAD CREDIT REPORT. THESE ATROSITIES OF PRDJUDICE AGAINST HOMELESS PEOPLE IN FINANCIAL CRISIS ARE PREVENTING THE POSSIBILITY OF OBTAINING HOUSING. THE MEGER INCOME WOULD NOT AFFORD RENT, UTILITIES AND FOOD.
JUNE 27, 2007 APPEALANT IS STILL HOMELESS AND RECEIVING APPROX. $750 PER MONTH SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME, WHICH DOES NOT LAST 30 DAYS, WHILE FORCED TO OBTAIN MEALS IN RESTURANTS. USUALLY, THE LAST 2 WEEKS OF THE MONTH ARE SPENT EATING CRACKERS OR CHIPS.
NIGHTS ARE SPENT SITTING UP ON A BENCH WAITING UNTIL THE BUSSES START RUNNING SO YOU CAN GET TO A BATHROOM.
SLEEP OCCURS IN SHORT DOZING PERIODS, WHENEVER YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH IT, WITHOUT SOMEONE TAPPING YOU ON THE SHOULDER AND TELLING YOU THAT YOU CAN’T SLEEP HERE. …………….SOME CITIZENS ARE LESS THAN HUMAN.
Current Contact info:
Dawn Naret’
P.O. Box 2315,Pittsburgh, Pa., 15230-2315
EMAIL: (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE)
DAWN NARET’
EMAIL:Reply2dn@gmail.com
dawnaret@yahoo.co.ukWEB SITES:
http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com/ “WE THE PEOPLE”
http://www.chagrinning.blogspot.com/ “CHAGRINNING”
http://www.dawnnaret.wordpress.com/ “BUDDY, CAN YOU SPARE A LATTE ?”
http://www.dawnnaret.blog.com/ “58 YEAR OLD NATURAL-BORN LADY” <div align=”center”><script language=”JavaScript” src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ mce_src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ type=”text/javascript”><!–
//–></script><br /><a href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com” mce_href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com”>gynecomastia</a></div>
EXIBIT #2 MOTION TO REMAND OR REVERSE WITH PREJUDICE
MOTION TO REMAND or REVERSE WITH PREJUDICE
NARET’ v. UCBR (2004) NO. 1742 CD 2004
Dawn Naret’, Attorney for the Appellant
P.O. Box 643
Lancaster, Pa. 17608
Commonwealth Court of Pa
Irvis Office Bldg. – Room 624
Harrisburg, Pa. 17120
November 8, 2004
I am submitting, today, an official motion to immediately remand or
reverse with prejudice, the case referenced above.
I have made four (4) requests for full records of the hearing held
April 21, 2004 and did finally have the kind intervention of Gerard
M. Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Council of UCBR, who recently moved to
assist with the incompleted cases of Clifford Blaze, Esquire, who left
in August, 2004.
Deputy Markarevich forwarded the transcript of the taped testimony on
my 3rd request of October 25, 2004 to the UCBR for all records. The
deadline for my brief had been October 12, 2004. I submitted brief, in
person, on October 8, 2004 and it was rejected by an Unnamed Person
who did not return them, but sent me a form instruction list of
required brief form and gave me a new deadline of November 12, 2004.
That is only four (4) days away and it is clear that these records
have not been forwarded within reasonable time as required by
Pennsylvania Code 101.54 stating; “When an interested party or his
representative requests information from the file of the Board in
order to present and maintain the issues at a hearing before a referee
or the Board, or in an appeal to the Court, such information
(including the hearing transcript, where the record was transcribed)
shall be made available at a reasonable time to the party and his
representative, without charge.”
Upon examination of these transcripts, it was discovered that before
the employers witness arrived, there was were thirty-one (31)
documents already present in the file. The witness was given an
opportunity to view them, upon arrival, and did not object to their
inclusion in the file. But the items were Never mentioned in the
hearing, never identified and never quoted from.
I Immediately made a 4th request to the UCBR, repeating that I needed
ALL RECORDS OF THE HEARING and I have had no response.
It should be clarified to this honorable Court, that on page one (1)
of the transcript, the referee is verifying names and addresses:
”The employer of record is Beverly Health Care in care of TALX UC
Express, P. O. Box 283, St. Louis Missouri, 63166. Is that the address
you’d like to use?”. Five (5) sentences later, is a partial response
sentence stating; ” This is just a corporate…” (unfinished statement).
The truth is that TALX is not the employer or even affiliated with the
employer except as a service-contractor, hired to appeal EVERY
Unemployment Compensation Claim filed, in order to reduce the
obligatory payments, of the employer, to the State Treasury
Department, for the use in UC Benefit payments. It was TALX who filed
this appeal after the employer already denied a situation of willful
misconduct on the initial fact-finding.
TALX is therefore not the employer or even a viable interested party
because they are not attorneys qualifying as representatives,
acceptable to present evidence or give testimony without being
Judicially objected to as hearsay.
May I cite: Phila. Elec. Co. v. UCBR, 129 Pa Cmwlth 417, 565 A2d 1246 (1989):
“It is hearsay for a Licensed Physicians Assistant to read a test
report into evidence where the assistant is not the person who
conducted the test.”, ( The Physician Assistant’s reading of a lab
report on test samples is not the testimony of an expert witness on
the stand using his/her expertise, rather, “it is the testimony of a
witness who merely reiterates and parrots the conclusions of
another.”) ld.@ 1248.
Also, according to; Perminter v. UCBR 426 A2d 245:
” Hearsay evidence, although properly objected to, may be used as a
basis for further questioning by the referee. The testimony elicited
through the hearsay itself must NOT be given substantive evidentiary
value.” ( It is then of itself, inadmissible as evidence and should be
struck from the record).
These documents, labeled #1 (one) through # 31 (thirty-one), which I
still have not received, were not presented by the employer, who
attended the hearing and brought only one exhibit labeled employer’s
exhibit # 1 (one). They also were never mentioned in the hearing,
never identified and never quoted from.
Therefore, as they have been held from inspection, necessary for the
proper presentation of this appeal, I make a motion that these
documents labeled #1 (one) through #31 (thirty-one) be viewed as
hearsay evidence and in suspect of authenticity or relevance to this
specific claimant and be struck from the record as inadmissible or
hearsay evidence that could adversely affect the fact-finding and
evaluation of this case.
On the initial fact-finding, conducted by the Department of
Unemployment Compensation, the employer denied that the claimant was
terminated for “willful misconduct”, and listed “poor work
performance” as their motivating factor and also stated that “she did
the best she could”. This was NOT a charge of “willful misconduct”.
During the hearing, the transcripts reveal that the employer, although
still not admitting that the claimant was unfairly accused of
incidents that she insisted she was not a party to, still heard the
referee remind her, (according to page two (2) of the transcript),
that she held the BURDEN OF PROOF to present evidence that “willful
misconduct” had occurred. She STILL DENIED IT UNDER OATH and testified
that the claimant was terminated for “poor work performance”.
On the last line of page five (5) she is asked if the incident,
(which the claimant denied being part of), was considered a serious
“Category I” incident, (the company classifies either a Category I or
a Category II on complaints) and the EW (employers witness) stated:
“Actually, no it was Category II.”
On page six (6), an explanation of the Categories is requested by the referee:
EMPLOYER: (straight testimony without interruption):
“Actually Category…if we… Category II is the LESS serious of the
Categories. Category I is the more serious and corporate actually
changed that somewhat within the past year. If in other words if we
give a Category I they expect us to immediately suspend somebody. So
we now for the most part use Category II’s unless it’s something
extremely, extremely serious. We tend to use the Category II because
it fits right in with POOR WORK QUALITY. It’s a 2 point…2.2, It’s POOR
WORK QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY and that’s…”
The employer is then asked what the policy is then for Category II
(less serious) policy and she explains:
EMPLOYER:
“Right…right oh…and she was….actually I’m sorry I should’ve
said…mentioned that…after 4 warnings the counceling’s don’t count.
After 4 warnings it’s suspension pending investigation for
termination. And that was her 4th”.
Therefore, although the employer appears to have satisfied the four
warnings requirement for suspension, she never testified whether there
was an investigation conducted as was ALSO required, according to her
testimony. There were several discrepancies in the testimony of the
employer that are not consistent with issues that occurred or that
qualify
within the judicial definition of “willful misconduct”. The employer
stated and again repeated that the claimant was charged with Category
II , LESS serious complaints and a 2 point complaint is POOR WORK
QUALITY.
WILLFUL MISCONDUCT WAS NEVER PROVEN BY THE EMPLOYER. The employer also
failed to present an official copy of the current company policy of
required procedure for termination. The reasons and the procedure
testified to, were not acceptable reasons for termination, according
to actual company policy. The referee accepted hearsay testimony of
questionable documents #1 (one) through #31 (thirty-one) AND hearsay
testimony of what the disciplinary policy was and was blindly misled
to believe that the claimant was terminated with “just cause”.
The term “just cause” may vary in as many specific interpretations as
there are different employers who determine their own policies and
procedures. That is why the UCBR is forbidden to deny benefits
according to proven “just cause”, but must have proof of “willful
misconduct”, fully demonstrated as Judicially Defined in Section 402
(e):
(1) the wanton and willful disregard of the employer’s interests, or
(2) the deliberate violation of rules; or
(3) the disregard of standards of behavior which an employer can
rightfully expect from his employee; or
(4) negligence which manifests as culpability, wrongful INTENT, EVIL
DESIGN OR INTENTIONAL AND SUBSTANTIAL disregard for the employer’s
interests or the employee’s duties and obligations.
These are extremely serious, intentional/deliberate/willful actions
that MUST occur before a label of “willful misconduct” can be applied.
Negligence of clocking back in after lunch may be a company’s policy
for “just cause” termination, if committed repeatedly, but it is not a
negligence of the magnitude of the judicial definition of “willful
misconduct” required to deny benefits and none were even intimated by
the employer and definitely none were proven because none occurred.
My third reason for submitting a motion to remand and reverse with
prejudice, is that the UCBR failed to amend a 34-page letter of
request for reconsideration to the record of the case. On July 29,
2004 I responded to the letter of denial on appeal from the UCBR
decision of July 21, 2004. I sent on that day; an e-mail requesting
copies of all records, I faxed a five (5) page brief letter of timely
appeal for reconsideration and I post-marked a hard copy letter of
detailed point by point dispute to the procedure opinions and findings
as stated in the denial letter.
I am forwarding a duplicate copy with this communication. I already
submitted a petition to open the record for admission of additional
evidence on October 25, 2004, which was the letter responded to by
C.R. Hostutler on October 26, 2004. The purpose of that request was
the extended wait for copies of the record that I anticipated might
need additional rebuttal opportunity. This copy of the 34 page letter
is not new evidence but was part of the record of the request for
reconsideration WHERE THE REQUEST WAS DENIED AND NOT APPENDED TO THE
RECORD FOR EVALUATION UPON APPEAL TO THE COMMONWEALTH COURT.
This is yet another violation of Pennsylvania Code:
“Where written application for reopening of a hearing was made to the
board and there is no evidence that the referee or the board appended
to the record the request, ANY supporting material, and the ruling on
the request, A DISMISSAL OF THE CLAIMANTS APPEAL WILL BE REVERSED AND
THE RECORD REMANDED FOR A DETERMINATION OF PROPER CAUSE FOR CLAIMANTS
FAILURE TO ATTEND THE REFEREE’S HEARING.”
-ORTIZ V. UCBR 85 PA CMWLTH, 327, 331, 481 A2D 1385
“Finally, a “proper cause” inquiry for non-appearance does NOT
impermissibly reallocate the burden of proof in a “willful misconduct”
setting.”.
-FLORES V. UCBR 686 A 2D 66 (PA CMWLTH 1996)
With this over-whelming amount of error clearly proven in the
transcripts and records, I can only trust that this honorable Court
will end the injustice that has so extremely burdened and financially
destroyed this claimant since the initial unfair dismissal from her
job. Evidence proves that she was an excellent example of a
self-starter who gave extra effort in every area to assist her
employer with compliance to all laws, policies and organizational
efforts.
This attempt, by the employer to be released from payment of UC
Benefits stands as a despicable example of dishonest manipulation of
the Law and of the calendars of all the departments who have given
focus to this case. The employer’s witness could not bring herself to
state “willful misconduct” because she knew it never existed in this
claimant’s performance. And she admitted it twice in clarity.
The claimant, meanwhile:
(1) has a ruined reputation of job performance,
(2) was unexpectedly cut off from her only source of income when the
referee made the error of reversing her initial correct determination
of ELIGIBLE to denied benefits,
(3) she has suffered through five (5) whole months of absolutely no income,
(4) has been penniless without even 50 cents to buy a newspaper or
take a bus for any job searching or attending,
(5) her monthly accounts have not been able to receive any payments
and have now been reported to the Credit Bureau
(6) the Credit Bureau will now be giving an unfavorable report on her
FOR 7 YEARS
(7) she will have difficulty obtaining a new position from an unfair
record of her work
(8) she will have difficulty passing a credit check for a new position
(9) she will have difficulty passing a credit check for a new residence
(10) she has received notice of utilities to be turned off for non-payment
(11) she has received notice of eviction proceedings initiated already
by her landlord
(12) her bank has closed both her checking and savings accounts for
having a zero balance for too long
(13) she was seeking food at food banks to survive
(14) has suffered immense stress and will continue to be adversely
affected by this horrible miscarriage of justice for many years
(15) she has no family or friends to move in with and will become homeless
(16) she will have no address to receive mail of notice of hearing or
reinstatement or receive benefit checks necessary to survive
starvation and death
(17) if you have no residence address, you are not eligible for food
stamps or food bank donation pick-ups.
The state cuts you off and leaves you to starvation.
This is a shocking reality that must come to light for the protection
of citizens in this country. These aggressive moves to cut citizens
off from income is resulting in unbelievable numbers of increased
homelessness.
The UCBR admits to denying 100 to 200 cases per day just in one
office. To extend the multiplication, that is 24,000 to 48,000
citizen families per year placed in this position of possible
homelessness and total destruction to the magnitude that this claimant
is living as the very current reality of facing death within weeks
from now in spite of being totally healthy, with no acute, chronic or
fatal illness. What is Pennsylvania State doing to it’s citizens? Why
are they denying with prejudice, benefits for people who have worked
all their lives? Now, to find out that if you no longer have an
address, you are ineligible for any aid declared to be available to
the needy. Who is more needy than a person who has no home?
This case never should have reached this point or been extended to
this amount of time or have to have traveled to this level of the
judicial system before someone would stop the violations of Civil
Rights, of Due Process, of UC Law and of Pa Codes and Statutes.
We have a very well designed litigation system, when it is followed
according to the original rules and intentions. The system was a
non-prejudice system that protected employees from being unfairly
dismissed or denied benefits during the transitional period. Of recent
years it has been digressing toward a system of prejudice for the
employer and denial of Due Process for the claimants.
The major problem seems to be the cutting off of UC Benefits before an
appeal has been decided. Helpful to this may first be to revise the
initial appeal rules to reject appeals being filed by these contract
companies that receive commission on every case they book into appeal
of eligibility. They are creating havoc on the calendar and causing
delays of reinstatement that never should have been lost and have
created financial crisis while they were cut-off. They also are not
able to present evidence or testimony as I have shown you in the Pa
Codes. Their involvement in these cases is inadmissible and removal of
them would greatly reduce the number of unjustified applications for
appeal of eligibility.
A second major problem seems to be a misunderstanding of the referee’s
between termination for “just cause” by the employer and the true
requirements of the label “willful misconduct”. Too many cases are
being denied without meeting the requirements of the full judicial
definition of the term “willful misconduct”
Of serious crisis development is that the Department of Unemployment
Compensation cuts off benefits immediately, upon the referee’s
decision to reverse the eligible status, without giving any
consideration to the fact that the case has entered an appeal status
and the determination is not a final.
Next, the same department sends out a Repayment Due notice, in this
case it was assigned as a “no-fault” repay obligation for funds
already received. THE CLAIMANT MUST NOW ALSO REQUEST THE COURT TO
PERMIT RELIEF FROM THIS REPAYMENT OBLIGATION ON FUNDS SHE WAS ENTITLED
TO RECEIVE AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CUT OFF FROM.
CLAIMANT MUST ALSO APPEAL TO THE COURT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT
THIS CRISIS CREATED BY SO MANY ERRORS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PERMITTED
TO REACH THIS POINT AND THE CLAIMANT IS REQUESTING RELEASE OF BENEFIT
CHECKS FOR EVERY WEEK SINCE CUT OFF ON MAY 11, 2004 UNTIL DECISION
DATE. AND THEREAFTER FOR AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME, AS IT SHALL
TAKE, TO OBTAIN EMPLOYMENT AND RETAIN EMPLOYMENT, BECAUSE SHE WAS
ROBBED OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADJUST THROUGH THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD
WITH THE AID OF UC BENEFITS AND ENDED UP INSTEAD ON THE OUTSIDE OF A
HUGE IRON CURTAIN THAT HAD NO EMPATHY OR SHAME FOR IT’S ABUSES.
But, these errors should be caught and corrected immediately by the
UCBR. Why are they passed through?
Why is the UCBR consistently violating Pa Code with endless
merry-go-round arguments that they will not re-open a case or consider
a remand because the claimant failed to attend a hearing? I have also
shown you that these arguments are now ceased forever. They are
inconsistent with the UC Law, Commonwealth Court Standards, Pa Code,
Federal Laws and Civil Rights. The constant defense that they write
their own policy and what violations, they are alledged to have
committed, are acceptable according to their policy, is unacceptable
to the higher authorities according to the higher Laws and
policies that they are obligated to be consistent with in their policymaking..
May I cite: VAN v. UCBR 508 PA 139, 494 A2D 1081 (1985):
“ALTHOUGH THE HEARINGS ARE INFORMAL, THEY INVOLVE SWORN TESTIMONY,
CROSS-EXAMINATION AND RECORDING OF THE PROCEEDINGS. AN ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL IS NOT BOUND BY ALL THE EVIDENTIARY AND PROCEDURAL RULES OF A
LAW COURT SO LONG AS CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE HONORED, INCLUDING
THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW.”
THIS MUST BE THE END OF POLICIES BEING MIS-INTERPRETED OR USED WITHOUT
FULL APPROVAL AND PROPER AMMENDMENT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE HIGHER
RIGHTS AND STANDARDS AND LAWS PROTECTING THESE INDIVIDUALS THEY SERVE.
I thank you very much for a most enlightening experience. I have
learned much and hope to be able to use the expanded knowledge
productively, if I am unable to save my own life, perhaps my testimony
will inspire changes in the system that may save someone else’s life.
You face an extremely serious responsibility of not only attempting to
have my funds released and delivered before it is too late, but to
initiate immediate changes in this predatory system that has knarled
its demon head above the values and honor, that our country and our
judicial system once held as it’s identity and it’s genuine character.
DAWN M. NARET’
Current Contact Info as of 2-23-07:
P.O.Box 2315 Pittsburgh, Pa 15230-2315
reply2dn@gmail.com
dawnaret@yahoo.co.uk
ADDENDUM TO:
MOTION TO REMAND OR REVERSE WITH PREJUDICE
CASE NO. 1742 CD 2004
SUBMITTED NOVEMBER 10, 2004
APPENDED NOVEMBER 14, 2004
BY DAWN M. NARET’, ATTORNEY FOR THE APPELLANT
On April 21, 2004, during the original hearing, the claimant called into the office with a question on directions and was told that the hearing had already started and she would not be able to attend. She requested a continuance of a few minutes until she could arrive and the denial was repeated that the hearing had already started and she would not be able to attend.
Within minutes, she called back, a second time and requested permission to at least drop-off a written testimony, with supporting documents of evidence, that she wished to present and have considered before a final decision.
This request was also denied and she was told that she would have an opportunity to present written testimony in an appeal to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (UCBR), if the referee decided in favor of the employer.
I hold this interactive incident as further evidence of prejudice that has been unjustly obstructing the right to due process and a fair hearing, without prejudice, as required to be conducted by the UCBR.
May I repeat VANN v. UCBR 508 Pa 139, 494 A2d 1081 (1985):
“ALTHOUGH THE HEARINGS ARE INFORMAL, THEY INVOLVE SWORN TESTIMONY, CROSS-EXAMINATION AND RECORDING OF THE PROCEEDINGS. AN ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IS NOT BOUND BY ALL THE EVIDENTIARY AND PROCEDURAL RULES OF A LAW COURT, SO LONG AS CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE HONORED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW.
The claimant appeals to this honorable court to acknowledge, in their conclusion, that where opinions and policies have, on several occasions, agreed that if an employer is absent from the hearing, then the available record, which is usually the initial fact-finding plus the additional written testimony and material evidence, mailed in by the employer, as reasons why they are appealing an initial determination of eligibility, will be enough information in the record for the referee to evaluate and make a final decision, even in the absence of the employer.
The charge of prejudice lies in the acceptance of the additional written testimony, with any material evidence, that has been mailed-in and accepted into the record, in the absence of the employer, to be considered before a final decision by the referee.
If then, the employer has been given the opportunity to mail-in additional written testimony and material evidence, to be entered into the record before a final decision, even in his/her absence, then the same situation, from the aspect of the claimant, where the claimant is absent from the hearing, and the referee is permitted to conduct the hearing in their absence and determine a final decision based upon the available record, which includes the written testimony and material evidence mailed-in, by the employer, with their petition for an appeal, then the claimant, who is absent, is not being given the same opportunity for a fair hearing unless they are also afforded the same opportunity to deliver or mail-in written testimony as the employer did.
A final decision, where the employer was afforded the opportunity to add additional written testimony to the record and the claimant was denied or not offered the same opportunity, is a final decision formed with prejudice, and the claimant has not been offered the opportunity for a fair hearing.
Due process has then been violated if the final decision is made in the absence of the claimant and a continuance has been denied. Also, the employer was not obligated to prove “proper cause” for being absent, in order to have his/her written testimony accepted into the record prior to the final decision, and neither can the claimant be demanded to prove, “proper cause” for absence, before being afforded an opportunity for submitting a written testimony.
The absence of a claimant does not waive the right to due process and a Fair Hearing. Therefore, having a hearing scheduled, where they could not attend, was NOT giving them full opportunity for a fair hearing, if the opportunity for submission of written testimony, to be evaluated before a final decision has been made, has been denied.
The referee is obligated to decide these cases on their merit, according to the information available in the record. If that information is unjustly accepted from one party and not the other party, then the merit is not fairly determinable, if the referee is evaluating, with prejudice, the record of only one party.
The opportunity to submit written testimony cannot be denied to the claimant, if it is not denied to the employer. A final decision must include additional written testimony, of the claimant, if it accepts additional written testimony of the employer.
The initial fact-finding affords the employer an initial testimony written into the record. The employee is notified of the fact-finding comments, of the employer, in the initial determination letter from the Unemployment Compensation Department (UC Dept.).
The employee is NOT given an opportunity to cross-examine or rebutt any of these comments. If the UC Dept. determines that the employee is eligible for benefits, the employer is afforded the opportunity to appeal the determination and is given a SECOND opportunity in stating reasons why they seek appeal and to attach any material evidence they wish to have accepted into the record. The employee is not given an opportunity to cross-examine or rebutt any of these new comments either, until the hearing.
If the employee cannot attend the hearing, then there are TWO mailed-in written testimonies of the employer and NONE from the employee, to be evaluated according to merit. What is going to be evaluated? It is a ONE-SIDED, PREJUDICED EVALUATION PROCESS.
Now, if there is yet the attendance of the employer, with or without accompanying witnesses, giving oral testimony, objecting to the eligibility of benefits, in the absence of the employee, then the merit, of the record, now contains at least THREE and possibly more testimonies, if witnesses were present, from the employer and NONE from the employee.
In both situations, where the employer is absent or not absent, the record is unjustly tipped in favor of the employer and is obviously being evaluated with prejudice, if it is evaluated without at least ONE opportunity, for even ONE written testimony to be entered into the record, from the employee, in the event of their absence from the physical hearing. They clearly have NOT been afforded the opportunity of a fair hearing.
The obligatory evaluation, without prejudice, by the referee, before making a final decision, cannot be waived by the referee, by the claimant, by the employer or by the UCBR, who are also obligated to assure the opportunity for a fair hearing and order a continuance if there is any doubt that this was accomplished at the referee’s hearing. A ONE-SIDED, PREJUDICED EVALUATION PROCESS is definitely cause to doubt that a fair hearing was indeed afforded.
It is a Constitutional Right to due process, without prejudice, and it is a Fundamental Right that the UCBR is obligated to be consistent with in their policymaking, according to, again I would like to reiterate: VAN V. UCBR 508 PA 139, 494 A2d 1081 (1985), “SO LONG AS CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE HONORED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW.”
These Fundamental Rights, even in an informal UCBR setting, were already upheld by the Supreme Court in; DILLIPLAIN v. LEHIGH VLY. TRUST CO. 457 PA 255, 322 A2d 114 (1974). AND DILLIPLAIN WAS LATER SPECIFICALLY EXTENDED TO COVER UCBR PROCEEDINGS IN WING v. UCBR.
IN WING v. UCBR 496 PA 113, 436 A2d 179 (1981), the Supreme Court advised the UCBR to, “DISCARD THE DOCTRINE”. The Supreme Court explained the rationale for “DISCARDING THE DOCTRINE”, (the doctrine of Fundamental error) by noting; ” THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TRIBUNAL MUST BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT ITS ERRORS AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE; DILIGENT PREPARATION AND EFFECTIVE ADVOCACY, BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, MUST BE ENCOURAGED BY REQUIRING THE PARTIES TO DEVELOPE COMPLETE RECORDS AND ADVANCE ALL LEGAL THEORIES AND THE FINALITY OF THE LOWER TRIBUNAL’S DETERMINATIONS MUST NOT BE ERODED BY TREATING EACH DETERMINATION AS A PART OF A SEQUENCE OF PIECEMEAL ADJUDICATIONS.” – Id, @ 117, 436 A2d @ 181. “SUCH RATIONALE CONTINUES TO BE SOUND.”
They are to make every effort to investigate thoroughly by NOT erroneously denying a continuance, but are instead to grant a continuance more readily in order to create a complete record, so that they can be, “GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT ITS ERRORS AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.” How can they correct their errors, if they dismiss due process and send the unsatisfied party into a higher appeals arena, still trying to receive correction on a fundamental error made at the referee level? Or repeated at the UCBR level?
The SEQUENCUAL PIECEMEALING OF ADJUDICATIONS, is the error of forming a denial based on one issue, where a second issue forbids denial. This case has not been thoroughly investigated, assembled into a complete record or judicially resolved, whatsoever, and cannot avoid being remanded or reversed for violation of due process.
IE: A claimant, absent at a hearing, is denied a continuance and is claiming that there was not fair and equal opportunity to present equal testimony into the written record, which served as the basis for evaluating the merit according to available information. The UCBR upheld the referee’s denial of benefits, stating that the claimant was absent and did not give “proper cause” for the absence and was already afforded the opportunity for a fair hearing. –ISSUE #1
IE: The same claimant, absent at the hearing where there is a charge of willful misconduct, and the employer did not satisfy the Burden of Proof, for willful misconduct. A continuance, affording further testimony and evidence are refused, because the claimant was absent and was already afforded the opportunity for a fair hearing, then the UCBR is repeating the error of the referee in forming a denial based on ONE issue where another issue, willful misconduct ISSUE #2, forbids denial.
They cannot deny benefits because a claimant was absent at a hearing. The absence is issue #one and absence is not an acceptable reason to deny benefits. The issue #TWO compounds the error, with the evidence that the employer never satisfied the Burden of Proof with testimony on the willful misconduct charge. This is a SECOND issue that forbids the denial of benefits “where the employer has not proven willful misconduct”.
These are examples of exactly what the Supreme Court was referring to when it advised the UCBR to, “DISCARD THE DOCTRINE”.
The UCBR did in fact attempt to violate the findings of the Supreme Court and present a, SEQUENCE OF PIECEMEAL ADJUDICATIONS, in denying on ISSUE #1 and neglecting on ISSUE #2. The UCBR neglected to consider the sworn testimony of the employer’s witness, who under oath, denied that the reason for termination was willful misconduct.
The claimant was absent from the hearing, so a denial of benefits was upheld, by the UCBR, and the failure of the employer to prove willful misconduct was neglected and permitted to be buried below the absence issue even though it is forbidden to be present in a denial decision.
The Supreme Court already determined that these UCBR policies and procedures and dismissals and denials are violations of Fundamental Rights and advised that these doctrines be discarded in 1981.
Therefore, in every instance since 1981, where the UCBR has upheld a denial for benefits and has denied a request for continuance, due to the absence of a claimant, in a willful misconduct setting, even where the “Burden Of Proof” of willful misconduct, in the full definition as judicially defined, was not satisfied by the employer, they have been in violation of a Supreme Court decision and advisement, to void these policies (DISCARD THE DOCTRINE) THAT INHIBIT THE REQUIREMENT THAT THEY DEVELOP COMPLETE RECORDS AND ADVANCE ALL LEGAL THEORIES.
TO SUMMARIZE:
They CANNOT refuse a continuance due to absence from the original hearing,
They CANNOT refuse written testimony, from an absent party, to be accepted into the record, if they have accepted it from the opposing party, for evaluation before a final decision,
They CANNOT uphold an adverse decision, in a willful misconduct setting, where the “burden of proof” was not satisfied,
They CANNOT refuse or uphold a refusal for continuance, where an absent party has had NO opportunity to give ANY testimony, neither written or verbal,
They CANNOT repeatedly refuse to re-open cases or accept additional evidence, merely due to the objection of a re-opening, by the opponent, where the opponent’s objection would be obstructing the right to due process if the objection is not over-ruled and the request is not granted.
These conclusions are NOT open for discussion or dispute. They have already BEEN decided by the SUPREME COURT.
Also, accepting that we cannot enable the possibility of blatant disregard of a Notice of Hearing, we must also consider that an absence, although entitled to present written testimony to be evaluated before a final decision, does already carry a consequence, in that the absent party is not able to witness the proceedings and is therefore, unable to cross-examine or rebut during the hearing.
They do not become aware of testimony presented unless they request transcripts and records of the hearing, which are to be made available with the absence of either party, in order to prepare an appeal, and they should be informed of this availability. If they have testimony and evidence to present, that would be relevant to the decision, they suffer a delay in the opportunity for rebuttal, but a continuance and that opportunity for rebuttal is required by Law.
Any policies proposed by the UCBR and approved as amendments to PA Codes and Statutes must meet the criteria test of consistency; that “CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE HONORED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW.”.
Violation of this obligation is now verified by the Commonwealth Court and the supremacy of its opinion over the policies of the UCBR, plus the support of those just opinions by the Supreme Court, will nullify the standing, credibility and acceptance of these policies, as arguments that would DISREGARD the decision by the Supreme Court, if they do not pass the criteria test of consistency to Basic and Fundamental rights, as already demanded and clarified by the Supreme Court, and now I must request that it also be supported, reiterated and upheld by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. (end of addendum)
AUTHOR: DAWN NARET’
2-28-07 author update: Current Contact Info:
Dawn Naret’
P.O.Box 2315, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15230-2315
Email: reply2dn@gmail.com OR dawnaret@yahoo.co.uk
Blogsites: http://www.dawnnaret.wordpress.com
http://www.dawnnaret.wordpress.com
<div align=”center”><script language=”JavaScript” src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ mce_src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ type=”text/javascript”><!–
//–></script><br /><a href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com” mce_href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com”>gynecomastia</a></div>
NARET’ V. UCBR (2004) DOCKET NO. 1742 CD 2004
11/29/04 REPLY FROM APPELLANT TO:
11/24/04 RESPONSE FROM UCBR TO PETITIONER’S 11/8/04 MOTION TO REMAND OR REVERSE WITH PREJUDICE
AND
OPPOSITION TO: 11/24/04 MOTION TO DISMISS PETITIONER’S APPEAL FILED BY UCBR
APPELLANT IS FILING AN AFFIDAVIT IN OPPOSITION TO THE 11/24/04 MOTION, BY UCBR, TO DISMISS PETITIONER’S APPEAL
APPEAL TO:
COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CASE DOCKET NO. 1742 CD 2004
DAWN NARET’, ATTORNEY, PRO SE,
APPELLANT
VS.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT
NARET’ V. UCBR (2004) NO. 1742 CD 2004 (CONT’D)
APPELLANT, DAWN NARET’, ATTORNEY PRO SE, FILES THIS
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS PETITIONER’S APPEAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
(The reply number will correspond to the response line it is replying to as much as possible)
1. The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (hereafter referred to as the UCBR) filed this 11/24/04 Motion to Dismiss as a response to the 11/8/04 9 page Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice and 7page Addendum, filed by the appellant (petitioner). The arguments and legal citings in the appellant’s combined 16 page Motion, with its Addendum, presented undebatable evidence that conduct and procedure were repeatedly in error in this case, since the initial filing of an appeal against the decision of eligibility, made by the Department of Unemployment Compensation. Their initial, correct decision was based on the fact that the employer denied willful misconduct on the initial fact-finding inquiry and repeated that denial, in the dialog of the transcripts, as specified in the appellants Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice/plus Addendum. They were essentially appealing the initial employer’s own testimony or to clarify, disputing with themselves, which once testified, cannot be revoked or appealed by the party that testified, and definitely should not be given a scheduled appeal hearing date, because that would unacceptably inflate the hearings calendar.
2. On July 21, 2004, the UCBR defaulted procedure by adopting the illegal decision, by the referee. It is illegal to deny UC Benefits, where the employer failed to prove willful misconduct, and clearly stated, in the transcripts, that the ALLEGED offense was a Category II, which is the “LESS SERIOUS” Category.
3. On October 8, appellant met the timely deadline of October 12, 2004, for filing brief, in spite of the UCBR’s failure to respond with a timely submittal of all hearing records. Brief was hand-written.
4. On October 12, 2004, the prothonotary’s office rejected the brief, for form, and set a new deadline of November 12, 2004. Appellant made every effort to encourage expedition of the forwarding of requested records but had only a portion of them forwarded on October 26, 2004, through the kind intervention of Gerard Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Counsel for the UCBR. On November 3, 2003, a 4 th written request demanding the complete record, including ” documents #1 through #31″, that were mentioned on page 2 of the transcripts. None of the documents were forwarded even to date. Appellant then had no alternative but to file a timely 9page Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice plus a 7 page Addendum to the Motion on November 8, 2004, due to lack of UCBR’S cooperation in forwarding all records. This also nullified the new deadline of November 12, 2004 for filing a brief, according to the FEDERAL Rules of Appellate Procedure on Motion to Remand: “The motion shall be filed prior to the filing of the appellant’s brief.” – Rule 23B Section (A) paragraph 2. And may I also cite Rule 23B Section (D), “Oral argument and the deadline for brief shall be VACATED upon the filing of a Motion to Remand under this rule.”.
It has frequently become apparent that the UCBR operates under a misconception of the extent of their own autonomy, in policymaking, as well as policy following, that has often revealed them to be non-compliant to the superior policies and authorities of the laws, policies and procedures of the Commonwealth Court, The UC Laws and the Federal Superior Court Procedures, THAT THEY ARE ALSO SUBORDINATE TO, in their UPWARD ASSIGNING OF APPELLANT DISPUTES. These higher authorities cannot and will not abide by the non-compliant policymaking practices of the UCBR, WHERE DUE PROCESS WOULD BE VIOLATED IF NON-COMPLIANT UCBR POLICIES WERE PERMITTED TO OVER-RIDE THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES THAT HOLD SUPREMANCY OVER THEIR DEPARTMENT.
5. The UCBR, on Item #5 of their Motion to dismiss, incorrectly implies that the appellant has not complied with proper requirements of Chapter 21 of the Pa Rules of Appellate Procedure. The fact is, the appellant was exactly correct in timely functions and form, and the UCBR has attempted to persuade this court to overlook the filing of the combined 16 page Motion to Reverse, with all of its defaults documented, and its vacating of the brief deadline.
Therefore it is the UCBR who is not complying, due to their inappropriate filing for a Motion to Dismiss the Petitioner’s Appeal instead of complying with the procedure of response to the Motion to Remand;
“A response shall be filed within 20 days after the motion is filed. The response shall include a proposed order of remand that identifies the ineffectiveness claims and specifies the factual issues relevant to EACH such claim to be addressed by the trial court in the event Remand is granted, unless the responding party accepts that proposed by the moving party. Any reply shall be filed within 10 days after the response is filed.” – Rule 23B Section (B) Paragraph 2.
6. UCBR: ” On October 25, 2004, Petitioner requested the Board forward the hearing transcript of the employer’s testimony from the hearing of April 21, 2004.”
REPLY: Prior to the July 21, 2004 decision, by the UCBR, a telephone request for records was made. On July 29, 2004 a written request for ALL RECORDS was delivered and no response was received. By the deadline of October 12, 2004, Brief had to be submitted and compiled without the full record of the hearing, which was imperative to its efficient completion. This is a serious default, as cited, with references, in the Appellants Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice/ Plus Addendum. On October 25, 2004, Appellant submitted the THIRD not FIRST request for all records.
7. On October 26, 2004, a prompt response was made to the third request by, Gerard Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Counsel, as stated in reply item #4 of this document, but he only forwarded a copy of the transcript and 1 exhibit of the employer (the only exhibit of the employer, according to the transcript.) On page 2 of the transcript was dialog referring to documents #1 through #31 being entered into the record. Discussion of this was expanded in the appellants Motion to Reverse. None of these documents were ever forwarded and they held significance because they were already present, in the file, before the employer arrived and were not delivered by her, quoted from or mentioned by her during her testimony, as evidenced in the transcripts.
On November 3, 2004 a FOURTH request was submitted to the UCBR, with a time is of the essence status, pending the November 12, 2004 deadline for brief. NONE was received. UCBR DEFAULTED, again, in neglecting to make a timely response to requests for ALL RECORDS.
8. UCBR: “ON or about November 12, 2004, Petitioner filed a Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice (Motion) with this court, purportedly requesting a remand or reversal due to lack of timely release of records that are imperative to the preparation of her brief.”
REPLY: The FACT is; on November 8, 2004, NOT November 12, 2004, appellant had still received NO RESPONSE to the FOURTH request for ALL RECORDS. This was not a “purported” default but a serious obstruction to the efficient preparation of brief. The absence of a timely response, for the forwarding of the required documents, prompted the November 8, 2004, filing of the 9 page Motion of Remand or Reversal with Prejudice.
On November 10, 2004, appellant also filed a 7 page Addendum to that motion, providing a combined total of a 16 page Motion that revealed a wider view of the tragedy and proportionate number of victims that are being made homeless and losing entire households of possessions and property, due to these procedural spans, defaults and delays. If appeals are not resolved and UC Funds delivered to the claimants within 30 days, the claimant is vulnerable to an eviction on rental property, and if not resolved and delivered within 90 days, to a home-owner, they are facing mortgage foreclosure.
The staff of UCBR, as well as this honorable court must open their eyes; to the massive crisis the UCBR is creating by erroneously and illegally denying UC Benefits. By the UCBR’S own admission, they deny 100 to 200 appeals PER DAY.
That’s 24,000 to 48,000 victims PER YEAR, that they are responsible for, by imposing on them, the vulnerability of having their only source of income cut off and becoming homeless!
The UCBR has not been complying with the purpose it was created for. It is responsible to; investigate, correct and resolve errors as quickly as possible by using all the non-prejudice evaluating processes, that are fair and just and legal according to all Federal Civil Rights Laws, Pa State Laws, UC Department Laws, and UCBR Tribunal policies, that are recognized as acceptable within their own department, as well as beyond themselves, to the superior authorities, that they are also obligated to be compliant with, in their policymaking and practices.
The referees are over-burdened with appeals from employers who are hiring profit service-contract companies to appeal EVERY single ELIGIBLE Determination. These companies MUST be removed from the arena, as they have no association as legal counsel or acceptable witnesses who can present testimony or evidence. I expounded on this, in more detail, in the Motion to Reverse. I sympathize with the staff of the UC Department, including the referees and the Tribunal. But the over-load they are burdened with, they have created themselves, by giving hearing scheduling to frivolous appeals that are being made, in order that the employer can avoid payment as required, to the State UC Fund. These problems cannot be resolved by prejudicing the claimants, by denying benefits, where no willful misconduct has been claimed by the employer in the initial fact-finding inquiry, just to expedite the over-load of cases out the door, where it was not the fault of the claimant that they were over-loaded and where the staff from the UC Department already determined them as ELIGIBLE. Why would they schedule a hearing for an appeal where the employer already denied willful misconduct in the initial fact-finding inquiry? They shoot themselves in the foot and create the over-load by permitting the unpermittable. The employer cannot waste the referee’s time or put the UC Benefits of the claimant in question for the purpose of appealing his own initial testimony.
If the UCBR developed non-prejudice policies and procedure, supervised and followed-up on the decisions of the referees, the caseload of error, coming to them, would be drastically reduced, just by having the referee abide by the non-prejudice policies that must conform to the right of due process and the right to a fair hearing.
Their reluctance to grant continuances, to avail claimants the fair opportunity to completely voice all their testimony and present evidence, is causing the incompleteness that results in upward assigning and continuance, where the claimants are not receiving due process from the referee decisions. They CANNOT refuse continuances to claimants because too many employers have jammed their calendar with frivolous appeals. They pacify the request of the employer but not the claimant. This is clearly prejudice. They are devaluating the claimant and minimalizing the importance of their Civil Rights, their Right to a Fair Hearing and the importance and relevance of their testimony.
10. UCBR: (these statements are a perfect example, of the practice, of shoving the priorities and defaults under the rug and attempting to slide the testimony, of the claimant, out the door before anyone chances to hear or pay attention to them) Quote item # 10 in portions; ” To the extent the court considers Petitioner’s Motion and Addendum to be her amended Brief, these lack a statement of the scope of review and standard of review, statement of the questions involved, summary of argument, argument and conclusion…. Wherefore , Petitioner, having failed to comply with this court’s order, dated October 12, 2004, to file an amended Brief…… and the petitioner’s Motion and Addendum being non-responsive ….(???)…..Respondent moves that your honorable Court dismiss Petitioner’s appeal…..Wherefore, petitioner, having failed to state grounds upon which relief can be granted……. (???)….and Respondent, having complied with the Petitioner’s request for a copy of the referee’s hearing transcripts of April 21, 2004, Respondent moves that your honorable Court deny Petitioner’s Motion and Addendum…..”.
REPLY: the UCBR has clearly resorted to false statements, incorrect information and non-compliance with procedure. Also, in the attempt to over-step and erase the defaults proven in the appellant’s Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice/ plus Addendum, Respondent has failed to give any viable explaination or retort to several documented issues, including the employers initial fact-finding statements and their transcribed hearing testimony, that willful misconduct was NOT the reason for termination, the missing 34 page letter of request for reconsideration that was not appended to the record and possibly more missing material of testimony, presented by the appellant, or they would not consider that these blatent false statements could be found believable if ALL the evidence and testimony are available for evaluation. “Wherefore, Petitioner, having failed to state grounds upon which relief can be granted…..” Where are the pages listing all this material if this Respondent believes they have not been presented? It is obviously a rouse to avoid admitting that serious mistakes were made and Immediate Reversal of their Illegal Decisions can be the only recourse possible for this Honorable Court to proceed with, having in its philosophies founded on a more ethical standard of practices than these being resorted to by the Respondent. Therefore, the Appellant moves that this honorable and ethical Court deny the Respondents Motion to Dismiss the Petitioner’s Appeal, and further moves that the Appellant be granted an immediate reversal of all decisions that denied UC Benefits with prejudice.
In conclusion, UCBR counsel, having the disadvantage of arriving late in these proceedings, and to be liberal, may not have been privy to the entire record of testimony and the chronology of evidence presented by the Appellant, is unfortunately lacking an awareness and insight of the urgency of the need for immediate Reversal and disbursement of UC Funds to legally ELIGIBLE claimants. Please review the list of 17 personal tragedies that are suffered within 30 days of a referee’s denial, listed on page 6 of the Appellants Motion to Reverse.
This is not a time to “save face”, but an opportunity to “man up” and admit honorably that errors have been discovered, many victims have been left homeless, many lives are being destroyed by these merry-go-round delay tactics and policies. Yes, the claimants do eventually go away and leave you alone. They are forced to leave the state, those who survive alive. But these were never the stereotypical images you are holding of hoboes who are too lazy to work. These are people who have worked hard all their lives. Some have degrees, own their own homes and serve on community boards. These are people who were employed full-time, very recently. But in an alarming number of cases, they have been unjustly severed from the workplace through a common practice of deception, slander and framing innocent employees in order to dishonestly lay the groundwork for false statements of “just cause” for termination in order that the employer might avoid UC Benefits payments. These are people who have even been more adept and efficient at doing their job than their supervisors and were viewed as a threat. Therefore the groundwork is laid down to get rid of them “with just cause”.
They never deserved to loose their jobs, and now you impose on them homelessness, starvation, banishment and possibly death.
Read my lips. A State, a city, a country cannot survive the budgets required when there are no citizens paying taxes or having consumable income. Everyone and everything is affected by negative, unethical, uncaring, uncompromising policies and practices that would obstruct consumable incomes to the citizens. These are good people being abused.
Please STOP THE ABUSE.
Thank you,
Dawn Naret’
Current Contact Info:
P.O. Box 2315 Pittsburgh, Pa 15230-2315
reply2dn@gmail.com
dawnaret@yahoo.co.uk
(Old Original Contact Info-see below):
Dawn Naret’
P.O. Box 643
Lancaster, Pa. 17608 (no phone anymore – dependant on free Library computer access)
dawn_naret@emailaccount.com
dawn_naret@yahoo.com
<div align=”center”><script language=”JavaScript” src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ mce_src=”http://www.tech-counter.com/techcount.php?page=http://www.dawnnaret.blogspot.com&style=LED_g&digits=6″ type=”text/javascript”><!–
//–></script><br /><a href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com” mce_href=”http://www.nyplasticsurg.com”>gynecomastia</a></div>
LETTER TO MACAREVICH, ATTY FOR PA STATE:
Dawn M. Naret’
P.O. Box 643
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17608
(717) 394-2171
Gerard Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Counsel
Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
10th floor Labor and Industry Bldg.
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120
November 14, 2004
Deputy Mackarevich,
On October 25, 2004, I sent a repeat request for records on case no. 1742 CD 2004. You very kindly and very promptly intervened and responded to that request in the absence of Clifford Blaze, Esquire, but you did not send me ALL the records.
Unfortunately, I have reached an end of available waiting time and have submitted a Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice (you’re welcome J) to the Commonwealth Court of Pa, on November 10, 2004.
I also attempted to send you a copy of the correspondence, for Certificate of Service, since I have not been informed of exactly whom, if not yourself, is assuming full duties of the absent Attorney Blaze.
The mailing was returned to me, with refusal to forward it to you. I then faxed it to your fax number listed on your letterhead.
Today, I am mailing you a copy of an Addendum to that Motion. I chose to expand on some dialog.
Again, I thank you, very much, for your intervention and assistance in bringing this case to a long over-due completion.
Regards,
Dawn M. Naret’
LETTER TO PROTHONOTARY:
Dawn Naret’, Attorney, Pro Se
P.O. Box 643
Lancaster, Pa 17608-0643
Commonwealth Court of Pa.
Office of the Prothonotary
Irvis Office Bldg. – Rm. 624
Harrisburg, Pa 17120
Atten: Mr. Daniel R. Schuckers, Esquire
Regarding: Appellants 11/8/04 Motion to Remand or reverse with Prejudice and 11/10/04 Addendum to be appended to that Motion.
CASE: Dawn Naret’ v. UCBR
No. 1742 CD 2004
11/29/04
Dear Mr. Schuckers,
I was awaiting a response, from the UCBR office, within the required 20 days, to the Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice, filed by me 11/8/04, (prior to the 11/12/04 dead-line for brief submission).
What I received is a partial response to only a few items of contention that prompted the Motion. I can only be liberal to the UCBR and assume that they have given a timely response to that Motion with their 11/24/04 communication, stated in the form of a request for Motion to Dismiss the Appeal of the Petitioner. (???)
It is an unusual response, considering the evidence presented in the Motion to Remand or Reverse with Prejudice/plus Addendum. I am very certain that a dismissal would be, without a doubt, a very serious violation of all laws, codes and procedures that they are obligated to comply with.
Their denial of Due Process was one of the contentious issues and the illegal denial of benefits, where willful misconduct was not proven or stated by the employer, relegate this case beyond the possibility of legal dismissal.
Therefore, I am submitting an OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO DISMISS PETITIONER’S APPEAL and also requesting that the justification of this opposition be summarized in my permissible REPLY TO THEIR RESPONSE, as I am submitting it within the required 10 days and I am willing, as I said, to be liberal as to the venue of their 11/24/04 communication.
I hold no negative opinions toward any of the staff currently focusing on this case. I am fully aware of the difficulties they have encountered with staff replacements and various other cogs in the wheel.
I consider myself fortunate that Mr. Gerard Mackarevich, Deputy Chief Counsel and Ms. Janet M. Tarczy, Assistant Counsel, should have been willing to come in on this problem situation at such a late date.
I have addressed the Certificate of Service to both or either Mr. Mackarevich or Ms. Tarczy, since I have not been told whom to consider the official replacement of Attorney Clifford Blaze, who left in August 2004.
There has been, repeated lack of communication as well as misinformation that created an unfair tragedy including now; eviction and homelessness, due to the illegal withholding of UC benefit funds.
Because of the situation advancing to such an intensely serious miscarriage of justice, I must beg your compassion and assistance in expediting the reversal and release of UC funds immediately. I have no phone either, and cannot continue to accomplish these necessary clerical communications and requirements.
It is not an incompetence on my part, it is an injustice that I should be required to suffer through so much difficulty to receive what I am already entitled to and was already approved for, before the referee erred in her judgment and knowledge of the UC Law.
I can be contacted by e-mail at:
Dawn_naret@emailaccount.com or
Dawn_naret@yahoo.com
Thank you and regards,
Dawn Naret’
P.O. Box 643
Lancaster, Pa 17608
(No phone no.)
Mr WordPress 2:37 pm on August 9, 2008 | # | e
Hi, this is a comment.
To delete a comment, just log in, and view the posts’ comments, there you will have the option to edit or delete them.