Wikipedia Sarch Link

Search results

Monday, December 31, 2012


This follow-up to this previous post WHEN DISTRESSED CONDITIONS ARE ALLOWED TO OCCUR is carried out to point out that the investment by MidAmerican in 2008 in the location via, which this FEER subscription was ordered via check #2688 in 2004 does not change just because of their “grandiose” gesture based on a certain Mogul’s “principle” that , a) brandishing investment in conjunction with b) closing the USSBIA financial accounts through, which the check was written (for non existent reasons) alters historical events, in the pursuit of purchased “legitimacy”. See the below email communications.



This is follow-up to the posts COINCIDENCES AND OTHER THINGS - UPDATED (10/30/2012) as well as HOW TO ESTABLISH AN INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BLAME NO-ONE to document that while the current financial crisis (of at least a century) was a crisis for many, not all suffered as a result and this post is an effort to help put this series of events in proper perspective for a better understanding. According to that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from August 26, 2011 a certain well-known Mogul went on a spending spree during this fiasco for many and profited greatly. Those deals between 2008 and 2009 totaled more than $21 billion in such corporate Titans as, Wall Street’s Goldman, General Electric, Swiss Reinsurance Co, Dow Chemical Co and Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co in the form of preferred equity, bonds and other preferred instruments with some of the highlights as follows:

In 2008:
GOLDMAN & SACHS GROUP INC. - $5 billion for, which Goldman paid $5.5 billion to redeem in the spring of 2011 after having previously paid $1 billion in dividends to the Mogul (as of the time of this article the stock had dropped 12%).

GENERAL ELECTRIC CO - $3 billion in preferred stock to boost liquidity for, which GE was expected to repay the Mogul in terms similar to what he obtained from Goldman (however, as of the article’s writing the stock had dropped 37%).

BYD (Shenzhen, China based manufacturer of “Green” vehicles), - US$1.8 billion for a 10% stake in that company through its MidAmerican Energy unit), A deal at the time thought to be a wise investment with its rising share price, however by 2011 the price had fallen to around HK$16/share down from a high of approximately $19/share (as reported in the August 24, 2011 edition of that popular daily/weekend Business Publication).

In 2009:
SWISS REINSURANCE CO - $2.6 billion in the form of a loan to rebuild its capital and in return the Mogul received 12% annual return in securities and the loan has been repaid.

In 2011:
Even though the Judge in the case wasn’t impressed by the $33 million “sweetheart” settlement worked out with the SEC and BofA, as previously documented in comment # 1 from 12/23/2012 on the
COMMENTS 2 Page, (the mere fact that it was publicly proposed was sufficient) for some Mogul who apparently offered to “invest” in their institution to the tune of the $5 billion he was reported to have offered to invest in this entity that began with a phone call from this Mogul office at approximately 11:00 am on August 24, 2011 and ended one day later the 25th at 8:30 am with the Board of Directors approving the infusion. What a vote of confidence from One (noted for his highly “thin” standards) in this Institution for having the courage to publicly propose their $33 million settlement deal with the SEC (to provide a con artist with “legitimacy” based on another’s records). Could it be that this was a quid pro quo deal worked out and would have taken place anyway, irrespective of whatever else occurred, because it provided support for this entity’s identity switching/stealing, perpetual wealth generating methodology?
In conclusion, since this crisis, which just happened to bring about “coincidental” distressed conditions for many, not all suffered therefore, no-one can be at fault when a few profited so handsomely at the expense of so many, because if one individual knew to bet against the subprime market as documented in the post “WHAT’S NEXT FOR AN INSTANT SOCIETY? ”, at least another [who is known as a type of “Sultan of Panama” and prides himself as being omnipotent (because for some unknown reason he appears to be knowledgeable of all the events in my life) and who profited handsomely (in his all-knowing wisdom) most likely, also knew]. I WONDER WHAT TYPE OF DISTRESSED CONDITIONS WILL “COINCDENTALLY” OCCUR AT SOME POINT IN TIME NEXT TO ENABLE THIS MOGUL TO PROFIT GREATLY OUT OF THE SUFFERING OF SO MANY? This is in a nutshell why a “WHO” answer was not possible in that financial crisis inquiry, in my opinion.

Sunday, December 30, 2012


This is an update to the previous post UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RULE THE DAY in the interest of accuracy after conducting additional research to ensure that a more completed picture was being viewed of the circumstances surrounding the example 2 used regarding the delivery giants with names that sounds like Phextes and Youpzs, and what was realized was that this entity’s (Phextes) Founder and CEO guards the position of the Company he founded in 1971 with much passion. Furthermore, there is an ongoing and long-standing rivalry between these two nemeses. Therefore, this Entity’s position has to be viewed in this light because of the intense competitive nature of their business. For example, when the Phextex CEO announced in July 2010 that his organization had purchased new transportation equipment, which in his opinion would be a “game changer” in the competition with his archrival Youpzs in the Asian delivery and pickup route. Youpzs immediately responded that they did not believe the new equipment would a game changer of any type and even if such was the case, they had the means necessary to adjust their own network to neutralize any competitive advantage even if any such were to occur. The Founder finished his announcement as reported in that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from July 14, 2010 by pointing out that “the secret of this business is you’ve got to have a defensive strategy, as well as an offensive strategy.” Therefore, in conclusion, it is being pointed out that the actions of both Phextes as well as Youpzs have to be viewed in the light of these highly competitive circumstances.  


There is a real dilemma, which describes polar opposite scenarios with no easy answers in sight facing our society. At one end of the scale there exists the hedge fund industry with assets reportedly managed by such funds totaling $1.92 trillion by the end of 2010, which was up by 20% from the previous year. To better place this in proper perspective, these assets increased a staggering one hundred and fifty ($150) billion in the fourth (4th) quarter of 2010 alone. The dilemma that exists is the average of 8% to 9% unemployment figure that existed even during the referenced year and still exists while some boldly claim in front of millions that things are on the “right’ track and that “no-one else could have done better” given the existing conditions. In the face of the desperation conditions many have experienced as a result of the worst financial crisis in almost a century many believed this to be true.
The point being made here is this, why is it not possible for some individual to devise a method to make these two scenarios benefit each other? A method is possible to solve most dilemmas, however, the biggest drawback is the type of mindset that has overtaken society (like a controlling vine), which has deluded us to become seduced with INSTANT “everything”. As a result, its difficult to expect anyone to wait for years for returns on their investments instead of the average of 10.5% annual return on investment of these types of investment vehicles, not even taking into account the average gain of 15% annual return for the Standard & Poor’s (S & P) 500 index and the 19% return on the average stock mutual fund. In some individual cases an increase of 590% in a single year is possible, (as occurred by the individual who correctly bet that the subprime mortgage market was about to implode and personally made four (4) billion in the process in 2007 (as reported in that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from January 28, 2010 (A1/2).
It is because of the “meism” of our society exemplified best by the dearth of “reality” television programs with the promise of INSTANT stardom for “one” successful contestant, etc. explains best why these two (2) can’t be successfully devised to be beneficial for each other because Fund Manager wouldn’t be able to realize their billion-dollar/year average returns and would lose their reputations as being elite Managers. After all, why should anyone have to wait to achieve “success” in the age of: instant food, instant beverages, instant accomplishments, instant identities, instant qualifications, instant access, instant mail, instant communications, instant credit, instant elections, instant crops, instant stardom, instant military records, instant cures and even instant families may now also be available.
Clearly, the investment resources are available to address one part of the dilemma, however, the real question that exists is, is the will available to make these two (2) scenarios work for each other? Our society may be too far down the INSTANT road to be able to successfully tackle this scenario without some unplanned event of such a magnitude bringing about conditions to “force” society to rethink its values in the conundrum we are facing. However, there is always a chance for real CHANGE to turn the tide!

Saturday, December 29, 2012


According to HWJ Jr., a writer from that Daily/Weekend Business Street Publication, if you are investigating the underlying issues involved in causing the greatest financial breakdown in nearly a century (as occurred in 2008), start by asking an irrelevant question. In his opinion, the WHO was not addressed only the WHAT. My late Mother in her wisdom would point out “if you start wrong, you are not going to end up right”. HWJ Jr. in the January 29/30, 2011 edition (A17) concluded that the investigation was an exercise in political correctness because the relevant WHO question (or the elephant in the room for lack of a better symbol) was not addressed. What was missing in my opinion was clarity of focus, such as was exercised by those who established theground rulesfor determining at whose doorstep ALL the (complex security issues involved in the changing role of an Embassy in awar” zone) responsibility for the blame in the recent Syrian Embassy issue, lay. For example, if an embassy is called upon to provide assistance to another Department or Agency (especially one more proficient in security measures), who bears overall responsible for adequate security, especially if such practices are carried out in a “war” zone? That Report from all media reports left no doubt about the central responsible party and it can only be concluded that all these secondary factors were examined in arriving at the conclusion drawn. It only goes to show in all fairness, that thewillto find out the WHO is possible, on occasion does take place. All that’s needed is to find out is, what are the type of contributingfactorsrequired in order to establish clearly focused ground rules thattargetthe relevant criteria, such that the focus will be consistently clear instead of being diffused on occasion, (in the opinion of some).
Perhaps by this action, it was demonstrated that the Writer in the December 31, 2009 edition of the same Popular Publication (A13) was not correct in concluding that under the current Administration, “we have pulled back from the foreign world. We’re smaller for accepting that false choice between burdens at home and burdens abroad, and the world beyond our shores is more hazardous and cynical for our retrenchment and our self-flagellation.” However, it may take more than a single decisive action such as this to prove this writer wrong, (when the state of the world is taken into consideration). Maybe, it was the loss of “life” that marshaled all the competing interests, but what about all the secondary indirect lives impacted by the financial disaster either directly or indirectly. Who can say with any certainty that loss of “life” did not occur as a result of the financial disaster and that those as well as the surviving do not deserve a WHO answer as well! This demonstrates fair(ness) to those impacted in the financial crisis scenario and does not represent a delve into political policy on my part!
NOTE: This Writer is taking steps to ensure that the repeated use of “we” is not inclusive just because of my use of this quotation in this subject. This position is necessary especially since “Society’s” types standards for demonstrating “legitimacy” are very “thin”.

Friday, December 28, 2012


When a company makes an offer forcing another in the midst of merging with a third entity to reassess their proposed deal, what typically are the real underlying reasons for such offers? Sometimes what is not stated openly may be more than meets the eye. Consider the following two (2) examples:
  • When the Reinsurer’s division of a certain Mogul made a $52/share offer for Transatlantic Holdings inc. to the tune of $3.25 billion, this led Transatlantic to state that this offer was likely to lead to a “superior proposal” to its merger agreement with the third Company as reported in a popular Daily/Weekend Business publication from August 5, 2011 (C3). Since Transatlantic had already agreed to a merger with Allied World Assurance co. this offer led to a sell off of that Company’s stock thereby decreasing the value of its offer by 1.4% to $2.72 billion, and the value of a rival’s (Validus Holdings Ltd) third hostile bidder’s offer to $2.79 billion as that Company’s stock dropped by 4.7%. This course of action appears to be aimed at forcing Allied World to commit to a more expensive merger offer, weakening this Company in order to force them into a position needed to obtain the “superior (quid pro quo) proposal”. Could it be that some form of identity switching/ mangling activity was the real aim of weakening Allied World into accepting some “behind-the-scenes” type “credibility” activity for some Transatlantic “Society’s” type fraud with the $52/share offer?
  • Similarly when MidAmerican Energy holdings caused WPL to increase it merger offer for the then IES Industries with its (“prearranged” - see the below photo of a composite) hostile bid, was this action by this entity (now part of this Mogul’s Conglomerate) aimed at placing WPL into a weakened position to force them into acceptance of an impostor/con artist needing an identity from an individual hired for the purpose of identity transfer via quid pro quo deal-making (see the post ADDENDUM TO AN EXAMPLE OF HIRING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ID TRANSFER - UPDATED)? As it turned out, this Window-Dresser CEO showed that he also was “Society’s” type material and could be brought in exchange for a “price.” He was later rewarded handsomely for his (quid pro quo) part in this “multi-layered” merger (see the posts EXPLANATION OF A DISASTER-PRONE WINDOW-DRESSING PERSON) and HOW TO IMPLEMENT IDENTITY THEFT AND LEGITIMIZE FRAUD - UPDATED.  



This post is a follow-up to comment # 2 from 12/27/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page to attempt to answer the question raised to find a logical answer to why would such be permissible in this environment after the disastrous fiasco identified that went “unnoticed” for so long by so many. Well it would appear that those in the IDENTITY MASKING AND/OR SWITCHING business are “held” to different “standards” than most in effect they must be “Society’s” types. These types can: a) commit mail fraud, b) enter locked vehicles and “plant” evidence, c) close financial accounts of a targeted individual without reasons, d) obtained Social Security Administration “legitimacy” based on a “flawed” business card, e) completely take over the history of a targeted individual (including accomplishments and qualifications), f) steal a State Income Tax Refund check “to prove legitimacy”, g) illegally switch property records from one side of the road to the other to prove “authenticity” and h) after all these highly “ethical” practices claim to be the “originals” without consequences [see the post HOW TO STEAL WITHOUT VIOLATING COPYRIGHT MATERIAL CRITERIA (EDITED) ].
If you are able to carry out such activities as documented above and still present yourself as an ethical business operator of ANY type (even believing yourself to be a type of "Sultan of Panama"); then you can also ensure that financial overhaul guidelines also include a needed loophole for IDENTITY MASKING (AND/OR SWITCHING) in case the cloak of anonymity is needed at anytime to “hide” inexplicable funds of your "Society's" types and “gloat” that you are preferred five (5) to one (1) over another not in your “Society”. What is the moral here? If any individual is willing to operate in a “fictional world” with thin to zero standards and not be held accountable for illegal and/or highly unethical actions perpetrated, in the name of legitimacy and perpetual wealth-generation, then the “Society’s” type existence is the place for you. However, if you are the one (1) interested in CHANGE to be capable of ADAPTING TO SEE THE ALTERNATE VIEW, then THERE IS NOW ALSO A REAL CHOICE AVAILABLE. However, be warned “Society’s” types cannot take competition of any type, it’s their way or “WAR” (see the post NO BASIS FOR INVOLVEMENT IN PRIVATE MATTERS AS GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION).

Thursday, December 27, 2012


This follow-up to my comment # 1 from 12/27/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page documents my basis for my position indicating why my former Employer’s should in no way be involved in my plans made as a private individual because even the Constitution limits the powers of the States in Article 10 to form “agreements or compacts with another state…or engage in war”. To restrict the rights of any individual by subtle financial imprisonment can be compared to a type of embargo enacted when making “war” with another and this is what is being meted out to me, which is unconstitutional since the State is complicit in this action otherwise my State Income Tax Refund check would not have been stolen, blatantly (see NOTICE OF STOLEN CHECK).
Just as my position was clearly documented in the communication outlining my basis for declining from taking part in the Company incentive pay award program (see below photos documenting my position), it is only fitting that my former Employer

"Maintaned" should be "MAINTAINED" 
respectfully carry out the only ethical course of action possible here, namely, reciprocating by non involvement on the part of this entity regarding my personal affairs. This employer has no basis for involvement and should refrain from using any second or third party targeting in association with its “allies” to effect such involvement.


What are the chances of these various events documented in the post “HOW DOES STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT WORK?” being “random” occurrences, “independent” of each other? These are not samples chosen by me in such a manner as to influence the outcome but actual events that occurred. Furthermore, the relative frequency with, which these events took place has also not been influence by me because I had no way of influencing this population’s development. Therefore, the probability of these events being randomly occurring events can be determined by rigorous statistical methods but since this is not my objective, more general conclusions are being drawn especially when the developments surrounding event number 4 from the list in the previously referenced post, (post accident) are examined in greater detail, concurrent with other developments that took place.

As a result of the documented accident, which occurred at a definite point in time as previously described, my current vehicle with a VIN that “coincidentally” ends with the digits “…822” was obtained. When this development is viewed collectively with other events connected to me that also included these two last digits 22, (as discussed on this Blog’s” Pages in various posts); it is clear that they are not “random” occurrences in my opinion. Finally, the conclusion is being drawn that these developments are the result of those “skilled” in the art of identity switching/mangling “historically” as a business to produce the desired financially beneficial outcome (after the fact) to enable “walking away” with the identity of another as documented in the post  HOW TO STEAL WITHOUT VIOLATING COPYRIGHT MATERIAL CRITERIA (EDITED) ”.

NOTE: The above outcome admittedly appears to be a limited set of events from, which my conclusion appears to have been drawn. However, the result is also based on the assumption that all the occurrences in, which the numbers depicted “randomly appeared” for example, such as: 1) in a utility dividend check supportive details, 2) product delivery dates (for example ’05 Conservery calendars and other numerous other requested deliverables) and 3) the utility account assigned by my former Employer at my first residence in this State, etc. could not have occurred in the “random” manner in, which they all happened. MY ACCOMPLISHMENTS/QUALIFICATIONS WERE NOT UNDERTAKEN MERELY AS “RANDOM” OCCURRENCES TO PROVIDE “CREDIBILITY” FOR ANY INDIVIDUAL(S) OR (HIGH-SPEED RAIL) AS WELL AS ANY OTHER SIMILAR PROJECT REGARDLESS OF HIS/HER/(THEIR)/ITS STATUS!


Wednesday, December 26, 2012


To circumvent this Conservery Copyright complication (as depicted below even though off line), the answer is simple, as follows:


1.     make strategic investments in targeted entities such as the NYSE and ancestry types search databases,

2.     carefully contribute to a selected educational Institution(s),

3.     commit mail fraud to make sure that those with identities based on “a business card” receive Social Security Administration (SSA) “legitimacy”,

4.     close all financial accounts of the individual being defrauded after appropriate history has been established and allow those with fictional identities to open accounts,

5.     stage surgical accidents (see the post TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF REASONS FOR EXCLUDING LOCATIONS FROM CONSIDERATION), as appropriate,

6.     switch property boundaries from one side of the road to another (see the post THE CONDITIONS LEADING TO THE SWITCHING OF PROPERTY RECORDS AT 8263 140THAVE OLIN),

7.      do whatever it takes to ensure that payments are mailed from the accounts of those with “fictional” accounts (see comment # 1 from 12/26/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page),

8.     make sure all critical documents or property records contain selected numbers (such as 22 to pick random numbers, including any debit type card and even a vehicle VIN if possible [see the post HOW ARE X-RAYS AND A DIVIDEND CHECK CONNECTED (EDITED 12/3/20120?] and

9.    import another individual(s) as needed, arm him(them) with a “fictional” political name(s) relating to another nearby State to enable such a type(s) to exactly mimic the accomplishments, birth year etc., of the individual being targeted, hide him (them) in some small Midwestern town with a name that sounds like Carryon and provide him with “legitimacy” via deceptive mailings with a “fictitious” address sent to the Olin office/residence (see Issue 4.1 on the CQAP depicted in the post AN UNMISTAKABLE AND ONGOING PATTERN THAT HAS RESULTED IN MY DECISION TO RELOCATE –UPDATED) and


10. arrange for any “Society’s” type individual in need of a “voice” to receive such through a Court ruling if possible (see the post WHAT WAS OVERLOOKED IN THE FREE SPEECH DEBATE). 


After all these developments, “proclaim” yourself the “original” and attempt to walk away the accomplishments/qualifications of another (including any copyright material) and try to prevent the individual who is being defrauded from defending himself against such “high class” theft and with the assistance of “Society’s” perpetual wealth-generating types, success is assured, maybe!


This post is being updated to document that mail issues were a concern even when the Conservery Site was online as the included Page from the Site's CQAP from 6/20/2005 shows. The events previously documented in this Post as well as the following further underscore the decision to relocate out of State for the “health” and long-term success of the Proprietorship, as appropriate:

Example (5)

The most egregious event, the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) mailing to correct discrepancies discovered after replacement cards obtained earlier and the correspondence mailed on 1/26/2005 to initiate the process clearly showing“evidence” of having been tampered with as the correspondence was received from the SSA in a very different name form than was mailed out, via next day mail as documented in the post GIVING “LIFE” THE OLD FASHIONED WAY - UPDATED FOR AN EXAMPLE OF CONISTENCY.

My decision to relocate that began with the closing of the Proprietorship‘s office here in Olin, IA on January 2012 (see the post CONSERVERY FINAL STATUS UPDATE REGARDING STATE CRITERION - AMENDED), in the best interest on my Conservery was not made lightly and it should be respected because it’s unalterable. The following are but a small glimpse of the examples, which formed the basis for this decision since it establishes why in my opinion business cannot be conducted in an environment where my rights are disrespected, as follows:

Example (1)

The get well card mailed to a Former Governor discovered “stuffed” in the glove compartment of my then locked vehicle (see the below photo and HOW ARE STONEGATE THROUGH 140TH AVE, OLIN CONNECTED?):

Example (2)
The January 26, 2005 SSA letter mailed to correct certain irregularities that had been made in the replacement cards obtained in 1991 on returning from Vermont, which resulted in a response in the name of “fictitious”individuals as documented in the post GIVING “LIFE” THE OLD FASHIONED WAY UPDATED FOR AN EXAMPLE OF CONSISTENCY as well as its associated comments.

Example (3)

The 2005 calendar mailed to a Certain Corporation returned with all the addressee information blacked out except the word“Corporation”, in an apparent attempt to convey a message” of some sort, which could be interpreted as a form of intimidation, (see below):

Example (4)
The 2007 Reduced Pension letter to the Barbados Government dated May 12, 2007 returned in an unexplainable manner after a correction had been made to the earlier and the letter resent on May 14, 2007. See the below details and comment # 1 from 11/19/2012 on the COMMENTS Page, now accessible only vi the PREVIOUS COMMENTS link on the COMMENTS 1 Page.

The May 14, 2007 Corected Letter to the B'dos Government
The "TE" should be "THE"
The "I" after the 5/16/2007 date should be "in"

As previously stated, this small subset of activities has clearly shown an undeniable pattern of my actions being impeded by those who have decided that they know what is in my best interests, namely decisions/actions that assist these “Society’s” types and their Supporters maintain their masquerade at my expense. MY DECISION ON BEHALF OF THE CONSERVERY PROPRIETORSHIP WILL BE GIVEN THE RESPECT IT DESERVES including refraining from attempting to manipulate the choice of a relocation destination. THIS IS MY SIMPLE REQUEST THIS YEAR!


The purpose of this follow-up is to provide an answer to the question raised by the question in the post “WHERE WERE THE “ORIGINALS” WHEN THE HOUSE HUNTING TRIP FLIGHTS WERE IN MOTION? ”. As shown in the below photos, of the Credit Union loan payoff document received for the payoff for the ’89 Chevy Silverado pickup, purchased from Schoon's in 1994, [see the post CONNECTING THE DOTS FROM 1994 THROUGH 2005 ARBITRARILY (UPDATED 10/14/2013) for supporting details regarding this 1994 purchase]; these types were busily behind the scenes creating history the ”Society’s” way - “magically” out of thin air. This in a nutshell is why they could not be found, I had not been in this State/location for a long enough duration establishing “actual” history and ADAPTING TO SEE THE ALTERNATE VIEW) for such types to “come out of the closet” and claim “legitimacy”. This scenario adds to my basis for needing to relocate for the long-term “health” of my Proprietorship as documented in the post AN UNMISTAKABLE AND ONGOING PATTERN THAT HAS RESULTED IN MY DECISION TO RELOCATE and shows a pattern of backdating of specific "critical" documents as a means of obtaining history the "free loaders cause" way (as previously documnted in the post HOW TO IMPLEMENT IDENTITY THEFT AND LEGITIMIZE FRAUD - UPDATED (AND EDITED) in order to demonstrate "credibility" the easily obtained "whatever works" methods.
'98 Chevy Pick-up should be '89 Chevy Pick-up


Tuesday, December 25, 2012


This post is an update to the previous posts ADDENDUM TO GIVING “LIFE” THE OLD FASHIONED WAY - UPDATED (9/1/2012) FOR AN EXAMPLE OF CONSISTENCY and AN EXAMPLE OF HIRING FOR THE PURPOSE OF IDENTITY TRANSER to show a snapshot in time for as a reference point to attempt to determine where the originals were when my family and I were on the house hunting trip to Iowa (regardless of the use of the “hollow” name by my then Employer even before I was hired showing intent to hire for the purpose of identity mangling and transfer). The below copies of the Boarding Passes from Flights 25 and 685 from 5/19/1991 raises the question,
which is the subject of this post for the record. These dormant “originals” that only seem to have blossomed after our arrival (via labels, numbers and careful mailings that attempted to establish originality via external indications) as well a history only established via (matching that of mine exactly); must have been in hiding when these house hunting trip activities were taking place. Please don’t think for one moment that because this airline is now merged and can’t be found that this flight information is no longer in existence. As can be seen here, A TRAIL STILL EXISTS! 


This revision to the post ADDENDUM TO AN EXAMPLE OF HIRING FOR THE PURPOSE OF IDENTITY TRANSFER - UPDATED is further being edited to include additional details from my old Credit Union account to include routine transactions carried out even after the dates in question (shown below) in addition to eligibility and the method through, which payments for the Mitsubishi Montero were made to CNB and the follow-up account Owners to establish ownership even in the small issues as well and by so doing address any issues being used by those in the business of altering historical records.

The Money Orders for making payments to the Montero's Account Holders were purchased initially through the CU and indirectly after the CU's relationship with the MO's Issuer changed.

This update includes a practical example of the final point made in the previous post, about the main occupation of the con artist. Simply put, just being confident in the fact that knowing he is able to take credit for my career accomplishments as well as whatever it takes to completely take over the identity of “indentured service provider” (me). There is no way this con artist and his “Society’s” types would be comfortable carrying out the type of violations of basic rights (and a subtle form of “indentured service”) unless confident of their “Exporting” deal had been in place, because too many international laws are being violated and the arrogance with, which such types carry out their actions, is evidence of the fact that a quid pro quo deal of this type has been put in place. Then as previously stated all this con artist does, is sit back and take credit for every major activity carried out by me, as depicted in the following example. The previous post AN ABBREVIATED LISTING OF THE SIGNS THAT YOU (“SOCIETY’S” TYPES) HAVE BECOME IMPRISONED IN ANOTHER’S IDENTITY documented my career enhancement courses, which were taken at the Harvard School of Public Health in 1995 and as the below photos of the registration and payment methods show, this artist appears to be busily

injecting himself in the payback terms as well, with a payment of $24.33 (the “supposed” work/employee number and birth year of his “artist”), every pay period for a total of 35 payments. This is why he felt so confident in placing his numbers on the office "wing" constructed for "very, very valid reasons". If this is not an unlawful form of indentured service, what is it? (Indentured service if I may digress, is the working for another/entity for only your physical living arrangements in a nutshell). This is evident by the fact that such types use every illegal method possible to pretend that my Proprietorship is theirs, period. Furthermore, they attempt to take credit for all my work history in Connecticut, my school accomplishments, the property here at 8263 140th Ave, Olin, IA by illegally switching property records (see he post THE CONDITIONS LEADING TO THE SWITCHING OF THE PROPERTY RECORDS AT 8263 40TH AVENUE - UPDATED, etc and even those of my son (see the post MISLABELING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS).
I have neither entered into any such agreement with anyone nor has any other individual/entity been endowed with the right to make such decisions on my behalf or of my son, Dejon (the original). INDENTURED SERVICE DOES NOT LEGALLY EXIST IN ANY FORM AND IT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


That popular Legislation when passed in 2002 was considered initially to be the most important political reform Legislation of the decade by limiting spending on corporations and unions. However, within seven (7) very short years, key parts of the legislation had been overturned based on the "thinking" that the Constitution only promised “the freedom to speak” not “equal speech”.
I am going to attempt to examine this issue from fairness point-of-view and avoid becoming embroiled in political policy issues to remain consistent with my Guidelines. Whatever imperfections this Bill may have had, its initial premise was valid, if viewed from the following perspective.
It is correct that the Constitution only guarantees the freedom to speak and this should never be altered, however this freedom is available to individuals only. The more important question, which was not addressed is who personified entities and “endowed’ them with the “freedom” to speak? The Constitution certainly does not.  Entities run by individuals who all collectively already have the freedom to speak, need no further freedom to speak through the entities they control (unless special status is being attributed to any specific individual and then this is not a valid mechanism via, which such should be obtained and is highly unethical). The unfairness is included here, because by guaranteeing entities the freedom to speak, they are being personified and those who control them are being provided with an additionalvoice” via, which to speak not available to members of the public at large and IN THIS MANNER THE CONSTITUTION WAS OVERTURNED AND THIS IS BLATANTLY UNFAIR.

Monday, December 24, 2012


The initial post in this series “THERE IS ALWAYS AN ALTERNATE VIEW, IF TIME IS TAKEN TO FIND IT, pointed to adaptability as a trait of those with the capability to perceive such circumstances in the midst of impending events. This ability is not to be confused with vacillating, however. A lesson from nature may be the best avenue to demonstrate this example (based on an article from writer Sharon Begley from 5/26/2006 from a popular daily/weekend financial publication), as follows.
If the example of an adaptable plant is used, what is discovered is this, bracken fern whose fiddleheads (or young unfurling leaves), which are considered a delicacy in some Asian cuisines while those of another variety, ostrich ferns are more common in US restaurants), provide some unique qualities worth further examination. These ferns are so popular for foraging, etc., that more than one hundred (100) species either suck or chew on these fronds (or leaves of fern-type plans). Brackens respond with poisons of dangerous chemicals that can either destroy or deter the organisms that attack them. While these chemicals aren't in large enough quantities to deter large attackers such as cattle, they can be lethal to small insects. This is an example of the ability to be adaptable in its most basic and dramatic form, from the point-of-view of the plant world, to provide an insight into how an adaptable individual can recognize what's at stake and utilize available (non lethal defensive) resources to meet the challenge at hand.


The follow-up to the previous post MISLABELING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS documenting my son Dejon's abilities is being carried out to include a composite of his resume from the Conservery Site (designed by him as shown below) from

6/25/2005 documenting his skills as depicted at that time. Some who are in the habit of playing “god” in the lives of others are of the opinion that because this Site was removed that somehow this documented reference from a point in time has vanished but this page has been added to reinforce the fact that this is not the case just as the documented skills are Dejon’s and cannot be assigned to anyone, whether a “Driveby” pretender or anyone else. See the below composite photo of the Website page of his curriculum vitae. 


The two (2) scenarios below highlight the point being in this subject as follows:
  1. It can only be concluded from the actions of “Society’s” types using all types of isolated inferences to rewrite “heritages” to provide themselves with the most desirable heritages that’s affordable, that when the Nation’s Highest Court by a 6-3 majority in a previous ruling, declared it unconstitutional to hold anyone accountable for lying about their military service, that a collective “sigh of relief” went up from those with “manufactured” identities/ancestries along with those who “trade” in such for perpetual wealth-generation, because by extension those with fictitious identities can’t be held accountable as well. The only casualties were TRUTH and any individual who has experienced STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT (a very narrow group so maybe the overall benefits outweigh the negative drawbacks.)
  2. A “victory” of sorts was reinforced for those who believe in “lawsuit threats" as a means of obtaining “legitimacy” as typified by example from media reports in 2009 when a spiff between the two package delivery giants developed over a claim by one such provider with a name that sounds like Youpzs aired a commercial claiming to be the most reliable service provider based on shippers research conducted by the then Morgan Stanley in November the previous year. Rival Phextes demanded in a letter on 3/31/09 that Youpzs refrain from making the claim and filed suit as well in a Memphis, TN federal court. Faced with this “temper tantrum”, Youpzs withdrew the ad as it (just was worth the effort). However, in a 4/26/2009 follow-up Morgan Stanley follow-up survey, (as expected), Phextes received “top” billing from the shippers survey. 
What a turnaround, in a society founded on the principal of “liberty and justice for all” that: TRUTH, as well as THE RIGHTS OF THOSE IMPACTED BY STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT and THE ABILITY TO PUBLISH INFORMATION IN YOUR BEST INTEREST have all been “imprisoned” in that same society a short two hundred and thirty-seven (237) years later.

Sunday, December 23, 2012


This follow-up to the previous post PRACTICAL INVOLVEMENT CANNOT BE ASSUMED SIMPLY WITH LABELS AND NUMBERS is needed since there may be some conflict in determining whether or not the (con artist) “Director” is legally required to step down, notify the SEC within the required FOUR (4) days before assuming another position for compliance purposes (as documented in the comment from 12/21/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page). The following clear US Postal Service verified evidence between that the con artist and James F. Brazant exists clearly showing two (2) distinct individuals and not one and the same thus  requiring


compliance. The fact that the communication took place before the “needed” office “wing” was built (and this con artist then placed various labels on that new “wing”), doesn’t change the fact that different individuals were involved. The same individual who communicated with the “Director” (con artist) CEO from the previous address was not transformed into a con artist due to labels and numbers for “credibility” and COMPLIANCE IS REQUIRED!


In picking up on the theme as planned to coincide with my birth date, which is today, December 23rd, VIEWING FROM AN ALTERNATEPERSPECTIVE, time is being taken to honor the memory of a loving Mother, who never stopped giving me advice even from a distance and who “gave her life” for a cause she never knew and would have never supported in anyway shape or form. To digress, on Friday 21st while out clearing snow in the driveway (to ensure that my son would be able to re-enter the driveway on his return home since he was caught out in the blizzard at work from Wednesday the 19th when he decided to await the coming blizzard to ensure he would be in place to oversee the normal functioning of his Departmental rather than be stuck at home under these conditions). While out, I saw a flock of approximately fifty (50) Canadian geese flying south in the usual V-shaped pattern between 4:30 and 5:00 pm. What was unusual in this scenario was that a single goose was flying in pursuit of the others approximately 300 to 400 yards behind. The thought occurred to me, how many individuals if caught in a similar situation would be able to chart a course and maintain it successfully as this single goose was doing?      
Back to my main focus, since the summer of 2000 was such an instrumental year for me in that an activity intended for devious purposes (see the post DRIVBY OWNERS AND THEIR COMMON FEATURES SHARED WITH SOME BIRDS), was turned around and made into an instrument for CHANGE regardless of what some may attempt to associate my Proprietorship with, it is being used as the basis for his post. As a result, to best highlight her memory in my opinion is to typify it by example with the actions of another female who saw the alternative view from her perspective and turned things around. 
This CEO, known as KM took over the operation of the retail chain Tuesday Morning in August 2000. What she discovered was the following: 1) inventory mounting at widely scattered warehouses, 2) inventory not arriving in time for store sales and 3) an outmoded tracking system, making staying on top of inventory impossible. She took charge by: 1) centralizing warehouse operations, 2) purchasing a state-of-the-art inventory tracking system, 3) seting unbendable deadlines for in-store product deliveries, 4) making sure that loyal customers received advanced notice of event sales and 5) increasing the marketing budget. After 2 short years, her swift action had paid off and an operation that was in decline was brought back to “life” through the first three (3) quarters of that year to the extent of almost a 180-degree turn (the period, which was the focus of this IBD article from October 24, 2005). 
What are some of the techniques employed by some leaders from, which examples can be adapted: 1) to survive “real” change is needed, 2) be very careful who you surround yourself with, since direct reports provide “filtered’ information, which may or may not be accurate, 3) consider your customers (in whatever medium you are involved with) as your chief advisers by finding out what they “actually” desire through research and not the opinions of individuals and 4) CONSTANTLY LEARN FROM YOUR EXPERIENCES TO RECOGNIZE HOW THE ALTERNATIVE VIEW CAN BE REALIZED AND BECOME MORE ADEPT AT IMPLEMENTING LESSONS LEARNED IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE SUCCESS

Saturday, December 22, 2012


The previous post "WHAT DO DRIVEBY OWNERS AND SOME BIRDS HAVE IN COMMON? " is being updated to include Issue # 2.1 from then CQAP from the Conservery website from 6/13/2005 (see below photo).