Wikipedia Sarch Link

Search results

Monday, January 2, 2012


How are those whose very existences are completely based on the “virtual” society able to exist in maintaining their double lives? This posting provides the answers you were awaiting, as follows: 1) with the backing of individual(s) who either outwardly convey “strong” ethical standards and/or a few whose business or themselves have gained “fairly well known reputations historically, 2) by exploiting and/or magnifying minute details, 3) with the support of “family” members, spouses and others with any connection to the main/central individual being “shafted”, 4) in exchange for their cooperation either blackmail and/or some type of inducement is used to obtain their support to essentially “sell-out” the person involved, 5) covering up and/or replacement of any connected individuals previously associated with the individual recent past is carried as appropriate, 6) constant advertising is needed/required for authenticity (if they are carrying on a business of their own) and by businesses who are knowingly supporting these individuals in their “virtual” identities (because they do not have any history and/or foundation on their own) and 7) the strong (financial and/or other) support of the political process is required to ensure that the “right” candidates are elected (TYPICALLY THOSE WITH CHARACTER/TRACK RECORD "FLAWS" AND/OR THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN DISCARDED BY OTHERS), for the obvious reasons.
Without these tenets, it would be impossible for those with “virtual identities" to maintain them. Likewise those whose financial “empires” are based on supporting this “virtual” world would not otherwise be able to achieving the “successes” they constantly remind us of.
Specific Examples:
  • In my case, the consequences of having identical legal names shared with my father is what was manipulated. Even though the youngest, I was named after my father, (James Francis Brazant, which one “identity dodger” is very likely Texploiting and trying to imply that he was named after my Dad as firstborn because of his advance years without recognizing that my Father had NO offspring before his marriage to my mother as he was saving his funds to return and marry her as promised (see A TRIBUTE TO MY LATE MOTHER! and ANOTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF HAVING A "VIRTUAL" IDENTITY).
  • To digress, maybe my Father’s reason for naming me after him lies in the fact that he was grooming me to take over the family business and the exact name would have made the succession easier, and it would have happened but for my Mother’s decision not to expand at a critical point. I was the only one he took on his periodic trips to order supplies from wholesalers at every available opportunity, whom I also got become familiar with as a result. Their (my parents) first child (a stillbirth was not until circa 1947).
  • However, to differentiate between us, my middle name was “unofficially” (but familiarly) used as my usual first name. Therefore, it is not unusual to find communication to me either in my “unofficial” first name especially where family members are involved. That practice continued even after entering the USA in 1978 to further my studies (recognizing that most of my documents from Barbados were sent and/or initiated in my “unofficial” first name), and since my legal first name was used in my activities, to compensate; I used my full legal name (or included my middle initial as is now done), since I only occasionally did previously.
Vacation/Initial Leave of Absence Letter 2/28/1978 James   
TCI Acceptance Letter 12/14/1977

Communication with Justice's INS in Support of Study Leave, 1979 - Francis used.

Training Dept Request for Additional Info - Francis used

  • that is why even today, if I am completing anything requiring my first name, I use James F. as long as the software allows it.
B'dos Central Bank Approval from Funds
Transfer to USA for Education (Ref. 639/78 #27
 of 1/13/1978 Francis used.

B'dos Training Dept Assistance Approval -
J. Francis Bazant used.
B'dos Customs Dept Pension Agreement of
1983 After Resigning - James F. Brazant used
When my personal documents were not recovered after relocating to Vermont in 1989 (as documented in these documents), where various Agencies were contacted, and the process of identity switching was fully being implemented (as this response from the HHS in the form of Mr. and Mrs. James B. Brazant indicates fraud). However, I HAVE YET TO ACT ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE IRS TO REPLACE ANY TAX DOCUMENTS at ($75 per set of tax documents), from California, which is now the Filing Place for filers from Connecticut as well as the Midwest.

Dept of HHS Response of 2/17/2005

Letter to HHS Dept Dated 1/26/2005 about updating Social
Security Details Replaced in 1991

     Letter to IRS Documenting Copies of 
Records not Recovered Dated 5/3/2007
Communication with B'dos Gov't Regarding Previous
Reduced Pension/Gratuity Dated 5/14/2007 - Never Received any

  • Finally all the criteria listed above would make some type of sense, to explain why the Government never even responded to the above request agreed to in 1983 as shown above.   
All of the above have been pointed out to document for the record that my estranged spouse and I previously collaborated in the Proprietorship, however, this was no longer the case after February 7, 2011 as this Authorization of April 22, 2011 implicitly documents.
Conservery OUTDATED Autorization from 4/22/2011 Documenting the Eliminating of the Previous Position
 However, it must also be noted that the Header (of the Referenced document) also included education services as a reference only, to recognize that such services were offered. Going forward, such services were excluded consistent with the initial Conservery application shown on the Conservery Page.  Since the Authorization action indicated here as well as the on-going divorce proceedings obvious marital differences/circumstances exists; THIS ACTION THEREFORE ON MY PART IS TO PREEMPT THE EXPLOITATION OF THESE DIFFERENCES (BETWEEN MY ESTRANGED, SOON TO BE DIVORCED SPOUSE AND I), BY THOSE WITH THE DESIRE TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO (NAMELY CONSERVERY REMAINING IN IOWA AND NOT RELOCATE); TO TRY TO ACHIEVE THIS OBJECTIVE.

No comments: