Wikipedia Sarch Link

Search results

Tuesday, December 11, 2012


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!

1 comment:

J_F_Brazant said...

They are some “Society’s” types who would expect me to remain in this environment as documented in this post in, which my basic rights to implement decisions in the best interests of the Proprietorship are repeatedly violated and ideas infringed upon and outright stolen (see comment # 1 from 12/5/2012 on the COMMENTS 1 Page); who themselves “cry” foul when a simple matter such as other company’s names showing up when the name of a Company under their ownership is retrieved when searched brings litigation from these types (see the article from the 12/16/2004 edition of the IBD on Page A5. Would anyone care to guess about whose best interests such types are usually looking out for when making their pronouncements?