See these links to the CONSERVERY CHALLENGE RESULTS and the CONSERVERY BLOG page, which was used as an alternate to focus on the same issues in an effort to bring closure instead of via the Photo Challenge as originally intended:
DAY FORTY-TWO (42) 11/04/2012
This is the last update for this challenge and with the introduction of the Photo Challenge this combination is intended to bring completion to this saga that has gone on too long. There is more than to a person’s identity than taking a class photo and with the use of fancy photography insert the picture of a con artist into the photo via any Photo Pro(fessional) and then taking over all the individual’s accomplishments, changing stories, living in different places simultaneously, etc. In addition, there is also more to an individual’s identity than stealing financial history assuming their name, bribing certain types and eventually assuming the individual’s identity completely and eventually by the methods of the “Society’s” types thuggish practices, stage hands (or accident "stagers"), intimidation and/or harassment, etc. finally usurp the identity completely, because “Society’s”types who have taken it upon themselves to play “god” in the lives of those whom they have concluded, society in general would better off without have decided that replacement of such individuals with their “models” of the type of standards to aspire to, would be a fitting “end”. There have to be “actual”interaction in the historical events of the live of the individual whom they have decided to replace not just simply assuming the accomplishments of the individual and then using their methods to “force” acceptance of their “brand”and dare anyone to tell them there are not original with their easily gotten wealth through their perpetual wealth-generating schemes and conclude that simply by repetitive advertising, legitimacy will be attained. The PHOTO CHALLENGE is all about actual interaction in the life of the individual and if the questions can’t be answered, by these “Society’s” types they should vacate my identity and let me move on with my life without the form of “imprisonment”their whims and melodrama brings. TEN DAYS is sufficient time to demonstrate that actual interaction took place (by answering the questions) for those claiming to have been through my exact path, that is being (James F. Brazant). ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO CAN ANSWER THE PHOTO CHALLENGEQUESTIONS SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THE STAND ALONE EVIDENCE, to complete this requirement. There is no need for wasting financial resources (easily gotten or otherwise) trying to replicate the photos, knowledge of James F. Brazant’s history is being requested not photos and by the due date November 13, 2012.
DAY FORTY-ONE (41) 11/03/2012
On this continuing day of this Challenge, when it is clear that gimmicks have no place in producing this evidence, and desperation mode sets in amongst those with a desire to manipulate the desired outcome; the realization must finally be faced that not all situations can be accomplished by: strong-arm methods, stuffing prearranged end results into the mix to “produce” a version desired by “Society’s” types as well ELECTRONIC NETWORKING RECORDS FRAUD ON A SIGNIFICANT SCALE. Even when all that’s printed feign “unusual” solidarity, the hallmarks of those “Society’s” types must never be forgotten, as outlined in the post THE ORIGINS OF “VIRTUAL” “TWO-FACED”IDENTITIES. Finally, in closing it must be reinforced that STAND ALONE evidence simply put is just that, without gimmicks or some other reinvented mechanism to produce some desired outcome.
DAY FORTY (40) 11/01/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge it must be reinforced what was previously emphasized on Day 13 of this Challenge (included as an excerpt below); On this thirteenth (13th) day of this challenge and counting it is being emphasized that this evidence has nothing to do with any type of transportation whether air, sea or land related including motorized or non-motorized forms of transport as well as anything required to operate such whether legally required or otherwise. This broad category includes vehicle insurance, and frequenting an old establishment as a desperate act to demonstrate legitimacy is not required to validate the evidence simply because such instruments can be “taken over” by enterprising Insurance Types to provide legitimacy to “two faced” virtual frauds (see the below photo insert
of a closed policy). LET ME REITERATE, THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” (INENTITY CRUTCHES), WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM!
DAY THIRTY-NINE (39) 11/01/2012
The challenge continues on this day with the reminder that the evidence is the “STAND ALONE” type while at the same time emphasizing that many reason have dictated the path selected for this Challenge (as discussed on the various posts on the Blog - SOCIALLMEDIA ISSUES).
DAY THIRTY-EIGHT (38) 10/31/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, it must be emphasized that the evidence does not require a former aspiring OPPORTUNISTIC POLITICO (circa 1991, see DAY 33) regardless of his current title (labeled OPPORTUNISTIC SUPPORTER on this Blog), to provide his form of “legitimacy” to validate the evidence, since its STAND ALONE validity needs no individual with questionable motivations at best (who does not know when its time to leave the political stage to others), in order to validate it. If such individuals were credible, IDENTITY CRUTCHES would be unnecessary; whether mail diversion of a Storage account to connect to the history/identity of an individual whose Accident Report has been taken over in a brazen act of STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT (see the post WHEN IS AN “ACCIDENT” NOT REALLY AN“ACCIDENT”?), attempting to dictate the CLOSED subscription (account) of a prestigious publication to gain “instant” credibility in order to justify the previous Accident Report assumption (without the injuries), or misrepresenting the Proprietorship whenever property relocation search inquiries were implemented by me (an activity now halted, see the CONSERVERY OPEN POSITION Page for additional details), etc. None of these actions would be needed if authentic. Only those“Society’s” types with “two faces” whose qualities are listed in the post THE ORIGINS OF “VIRTUAL” “TWO-FACED” IDENTITIES, would have to resort to such methodologies, because of their need for “easy” everything. However, STAND ALONE evidence cannot be covered-up if you are unaware of what it is. Such types can only attempt to produce their own, with the aid of their (paid) supporters, which in a court setting would be termed perjured witnesses for a price (whether phony book sales or product endorsements such as “9 o’clock”coffee, etc.). In closing, it must be emphasized STAND ALONE, is just that.
been circulated unknown to me (see DAY 34 on this CHALLENGE Page). Therefore, by the beginning of 2002 I had received my layoff letter on February 19, 2002 to, which my response is shown above. After my lay off, the identity transfer scheme went into full gear, such that by March 3, 2003 the con artist “received” legitimacy for having been in Connecticut, “virtually” - see comment # 1 from 10/27/2012 on the COMMENTS Page), because of further deal-making involving the Country of my birth from, which somehow this con artist was able to receive “virtual” records indicating that he was connected to my parents, [with the assistance of this Mogul and my siblings cooperation, that was set in motion by a visit made to the Country by this opportunistic Politico in 1995]. I have learned first hand, that this Mogul and his “Society’s” types, do not like loosing at anything (no matter what it takes since their motto is “as long as in the end it works out, then the means are all worth it, because it can covered up down the road” because he is of the opinion that this is why he was “given” resources). As a result, the STAND ALONE evidence requires neither investment instruments of ANY TYPE nor confirmation paperwork from any international or national location in 2003 granting any con artist “virtual” connection to such locations in order to validate it.
DAY THIRTY-FOUR (34) 10/27/2012
On this Challenge day to digress, it is being reminded those “Society’s” types who are in the habit of playing “god” in the lives of others, of a saying by ONE much wiser than me; namely, that your “group” is as strong as its weakest link. Having spent the past approximate twenty-two (22) years rearranging the events in my life including my identity to provide a “con artist” and others with identities based on being in Connecticut to cover-up the practices of one of your types in Vermont, now proven to be “full of holes” and on “life” support. He (the con artist) and the others in addition to those who support them have been proven to be “spinners” of “tales”, who continually brandish all the “wool” at their availability via carefully chosen methods and the “angles” put in place to “cover-up” misdeeds. As a result, my cooperation should certainly not be expected to make the “tales” spun in recreating the new “THRUTH” “easier” for “shadowy Society’s” types. After all that have expended in the referenced years, [not even having the courtesy of informing me to my face that discrepancies (created your types) were discovered] for the obvious reasons. Your types wasted untold (questionably obtained) resources in “spinning” and pretending concerns to others; (example, building a new office “wing” outside the security fence at the DAEC, where the Group I was in and a few others were place for “show”), while at the same time keeping me “in the dark” because your “Society’s” types (as well as I) are fully aware that what is being “spun” is fictional at best. This facade, which was created for the purpose of convincing others that I was being treated with “concern”, during your investigation while concurrently brandishing the "shadowy" types as legitimate "externally.
This process was nothing more than a game of smoke and mirrors to justify the eventual action when the identity transferring enacted was completed, my lay-off, as planned. It was only due to my observation, that many things were amidst and started research of my own combined with the many and various name forms being mailed to this address, which were emboldened after my lay off that led me to realize what had transpired. However, because of certain “inherent opportunities” [that occur every four (4) years], possessed here, it was felt that it could be pulled off especially after implementing a blackout of near historic proportions, (see the post ONE TOO MANY COINCIDENCES) and making quid pro quo deals with various opportunistic types to completely stop utility industry impending deregulation in its tracks [as occurred - see the post WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THOSE "SWEEPING CHANGES" SUPPOSED TO OCCUR IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY (EDITED)?].
Based on this set of developments, it is being reinforced that my cooperation in pretending to be something or someone other than who I am and always was is not to be expected of me, since I am not a con artist. Maybe, the upcoming storms on the East coast will “bring about” a change in fortune but I can’t assist such types in freeing themselves from a “hole” they dug for themselves. Once again, the requested evidence is “STAND ALONE” and requires no “crutch” of any type. Those “Society’s” types are very incapable of understanding such because as possessors of two faces crutches are an essential part of life and the efforts a certain Utility undertook in transforming itself and then rewriting history to place a con artist in Connecticut, “in theory” to imply he was the original (James F. Brazant), would only be credible if published “stories” didn’t place the con artist elsewhere “his entire working life”. However, “THRUTH” to “Society’s” types is whatever is, “is” for any moment in time.
AS THE EVIDENCE EVENTUALLY PRESENTED SHOWED, NONE OF THE "SHADOWY SOCIETY'S" TYPES WERE ANYWHERE NEAR CONNECTICUT DURING THE YEARS IN QUESTION (AS THIS LINK SHOWS CONSERVERY'S CHALLENGE RESULTS).
DAY THIRTY-THREE (33) 10/26/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, this outline is not being HASTILY presented in summation form, for the RECORD to be used for demonstration purposes by anyone, since much thought has gone into it, as follows: had I known that my Sister’s March 20 through March 25, 1991 visit to New York to obtain MRI tests (see below photos), which confirmed a condition she and her physician in Barbados were suspecting;
DAY THIRTY-TWO (32) 10/25/2012
Medical records of any procedures undertaken cannot be used for legitimacy to validate the evidence, because medical records can: a) be obtained in any identity chosen, b) applied for conditions feigned by those whose main existence is based on adapting to any scenario to “justify” their “two faces”, and c) be obtained simply to implement "medical copying" by any “successful” con artist to justify an alter ego. [This copying involves transferring a condition, which for example a family member (my sister June) may have had undertaken in Forest Hills, N.Y. in March of 1991, MRI work at the specific office on visit to the US on the indicated occasion to obtain x-rays for a condition experienced as a result of an car accident experienced in Barbados, in circa 1986/87 that left her with a limp; and transferring a similar condition to a con artist to connect such an individual with an alter ego and a location “centrally important to where these original events occurred” and transfer them to establish an identity here in this State, based on the same x-rays (see the posts HOW ARE ACCIDENTS AND LEGITIMACY CONNECTED TO COINCIDENCES AND OTHER THINGS? as well as AN ABBREVIATED LISTING OF THE SIGNS THAT YOU(“SOCIETY’S” TYPES) HAVE BECOME IMPRISONED IN ANOTHER’S IDENTITY - UPDATED)]. Therefore, for a con artist, accustomed to feigning an alter ego, feigning a medical condition up to and including a “limp” from a non-existent accident to assist in identity switching, this is “piece of cake”. As a result, medical-related work of any type cannot be used as an “identity crutch” to validate the evidence.
DAY THIRTY-ONE (31) 10/24/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, it is being emphasized that in addition to the summary of details included on the Video, credit histories issued to “Society’s” types in their private alter egos (using the financial history of another as a base for the information), are not a valid mechanism for demonstrating legitimacy and as a result, validating the evidence, especially with the type of 21st century banking practices in existence today, [see the posts 21st CENTURY BANKING - AND HOW TO BOUNCE OFF AN INDIVIDUAL FOR LEGITIMACY AND IMPRISON FINANCIALLY, SIMULTANEOUSLY as well as MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED]. THE “STAND ALONE” EVIDENCE NEEDS NO “CRUTCH” TO VALIDATE IT.
On this 28th day (10/21/2012) of this continuing challenge the Conservery Challenge Video above is being introduced to quantify it and further updates after this date will be added as warranted.
DAY TWENTY-SEVEN (27) 10/20/2012
As this challenge continues, it must again be pointed out that IDENTITY CRUTCHES can come in many forms as was depicted in the post of this title. However, those who immersed themselves into the identity of others to the extent that has clearly be carried out here, such that my children and I have just been relegated to just being MERE OBJECTS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF OTHERS, with the “perfect” outward “cover” for all to see internationally, such that an “army” of, business types and their ethically challenged politicos are dedicated to continually reinforcing the “misinformation” spread about us; it is being emphasized that neither convenient “accidents” nor the previously mentioned “army” will implement the final piece of the puzzle. This final action is intended to“imprison” completely instead of just “financially” by the use of such mechanisms as the designation of my daughter Danielle as needing legal“Guardianship” in order that the “Society’s” type in their psuedo world, who have been committing tax fraud can continue to justify their alter egos and as a result, the “disinformation” instituted to carry it out. With this path chosen then ACCIDENT INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER can be completed as well as all other “planned” scenarios. In summation it must be stated that IDENTITY CRUTCHES of any form, including illegally obtained legal classifications based on any type of accident induced medical trauma cannot be used to validate the evidence; especially when the types trying to implement such an action could not “face”the same court system to attend the Brazant Divorce (# CDDM 001638) in person, (see the below photo of the continuing use of convenient subtle mail fraud techniques by those lacking in “heritage” and vision).
DAY TWENTY-SIX (26) 10/19/2012
On this challenge another update is being emphasized to clarify the criteria as follows: produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant and not reliant on any IDENTITY CRUTCH (whether products, services, individuals or entities) and outline HOW DOES THE STAND ALONE PIECES OF EVIDENCE ARE EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED TO THE 501C3 THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT CORPORATION’S OFFICE ESTABLISHED AT 158 CARLISLE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT FROM DEC, 1988.
The following are updated examples of the type IDENTITY CRUTCHES identified above:
1) THE EVIDENCE IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE, PERIOD (including services provided by (semi) and/or governmental agencies, etc.). For example, “Society’s” type entities/organizations are known to rely on identity switching or similar activities such as the absconding & commandeering of the financial history of legitimate individuals and/or “replacing” selected individuals (such as those whose names appear in the souvenir mementos - see the below photos) and outright identity “borrowing”, which relies
Signatures of My Associates At DAEC Signing Dawn's Birth Card - 1/1997
on the stealing of accomplishments and actual histories and assigning them to individuals with one public “face” and another privately, (see the posts AN A-TO-Z EXPOSÉ OF THE VIRTUAL SOCIETY’S METHODOLOGY - UPDATED as well as ONE OF THE “SOCIETY’S” FAVORITE MECHANISMS FOR IDENTITY VALIDATION). These “Society’s” types exist on presenting only a cursory indication of legitimacy and then advertising as a means of validation, which cannot withstand an intense scrutiny, otherwise it would be clearly seen that these types actually would have had to possess omnipotent powers to have carried out the accomplishments being assigned to them in their “two faces” (see the post MERE OBJECTS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF OTHERS and comment # 1 from 9/27/2012 on the COMMENTS Page). They also use the placing of “carefully selected borrowed phrases” in advertisements as a means of demonstrating authenticity and then rely on their “self” designated meaningless arbiters of “TRUTH” to validate their types as legitimate (see the post CONNECTING THE DOTS FROM 1994 THROUGH 2005, ARBITRARILY). Ultimately, these methods can only be completed by outright unethical practices, which such types have certainly brandished as their “hallmark” (see the post MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED. This in summation is why, the purchase of products and/or services cannot be relied on as any validation mechanism.
2) BROAD SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLASS ACTION SUITS where those identity-seeking types can hide amongst large numbers CANNOT BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO “PRODUCE” EVIDENCE.
3) THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM PERIOD; (For example transportation type equipment, whether air, sea or land related including motorized or non-motorized forms of transport as well as anything required to operate such whether legally required or otherwise are unrelated to this evidence. In other words broad transportation systems and anything associated such as the “tools” legally required to operate such forms of transport are completely unrelated to this challenge and no individual, entity either business type (known for selling some of these tools required to operate such) or any political type (who has been known for the executive roles occupied, which would have required involvement in the formulation of the type of requirements needed to operate such or any other individuals) can “dictate” that such things are related to this challenge by “decree” or otherwise.
4) IDENTITY MASKING techniques that rely on early “mail in” voter activities and not any accompanying verifiable evidence of actual in person voting in the “identities” being claimed as “legitimate” are not a valid method for validating the required evidence and
5) Individuals even if the Founding LPCs members CANNOT be used to validate the evidence since: a) they were mainly associated with James F. Brazant in his VOLUNTEER ROLE as LPC’s President and first Executive Director, (which was not his professional role) and b) none of these members individuals had even met James F. Brazant prior to late 1986/7, and as a result they cannot validate accomplishments they were unaware of. As previously stated the evidence requires no such or any other “crutch”.
DAY TWENTY-FOUR (24) 10/17/2012
On this twenty-fourth (24th) day of this challenge an updated restating is in order as follows: produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant and not reliant on any IDENTITY CRUTCH (whether products, services or individuals) and outline HOW DOES THE STAND ALONE PIECES OF EVIDENCE ARE EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED TO THE 501C3 THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT CORPORATION’S OFFICE ESTABLISHED AT 158 CARLISLE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT FROM DEC, 1988.
The following are examples of the type IDENTITY CRUTCHES identified above: 1) THE EVIDENCE MUST NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE, PERIOD (including services provided by (semi) and/or governmental agencies, etc.), 2) it is being emphasized that BROAD SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLASS ACTION SUITS where those identity-seeking types can hide amongst large numbers CANNOT BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO “PRODUCE” EVIDENCE, 3) THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM PERIOD, 4) IDENTITY MASKING techniques that rely on early “mail in” voter activities exclusively about the “identities” being claimed as “legitimate” are not a valid method for validating the required evidence (see the post CONSERVERY INDEPENDENT POLITICAL SERVICES FRAMEWORK/GUARANTEE POLICY SUMMARIZED AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS), & 5) any individuals even if they are the original LPCs founding members CANNOT be used to validate the evidence since they were: a) mainly associated with James F. Brazant in his VOLUNTEER ROLE as LPC’s President and first Executive Director, (which was not his professional role) and b) none of these members/individuals had even met James F. Brazant prior to late 1986/7, and as a result they cannot validate accomplishments they were never in a position to be aware of. As previously stated the evidence requires no such “crutch”.
DAY TWENTY-THREE (23) 10/16/2012
On this day of this continuing challenge it is being emphasized that the use of “IDENTITY MASKING” techniques is not a valid measure of demonstrating legitimacy to “produce” the requested evidence (see the post HOW IS ACCIDENT INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER COMPLETED?).
DAY TWENTY-ONE (21) 10/14/2012
DAY TWENTY (20) 10/13/2012
DAY NINETEEN (19) 10/12/2012
DAY SIXTEEN (16) 10/9/2012
To avoid this challenge being redirected and becoming lost in a myriad of non essential issues it is being introduced early (10/8/2012 @ approximately 10:40 pm) and restated to prevent it from becoming unnecessarily complicated in order to make “life” simpler for those who may have forgotten their “actual” past, as follows; PRODUCE IF YOU ARE INDEED JAMES F. BRAZANT EVIDENCE OF HIS PROFESSIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM MARCH 14, 1985, MARCH 3, 1988 & MARCH 14, 1988, WHICH CLEARLY HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED/UNDERTAKEN BY HIM.
The following are clues to assist with this evidence: 1) the pieces of evidence each contain a signature (or signatures), 2) they are “STAND ALONE” pieces of evidence and need nothing to validate them, whether state or municipality legislated/required or not, 3) the evidence also is devoid of reliance on any product or service purchased or freely obtained to support it, 4) class action suits are an unnecessary mechanism for supporting the evidence, 5) the pieces of evidence may or may not be directly or indirectly related to the office established for carrying out The Lighthouse Project Corporation’s activities at 158 Carlisle Street, New Haven, CT, 6) the “STAND ALONE” evidence does not require the validation of a service provided to any specific class of individuals by any State agency to validate it, period and 7) the "STAND ALONE" evidence DOES NOT REQUIRE THE SUPPORT OF ANY AREA ETHNIC GROUP TO VALIDATE IT. Anyone attempting to use any of the above methods to demonstrate validity of "their" evidence, is attempting to alter history. The unique achievements/accomplishments need no supporting mechanism for validation only actually being in the specific location at the indicated dates.
See Retroactive Authorization 1V. Regarding Class Action Suits in the Above Composite of Conservery's Administrative Policy from Dec 27, 2011
identity-seekers can hide amongst others for legitimacy, cannot be used as a mechanism to "produce" the requested evidence, when "stand-alone" mechanisms such as Brazant
Divorce NO: CDDM 001638 were shunned by those with private "alter egos" and different public identities. The "STAND ALONE" criterion means just that, THE EVIDENCE NEEDS NO SUPPORTIVE CRITERIA (WHETHER PRODUCT, SERVICE, CLASS ACTION SUIT ETC.), TO VALIDATE IT!!!!!!!!!!!
DAY TEN (10) 10/3/2012
This day of this challenge serves to inform all those may attempt to misinterpret my actions and draw all types of misconceptions, when my actions are simply to reclaim my identity from the misrepresentation and switching that has occurred at the hands of those (business and politicos) who concluded that such methods were an appropriate path for resolving a matter from long ago in the past by trying to recreate an us against “him” scenario. These types forgot that all in the USA were at one time immigrants with the exception of those who were already here when the first “Settlers” arrived. However, those who understand the implications of such will correctly interpret the overall meaning and classify these matters their proper place in history and the requirements, previously stated are unchanged.
DAY EIGHT (8) 10/1/2012
This day of this challenge is being used to emphasize the fact that deceptive claims sent to the email address jfbrazant@gmail.com, at carefully selected times to justify dreaming up fictitious events to satisfy this challenge does not provide any “Society’s” type identity-seeking individual with legitimacy. As a result, on this day of the challenge, an added criterion is being included, namely that the evidence CANNOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE PERIOD, WHETHER PURCHASED OR FREELY OBTAINED. (NOTE: THIS ADDRESS, WAS INITIATED BY ME FOR MY PERSONAL USE ONLY AND WAS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE ANY IMPOSTOR WITH AN ALTER EGO TO HIDE BEHIND, REGARDLESS OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN)!!!!!!!!
DAY FORTY-TWO (42) 11/04/2012
This is the last update for this challenge and with the introduction of the Photo Challenge this combination is intended to bring completion to this saga that has gone on too long. There is more than to a person’s identity than taking a class photo and with the use of fancy photography insert the picture of a con artist into the photo via any Photo Pro(fessional) and then taking over all the individual’s accomplishments, changing stories, living in different places simultaneously, etc. In addition, there is also more to an individual’s identity than stealing financial history assuming their name, bribing certain types and eventually assuming the individual’s identity completely and eventually by the methods of the “Society’s” types thuggish practices, stage hands (or accident "stagers"), intimidation and/or harassment, etc. finally usurp the identity completely, because “Society’s”types who have taken it upon themselves to play “god” in the lives of those whom they have concluded, society in general would better off without have decided that replacement of such individuals with their “models” of the type of standards to aspire to, would be a fitting “end”. There have to be “actual”interaction in the historical events of the live of the individual whom they have decided to replace not just simply assuming the accomplishments of the individual and then using their methods to “force” acceptance of their “brand”and dare anyone to tell them there are not original with their easily gotten wealth through their perpetual wealth-generating schemes and conclude that simply by repetitive advertising, legitimacy will be attained. The PHOTO CHALLENGE is all about actual interaction in the life of the individual and if the questions can’t be answered, by these “Society’s” types they should vacate my identity and let me move on with my life without the form of “imprisonment”their whims and melodrama brings. TEN DAYS is sufficient time to demonstrate that actual interaction took place (by answering the questions) for those claiming to have been through my exact path, that is being (James F. Brazant). ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO CAN ANSWER THE PHOTO CHALLENGEQUESTIONS SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THE STAND ALONE EVIDENCE, to complete this requirement. There is no need for wasting financial resources (easily gotten or otherwise) trying to replicate the photos, knowledge of James F. Brazant’s history is being requested not photos and by the due date November 13, 2012.
DAY FORTY-ONE (41) 11/03/2012
On this continuing day of this Challenge, when it is clear that gimmicks have no place in producing this evidence, and desperation mode sets in amongst those with a desire to manipulate the desired outcome; the realization must finally be faced that not all situations can be accomplished by: strong-arm methods, stuffing prearranged end results into the mix to “produce” a version desired by “Society’s” types as well ELECTRONIC NETWORKING RECORDS FRAUD ON A SIGNIFICANT SCALE. Even when all that’s printed feign “unusual” solidarity, the hallmarks of those “Society’s” types must never be forgotten, as outlined in the post THE ORIGINS OF “VIRTUAL” “TWO-FACED”IDENTITIES. Finally, in closing it must be reinforced that STAND ALONE evidence simply put is just that, without gimmicks or some other reinvented mechanism to produce some desired outcome.
DAY FORTY (40) 11/01/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge it must be reinforced what was previously emphasized on Day 13 of this Challenge (included as an excerpt below); On this thirteenth (13th) day of this challenge and counting it is being emphasized that this evidence has nothing to do with any type of transportation whether air, sea or land related including motorized or non-motorized forms of transport as well as anything required to operate such whether legally required or otherwise. This broad category includes vehicle insurance, and frequenting an old establishment as a desperate act to demonstrate legitimacy is not required to validate the evidence simply because such instruments can be “taken over” by enterprising Insurance Types to provide legitimacy to “two faced” virtual frauds (see the below photo insert
DAY THIRTY-NINE (39) 11/01/2012
The challenge continues on this day with the reminder that the evidence is the “STAND ALONE” type while at the same time emphasizing that many reason have dictated the path selected for this Challenge (as discussed on the various posts on the Blog - SOCIALLMEDIA ISSUES).
DAY THIRTY-EIGHT (38) 10/31/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, it must be emphasized that the evidence does not require a former aspiring OPPORTUNISTIC POLITICO (circa 1991, see DAY 33) regardless of his current title (labeled OPPORTUNISTIC SUPPORTER on this Blog), to provide his form of “legitimacy” to validate the evidence, since its STAND ALONE validity needs no individual with questionable motivations at best (who does not know when its time to leave the political stage to others), in order to validate it. If such individuals were credible, IDENTITY CRUTCHES would be unnecessary; whether mail diversion of a Storage account to connect to the history/identity of an individual whose Accident Report has been taken over in a brazen act of STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT (see the post WHEN IS AN “ACCIDENT” NOT REALLY AN“ACCIDENT”?), attempting to dictate the CLOSED subscription (account) of a prestigious publication to gain “instant” credibility in order to justify the previous Accident Report assumption (without the injuries), or misrepresenting the Proprietorship whenever property relocation search inquiries were implemented by me (an activity now halted, see the CONSERVERY OPEN POSITION Page for additional details), etc. None of these actions would be needed if authentic. Only those“Society’s” types with “two faces” whose qualities are listed in the post THE ORIGINS OF “VIRTUAL” “TWO-FACED” IDENTITIES, would have to resort to such methodologies, because of their need for “easy” everything. However, STAND ALONE evidence cannot be covered-up if you are unaware of what it is. Such types can only attempt to produce their own, with the aid of their (paid) supporters, which in a court setting would be termed perjured witnesses for a price (whether phony book sales or product endorsements such as “9 o’clock”coffee, etc.). In closing, it must be emphasized STAND ALONE, is just that.
DAY THIRTY-SEVEN (37) 10/30/2012
On this challenge day, it is being emphasized that accident reports are not necessary to legitimize the evidence since it’s STAND ALONE and requires no IDENTITY CRUTCH since even such reports can enable misrepresentation and as a result, be an avenue for STATE SPONSORED IDENTITY THEFT to occur (see the post WHEN IS AN “ACCIDENT” NOT REALLY AN “ACCIDENT”?).DAY THIRTY-SIX (36) 10/29/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, it must be emphasized that investment instruments of any type are not a legitimate mechanism for “producing” the evidence because such tools can be manipulated by “Society’s” types. For example, the same Mogul identified in the comment to this CHALLENGE from 10/28/2012 (or comment # 3 on the COMMENTS page from 10/28/2012), just so happened to bet against the Tech Bubble of the 1990s and he is not one to loose on anything he bets on, especially when it comes to wealth generating. Ironically, it initially appeared as if it was wrong and his investments took a beating for quite sometime, (see below excerpt of from a 2000 on-line article. This duration lasted for the approximately fifty-two (52)
CONSISTENT WITH MY COMMITMENT NOT TO ALLOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANY INDIVIDUAL/ENTITY WHO HAS IN ANYWAY CONTRIBUTED TO THE MANGLING OF MY IDENTITY TO REMAIN ON THIS BOLG'S PAGES; THE 2000 ON-LINE ARTICLE EXCERPT ABOUT THE "BEATING", WHICH THE INVESTMENTS OF A CERTAIN MOGUL TOOK DURING THE TECH BUBBLE, WITH A SO-CALLED "MIDAS TOUCH" HAS BEEN REMOVED.
week throughout the year (of 1999) and the “wisdom” of this Mogul appeared not to have paid off. However, in the coming years the Tech “Bubble” imploded and his “decision” just so happened to pay off in the coming years after that strategically critical duration (identified previously). This Mogul doesn’t like loosing and whether he was induced to participate in this redistribution scheme because of the beating he took or otherwise (in all fairness) isn’t clear (because if he was in a position of strength there would be mo need to become involved with others in any shady perpetual wealth-producing scheme. His involvement was secured, nevertheless and these “Society’s” types wasted little time, after this financial turmoil in implementing their scheme and by 2001 had transferred all of the DAEC workers to contract status to implement their “dirty little scheme” (lay off via NMC) to culminate the story that had
DAY THIRTY-FIVE (35) 10/28/2012
On this continuing challenge day, since subscriptions fall into a “gray” area between product and/or service, they warrant special attention, as follows: subscriptions of any type are not a prerequisite in order to validate the evidence, especially subscriptions involving closed accounts (for those “Society’s” types who are in the habit of FREQUENTING PAST ESTABLISHMENTS AS A MARK OF LEGITIMACY). Subscription(s) also currently held by my son’s are also applicable, even though he was very young at the time of all the requested evidence dates. He (my son) only has a single subscription and none other especially since mimicking is a fond practice of “Society’s” types who have ZERO respect for the rights of any individual not in their “Society” and always have another “angle” to implement their objectives (i.e. to control, dictate, eradicate and manipulate the lives of those who stand in the way of the pursuit of whatever is in their “sights”). PLEASE NOTE: ANY TITAN, MOGUL OR ARBITER OF “THRUTH” AND THEIR SUPPORTERS CANNOT OVERRIDE THIS IN THEIR EFFORT TO LEGITIMIZE THOSE OF THEIR “CLUB”.
DAY THIRTY-FOUR (34) 10/27/2012
On this Challenge day to digress, it is being reminded those “Society’s” types who are in the habit of playing “god” in the lives of others, of a saying by ONE much wiser than me; namely, that your “group” is as strong as its weakest link. Having spent the past approximate twenty-two (22) years rearranging the events in my life including my identity to provide a “con artist” and others with identities based on being in Connecticut to cover-up the practices of one of your types in Vermont, now proven to be “full of holes” and on “life” support. He (the con artist) and the others in addition to those who support them have been proven to be “spinners” of “tales”, who continually brandish all the “wool” at their availability via carefully chosen methods and the “angles” put in place to “cover-up” misdeeds. As a result, my cooperation should certainly not be expected to make the “tales” spun in recreating the new “THRUTH” “easier” for “shadowy Society’s” types. After all that have expended in the referenced years, [not even having the courtesy of informing me to my face that discrepancies (created your types) were discovered] for the obvious reasons. Your types wasted untold (questionably obtained) resources in “spinning” and pretending concerns to others; (example, building a new office “wing” outside the security fence at the DAEC, where the Group I was in and a few others were place for “show”), while at the same time keeping me “in the dark” because your “Society’s” types (as well as I) are fully aware that what is being “spun” is fictional at best. This facade, which was created for the purpose of convincing others that I was being treated with “concern”, during your investigation while concurrently brandishing the "shadowy" types as legitimate "externally. This process was nothing more than a game of smoke and mirrors to justify the eventual action when the identity transferring enacted was completed, my lay-off, as planned. It was only due to my observation, that many things were amidst and started research of my own combined with the many and various name forms being mailed to this address, which were emboldened after my lay off that led me to realize what had transpired. However, because of certain “inherent opportunities” [that occur every four (4) years], possessed here, it was felt that it could be pulled off especially after implementing a blackout of near historic proportions, (see the post ONE TOO MANY COINCIDENCES) and making quid pro quo deals with various opportunistic types to completely stop utility industry impending deregulation in its tracks [as occurred - see the post WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THOSE "SWEEPING CHANGES" SUPPOSED TO OCCUR IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY (EDITED)?].
Based on this set of developments, it is being reinforced that my cooperation in pretending to be something or someone other than who I am and always was is not to be expected of me, since I am not a con artist. Maybe, the upcoming storms on the East coast will “bring about” a change in fortune but I can’t assist such types in freeing themselves from a “hole” they dug for themselves. Once again, the requested evidence is “STAND ALONE” and requires no “crutch” of any type. Those “Society’s” types are very incapable of understanding such because as possessors of two faces crutches are an essential part of life and the efforts a certain Utility undertook in transforming itself and then rewriting history to place a con artist in Connecticut, “in theory” to imply he was the original (James F. Brazant), would only be credible if published “stories” didn’t place the con artist elsewhere “his entire working life”. However, “THRUTH” to “Society’s” types is whatever is, “is” for any moment in time.
AS THE EVIDENCE EVENTUALLY PRESENTED SHOWED, NONE OF THE "SHADOWY SOCIETY'S" TYPES WERE ANYWHERE NEAR CONNECTICUT DURING THE YEARS IN QUESTION (AS THIS LINK SHOWS CONSERVERY'S CHALLENGE RESULTS).
DAY THIRTY-THREE (33) 10/26/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, this outline is not being HASTILY presented in summation form, for the RECORD to be used for demonstration purposes by anyone, since much thought has gone into it, as follows: had I known that my Sister’s March 20 through March 25, 1991 visit to New York to obtain MRI tests (see below photos), which confirmed a condition she and her physician in Barbados were suspecting;
 |
This question was intended for another see the post - ADDENDUM TO HOW "VIRTUAL" IDENTITIES ARE SUSTAINED
|
would become the central piece of evidence in a con artist’s claim to my identity, maybe I should have refused to pick her up from the airport on the 20th, refused to drop her off and wait for her in the Office for her tests and drove her back to the same office on the morning of the 25th to pick up the results of the x-rays and then to the airport for her return flight to Barbados. While according to all local Newspaper reports from the September 2, 1996 edition, this omnipotent con artist was climbing the “corporate ladder to the top” in a completely different location. There are those “Arbiters of THRUTH” who call such a “Society’s” type individual, “credible” based on this sketchily pieced together “mumbo jumbo” of a “legitimacy” based on lies, deception, “angles” and outright fraud, [as documented in the post MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED], authentic, which does not say a great deal for their business practices. On this continuing day of this challenge, it is being emphasized that evidence cannot be produced from a location where you have never been except (in theory via labels and numbers - ex. the careful placement of the numbers 03 in specific places on documents, etc.) when the records all clearly state that the con artist was in a specific location “all his working life” in a “single” identity. Now if this local “standard bearer” of news “fit to be published” is willing to print a retraction and admit that their story was ALL a “pack of lies”, maybe this could be a starting point to rebuilding another story that does not require omnipotence to pull off. The “STAND ALONE” evidence does not require the support of any identity crutch for validation, whether: 1) governmental, 2) semi-governmental agency (that provides a service a specific class of individuals), 3) non profit agency, 4) business entity’s confirmation of product(s) purchased, 5) any winnings due to participation in a game of chance, 6) any transportation system and/or the instruments required to operate such, 7) medical records, 8) participation in broad legal activities such as class action suits, 9) reliant on identity masking techniques similar to class action suits involving demonstrating participating in activities, which foster the use an a private alter ego and a different public “face” such as mail in voting practices, 10) gifts of any type and 11) individuals of ANY status placing their “reputations” on the line to provide legitimacy for the authenticity of any “Society’s” type person.
DAY THIRTY-TWO (32) 10/25/2012
Medical records of any procedures undertaken cannot be used for legitimacy to validate the evidence, because medical records can: a) be obtained in any identity chosen, b) applied for conditions feigned by those whose main existence is based on adapting to any scenario to “justify” their “two faces”, and c) be obtained simply to implement "medical copying" by any “successful” con artist to justify an alter ego. [This copying involves transferring a condition, which for example a family member (my sister June) may have had undertaken in Forest Hills, N.Y. in March of 1991, MRI work at the specific office on visit to the US on the indicated occasion to obtain x-rays for a condition experienced as a result of an car accident experienced in Barbados, in circa 1986/87 that left her with a limp; and transferring a similar condition to a con artist to connect such an individual with an alter ego and a location “centrally important to where these original events occurred” and transfer them to establish an identity here in this State, based on the same x-rays (see the posts HOW ARE ACCIDENTS AND LEGITIMACY CONNECTED TO COINCIDENCES AND OTHER THINGS? as well as AN ABBREVIATED LISTING OF THE SIGNS THAT YOU(“SOCIETY’S” TYPES) HAVE BECOME IMPRISONED IN ANOTHER’S IDENTITY - UPDATED)]. Therefore, for a con artist, accustomed to feigning an alter ego, feigning a medical condition up to and including a “limp” from a non-existent accident to assist in identity switching, this is “piece of cake”. As a result, medical-related work of any type cannot be used as an “identity crutch” to validate the evidence.
DAY THIRTY-ONE (31) 10/24/2012
On this continuing day of this challenge, it is being emphasized that in addition to the summary of details included on the Video, credit histories issued to “Society’s” types in their private alter egos (using the financial history of another as a base for the information), are not a valid mechanism for demonstrating legitimacy and as a result, validating the evidence, especially with the type of 21st century banking practices in existence today, [see the posts 21st CENTURY BANKING - AND HOW TO BOUNCE OFF AN INDIVIDUAL FOR LEGITIMACY AND IMPRISON FINANCIALLY, SIMULTANEOUSLY as well as MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED]. THE “STAND ALONE” EVIDENCE NEEDS NO “CRUTCH” TO VALIDATE IT.On this 28th day (10/21/2012) of this continuing challenge the Conservery Challenge Video above is being introduced to quantify it and further updates after this date will be added as warranted.
DAY TWENTY-SEVEN (27) 10/20/2012
As this challenge continues, it must again be pointed out that IDENTITY CRUTCHES can come in many forms as was depicted in the post of this title. However, those who immersed themselves into the identity of others to the extent that has clearly be carried out here, such that my children and I have just been relegated to just being MERE OBJECTS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF OTHERS, with the “perfect” outward “cover” for all to see internationally, such that an “army” of, business types and their ethically challenged politicos are dedicated to continually reinforcing the “misinformation” spread about us; it is being emphasized that neither convenient “accidents” nor the previously mentioned “army” will implement the final piece of the puzzle. This final action is intended to“imprison” completely instead of just “financially” by the use of such mechanisms as the designation of my daughter Danielle as needing legal“Guardianship” in order that the “Society’s” type in their psuedo world, who have been committing tax fraud can continue to justify their alter egos and as a result, the “disinformation” instituted to carry it out. With this path chosen then ACCIDENT INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER can be completed as well as all other “planned” scenarios. In summation it must be stated that IDENTITY CRUTCHES of any form, including illegally obtained legal classifications based on any type of accident induced medical trauma cannot be used to validate the evidence; especially when the types trying to implement such an action could not “face”the same court system to attend the Brazant Divorce (# CDDM 001638) in person, (see the below photo of the continuing use of convenient subtle mail fraud techniques by those lacking in “heritage” and vision).
CONSISTENT WITH MY COMMITMENT TO REFRAIN FROM INCLUDING ANYTHING ON THE PAGES OF THIS BLOG THAT IN ANYWAY PROMOTES THE ID SWITCHING THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED HERE, THE PHOTO OF THE DECEPTIVELY ADDRESSED MAILING FROM 10/20/2012 WAS REMOVED.
DAY TWENTY-SIX (26) 10/19/2012
On this challenge another update is being emphasized to clarify the criteria as follows: produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant and not reliant on any IDENTITY CRUTCH (whether products, services, individuals or entities) and outline HOW DOES THE STAND ALONE PIECES OF EVIDENCE ARE EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED TO THE 501C3 THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT CORPORATION’S OFFICE ESTABLISHED AT 158 CARLISLE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT FROM DEC, 1988.
The following are updated examples of the type IDENTITY CRUTCHES identified above:
1) THE EVIDENCE IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE, PERIOD (including services provided by (semi) and/or governmental agencies, etc.). For example, “Society’s” type entities/organizations are known to rely on identity switching or similar activities such as the absconding & commandeering of the financial history of legitimate individuals and/or “replacing” selected individuals (such as those whose names appear in the souvenir mementos - see the below photos) and outright identity “borrowing”, which relies
 |
| Signatures from TCI's Graduating Classmates from the Class of 8/1980 |
Signatures of My Associates At DAEC Signing Dawn's Birth Card - 1/1997
on the stealing of accomplishments and actual histories and assigning them to individuals with one public “face” and another privately, (see the posts AN A-TO-Z EXPOSÉ OF THE VIRTUAL SOCIETY’S METHODOLOGY - UPDATED as well as ONE OF THE “SOCIETY’S” FAVORITE MECHANISMS FOR IDENTITY VALIDATION). These “Society’s” types exist on presenting only a cursory indication of legitimacy and then advertising as a means of validation, which cannot withstand an intense scrutiny, otherwise it would be clearly seen that these types actually would have had to possess omnipotent powers to have carried out the accomplishments being assigned to them in their “two faces” (see the post MERE OBJECTS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF OTHERS and comment # 1 from 9/27/2012 on the COMMENTS Page). They also use the placing of “carefully selected borrowed phrases” in advertisements as a means of demonstrating authenticity and then rely on their “self” designated meaningless arbiters of “TRUTH” to validate their types as legitimate (see the post CONNECTING THE DOTS FROM 1994 THROUGH 2005, ARBITRARILY). Ultimately, these methods can only be completed by outright unethical practices, which such types have certainly brandished as their “hallmark” (see the post MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED. This in summation is why, the purchase of products and/or services cannot be relied on as any validation mechanism.
2) BROAD SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLASS ACTION SUITS where those identity-seeking types can hide amongst large numbers CANNOT BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO “PRODUCE” EVIDENCE.
3) THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM PERIOD; (For example transportation type equipment, whether air, sea or land related including motorized or non-motorized forms of transport as well as anything required to operate such whether legally required or otherwise are unrelated to this evidence. In other words broad transportation systems and anything associated such as the “tools” legally required to operate such forms of transport are completely unrelated to this challenge and no individual, entity either business type (known for selling some of these tools required to operate such) or any political type (who has been known for the executive roles occupied, which would have required involvement in the formulation of the type of requirements needed to operate such or any other individuals) can “dictate” that such things are related to this challenge by “decree” or otherwise.
4) IDENTITY MASKING techniques that rely on early “mail in” voter activities and not any accompanying verifiable evidence of actual in person voting in the “identities” being claimed as “legitimate” are not a valid method for validating the required evidence and
5) Individuals even if the Founding LPCs members CANNOT be used to validate the evidence since: a) they were mainly associated with James F. Brazant in his VOLUNTEER ROLE as LPC’s President and first Executive Director, (which was not his professional role) and b) none of these members individuals had even met James F. Brazant prior to late 1986/7, and as a result they cannot validate accomplishments they were unaware of. As previously stated the evidence requires no such or any other “crutch”.
DAY TWENTY-FIVE (25) 10/18/2012
The update for this day of the continuing challenge is as follows, if any individual(s) have to repeatedly change their Curriculum Vitae to match the historical information presented, simply because they can adapt to anything, they are disqualified from being considered as any legitimate holder of my identity just because they being backed by “Society’s” types and their supporters with resources. At some point, impostors have to be called for what they really are, irrespective of who are supporting them because of the financial benefits (gained by Business types and certain Politicos for casting support behind these individuals).
DAY TWENTY-FOUR (24) 10/17/2012
On this twenty-fourth (24th) day of this challenge an updated restating is in order as follows: produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant and not reliant on any IDENTITY CRUTCH (whether products, services or individuals) and outline HOW DOES THE STAND ALONE PIECES OF EVIDENCE ARE EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED TO THE 501C3 THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT CORPORATION’S OFFICE ESTABLISHED AT 158 CARLISLE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT FROM DEC, 1988.
The following are examples of the type IDENTITY CRUTCHES identified above: 1) THE EVIDENCE MUST NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE, PERIOD (including services provided by (semi) and/or governmental agencies, etc.), 2) it is being emphasized that BROAD SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLASS ACTION SUITS where those identity-seeking types can hide amongst large numbers CANNOT BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO “PRODUCE” EVIDENCE, 3) THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM PERIOD, 4) IDENTITY MASKING techniques that rely on early “mail in” voter activities exclusively about the “identities” being claimed as “legitimate” are not a valid method for validating the required evidence (see the post CONSERVERY INDEPENDENT POLITICAL SERVICES FRAMEWORK/GUARANTEE POLICY SUMMARIZED AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS), & 5) any individuals even if they are the original LPCs founding members CANNOT be used to validate the evidence since they were: a) mainly associated with James F. Brazant in his VOLUNTEER ROLE as LPC’s President and first Executive Director, (which was not his professional role) and b) none of these members/individuals had even met James F. Brazant prior to late 1986/7, and as a result they cannot validate accomplishments they were never in a position to be aware of. As previously stated the evidence requires no such “crutch”.
DAY TWENTY-THREE (23) 10/16/2012
On this day of this continuing challenge it is being emphasized that the use of “IDENTITY MASKING” techniques is not a valid measure of demonstrating legitimacy to “produce” the requested evidence (see the post HOW IS ACCIDENT INDUCED IDENTITY TRANSFER COMPLETED?).
DAY TWENTY-TWO (22) 10/15/2012
On this day it’s being emphasized that Ads are (or can be) a powerful tool and in the hands of those who belong to the school of thought, whose motto is “the end justifies the means”, and have concluded, their identity switching gamble can be pulled off (see the post IDENTITY CRUTCHES), because all that is ever needed is to produce another ad and anything can be covered up and/or gotten away with; irrespective of “truth in advertising”, especially since to such types “truth” is whatever is convenient (see the post ADVERTISING’S TRUE PURPOSE - UPDATED). Whether it’s: 1) claiming to be the number one (1) selling brand and subtly simultaneously sending the message that the Ad’s messenger is the “arbiter of all that’s truthful”, 2) trying to convince an unsuspecting public that pets routinely reek havoc on the expensive electronic equipment in the homes of their “owners” and then a somewhat omnipotent seller of electronic equipment and/or others who sell “and all else” (including “discounted light bulbs”) are on the spot to replace all that’s damage “accidentally”, whether by “pets” or a “lightening strike”, because "Society's" types aren't above "helping out" any situation that will aid purchasers spending into the coffers of eagerly awaiting suppliers. Having pointed out this scenario, it’s being emphasized that it’s essential to be in possession of the appropriate “facts” before allowing overconfidence that some “fact” gained will enable “Society’s” types to simply “present” any challenge evidence contemplated (without regard for its validity) and that it will be accepted. Please remember, the ‘STAND ALONE” evidence is not reliant any entity being in possession of information that will enable anything presented to be accepted as valid, (because of the “high” ethical practices these “Society’s” types have been known to uphold [see the post MISREPRESENTATION DEFINED (FOR THE RECORD) - AMENDED]. If it does not meet the criteria specified here on this Challenge Page, free of any “crutch”, then it is not valid even if some “arbiter of truth” vouches for it.
DAY TWENTY-ONE (21) 10/14/2012
On this twenty-first challenge day, it must be emphasized that the challenge evidence cannot be validated by any entity with a dubious track record “branding” itself as the authority on validity, legitimacy, truth and “justice” (see Comment # 1 from 10/12/2012 on the COMMENTS page). This is without merit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On this day day of the continuing challenge, it is being emphasized that the "STAND ALONE" challenge criteria still remains.
DAY NINETEEN (19) 10/12/2012
On this day of this continuing challenge, it is being emphasized that “IDENTITY CRUTCHES” as defined in the post IDENTITY CRUTCHES of any type IF USED WITH THE EVIDENCE BEING BRANDISHED BY SUCH “TYPES” AS THE REQUESTED EVIDENCE, THEN IT IS NOT VALID.
DAY EIGHTEEN (18) 10/11/2012
This day of this challenge is devoted to restating it, to demonstrate how simple compliance is, as follows:
Produce “STAND ALONE” evidence of James F. Brazant’s accomplishments/undertakings, which were clearly achieved by him on the following dates:
1. March 14, 1985
2. March 3, 1988
3. March 14, 1988
The excluded criteria/clues are well known as documented in the previous Days on this Challenge Page and it is not necessary to restate them here. (See Day Thirteen & Day Fourteen for additional updated details, added only as points of reference, because they are those who use such details as diversions from the immediate task at hand.)
DAY SEVENTEEN (17) 10/10/2012
On this seventeenth day of the challenge another clue is being emphasized, namely that the “STAND ALONE” evidence does not require demonstrating having participated in ANY type of state sponsored activity as a means of validation (whether non regulated, regulated or of a semi-regulated nature); in order to satisfy the criteria. The direct “participation” of a state in ANY form is unnecessary as a means of meeting the challenge. This generic statement is possible here due to the fact that during the years in question State personal income taxes were not a requirement in Connecticut.
In addition, the completion of a recent major purchase (such as a new or used vehicle anywhere), is not a precursor to demonstrating having complied with or being able to “produce” the evidence for those who believe that current financial capability alone is an indication of “historical” legitimacy especially using another’s identity while “imprisoning” another financially and as a result physically to carry out this “selective” legitimacy (since I have not purchased and registered any new or used vehicle since 2001 and 2005/07 respectively, see the posts FREQUENTING PAST ESTABLISHMENTS AS A "MARK" OF LEGITIMACY as well as CONNECTING THE DOTS FROM 1994 THROUGH 2005, ARBITRARILY and HOW DOES STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT WORK? ). All that is required is having been in the indicated location on the specified dates and the evidence would be definitively known because historical events have a tendency to be altered by enterprising, well connected types with visions of “perpetual” wealth generating pyramid schemes constantly before them (see the post GIVING “LIFE” THE OLD FASHIONED WAY - UPDATED TO INCLUDE AN EXAMPLE OF CONSISTENCY).
Finally, it must be emphasized that the evidence DOES NOT require (illegal and/or other) involvement in the political process, contrary to my Proprietorship’s guidelines, (see the post CONSERVERY INDEPENDENT POLITICAL SERVICES FRAMEWORK/GUARANTEE POLICY SUMMARIZED & OTHER CONSIDERATIONS), which were carefully developed to protect its interests from misrepresentation by any individual/entity regardless of status; in order to validate it.
Finally, it must be emphasized that the evidence DOES NOT require (illegal and/or other) involvement in the political process, contrary to my Proprietorship’s guidelines, (see the post CONSERVERY INDEPENDENT POLITICAL SERVICES FRAMEWORK/GUARANTEE POLICY SUMMARIZED & OTHER CONSIDERATIONS), which were carefully developed to protect its interests from misrepresentation by any individual/entity regardless of status; in order to validate it.
DAY SIXTEEN (16) 10/9/2012
To avoid this challenge being redirected and becoming lost in a myriad of non essential issues it is being introduced early (10/8/2012 @ approximately 10:40 pm) and restated to prevent it from becoming unnecessarily complicated in order to make “life” simpler for those who may have forgotten their “actual” past, as follows; PRODUCE IF YOU ARE INDEED JAMES F. BRAZANT EVIDENCE OF HIS PROFESSIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM MARCH 14, 1985, MARCH 3, 1988 & MARCH 14, 1988, WHICH CLEARLY HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED/UNDERTAKEN BY HIM.
The following are clues to assist with this evidence: 1) the pieces of evidence each contain a signature (or signatures), 2) they are “STAND ALONE” pieces of evidence and need nothing to validate them, whether state or municipality legislated/required or not, 3) the evidence also is devoid of reliance on any product or service purchased or freely obtained to support it, 4) class action suits are an unnecessary mechanism for supporting the evidence, 5) the pieces of evidence may or may not be directly or indirectly related to the office established for carrying out The Lighthouse Project Corporation’s activities at 158 Carlisle Street, New Haven, CT, 6) the “STAND ALONE” evidence does not require the validation of a service provided to any specific class of individuals by any State agency to validate it, period and 7) the "STAND ALONE" evidence DOES NOT REQUIRE THE SUPPORT OF ANY AREA ETHNIC GROUP TO VALIDATE IT. Anyone attempting to use any of the above methods to demonstrate validity of "their" evidence, is attempting to alter history. The unique achievements/accomplishments need no supporting mechanism for validation only actually being in the specific location at the indicated dates.
DAY FIFTEEN (15) 10/8/2012
On this fifteenth (15th) day of this challenge and counting, it's purpose, namely to demonstrate that the "Society's" method of cherry picking (see the post THE COMPANIONSHIP BETWEEN CONSISTENCY AND TRANSPARENCY ), is not a valid method to demonstrating identity ownership because no two individuals can have the exact same path no matter how many other individuals are “thrown” together from [hither, thither and yon (see the post IDENTITY FREE FOR ALL)] in an international smorgasbord approach and called “relatives”, to attempt to piece together the life of another whose achievements are being ravished for their types to exist in their alter ego pseudo Class Action Suits world based only on demonstrating financial“success” [with legitimacy provided with the aid of ethically challenged politicos with outstretched hands and enterprising business “titans” who benefit greatly from these “grateful” types (see the post CAN MY INVESTMENTS REALLY STAND UP TO INTENSE SCRUTINY?)] because the pieces that can’t be explained always have to be “hidden and/or buried” via accidents and/or financial “imprisonment” etc., as needed in the hope that they are never resurrected. This has been clearly shown repeatedly (see the most recent post on this subject HOW DOES STATE SPONSORED IDENTITY THEFT WORK?) and it was for this reason that a second challenge was introduced and withdrawn to emphasize this fact. The challenge remains the same on this day as restated and outlined on day fourteen (14) and will remain this singular challenge with an added twist here and there as appropriate.
DAY FOURTEEN (14) 10/7/2012
In an effort to keep the focus on a single challenge an eliminate the potential for those who cannot comply with this diverting attention while giving the appearance that blanket acceptance was given to all that took place in New York, the 2nd challenge is being eliminated. My action in providing an avenue to evaluate this location was only from my own personal perspective just to determine if it could be a final relocation destination, nothing more. Therefore, this second challenge is being withdrawn to avoid promoting any individual(s) undeserving of such (such as any "Society's" type individual "awarded" legitimacy as a result of action from any ethically challenged politico), by default, receiving such.
On this fourteenth (14th) day of this challenge a restating is in order as follows: 1) produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant, 2) THE EVIDENCE MUST NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE PERIOD, 3) it is being emphasized that BROAD SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLASS ACTION SUITS CANNOT BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO “PRODUCE” EVIDENCE, 4) THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM, PERIOD and 5) outline HOW DOES THE STAND ALONE PIECES OF EVIDENCE EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARE RELATED TO THE 501C3 - THE LIGHTHOUSE PROJECT CORPORATION’S OFFICE ESTABLISHED AT 158 CARLISLE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CT from Dec, 1988 (see the below associated photo documents).
I am aware of at least one other individual who came along at the time of my departure from LPC, apart from those shown below, but these below were the founding individuals "so-to-speak", with knowledge of the original activity.
 |
Added 10/11/2012
|
DAY THIRTEEN (13) 10/6/2012
On this thirteenth (13th) day of this challenge and counting it is being emphasized that this evidence has nothing to do with any type of transportation whether air, sea or land related including motorized or non-motorized forms of transport as well as anything required to operate such whether legally required or otherwise. In other words broad transportation systems and anything associated such as the “tools” legally required to operate such forms of transport are completely unrelated to this challenge and no individual, entity either business type (known for selling some of these tools required to operate such) or political type (who has been known for the executive roles occupied, which would have required involvement in the formulation of the type of requirements needed to operate such) as well as any other entity involved in such can “dictate” and in turn use each other to corroborate that such things are "magically" related to this challenge by “decree” or otherwise. LET ME REITERATE, THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE STAND SOLO AND NEED NO ACCOMPANYING “TOOLS” WHETHER LEGISLATED OR OTHERWISE TO VALIDATE THEM, AND THIS CANNOT BE CHANGED BY ANY INDIVIDUAL, ENTITY, ETC.!
In addition, on this thirteenth (13) day of this challenge, a twist is being added. The below photos depict interior and an exterior view(s) of the Lighthouse Project Corporation's
 |
Photos of The Lighthouse Projects Corporation's Office in the Building at 158 Carlisle Street, New Haven, CT From Dec, 1988
|
office that had been set up in the building at 158 Carlisle Street, New Haven, CT. The added twist is this, how are the stand-alone pieces of evidence directly or indirectly related to this office?
 |
| Added 10/11/2012 |
 |
| My then Place of Employment - Added 10/11/2012 |
 |
| Supportive Letter Sent to My then Place of Employment - Added 10/11/2012 |
DAY TWELVE (12) 10/5/2012
On this day of the challenge the reasons for my aversion to Class Action Suits are being highlighted in the post ONE OF THE "SOCIETY'S" FAVORITE MECHANISMS FOR "IDENTITY" VALIDATION and the "stand alone" evidence is still being awaited.
DAY ELEVEN (11) 10/4/2012
This is day eleven (11) of the challenge and counting and the use of broad identity-seeking media such as a class action suit (see below composite of Conservery Admin Policy) where
See Retroactive Authorization 1V. Regarding Class Action Suits in the Above Composite of Conservery's Administrative Policy from Dec 27, 2011
identity-seekers can hide amongst others for legitimacy, cannot be used as a mechanism to "produce" the requested evidence, when "stand-alone" mechanisms such as Brazant
Divorce NO: CDDM 001638 were shunned by those with private "alter egos" and different public identities. The "STAND ALONE" criterion means just that, THE EVIDENCE NEEDS NO SUPPORTIVE CRITERIA (WHETHER PRODUCT, SERVICE, CLASS ACTION SUIT ETC.), TO VALIDATE IT!!!!!!!!!!!
DAY TEN (10) 10/3/2012
This day of this challenge serves to inform all those may attempt to misinterpret my actions and draw all types of misconceptions, when my actions are simply to reclaim my identity from the misrepresentation and switching that has occurred at the hands of those (business and politicos) who concluded that such methods were an appropriate path for resolving a matter from long ago in the past by trying to recreate an us against “him” scenario. These types forgot that all in the USA were at one time immigrants with the exception of those who were already here when the first “Settlers” arrived. However, those who understand the implications of such will correctly interpret the overall meaning and classify these matters their proper place in history and the requirements, previously stated are unchanged.
DAY NINE (9) 10/2/2012
This day of the challenge serves as a reminder that inhabiting another’s identity and then using the “Society’s” favorite playbook methodology, “the numbers game” at another’s expense can be very tricky & may backfire when the individual who was (is) imprisoned for success to be achieved finds out. This “numbers game” involves the following as needed: 1) the use of overwhelming numbers of individuals (all with alter egos and/or fictitious identities) claiming to be all related but with questionable origins, such as a fictitious family branch created from a “mistake” on a business card, 2) claiming to be either from South Carolina (and/or Alabama) to subtly feign connection to Barbados to justify legitimacy in this country, when such connections and/or heritages are non-existent and 3) the elevating of some of these types to positions of power and influence etc. (see the post
This day of the challenge serves as a reminder that inhabiting another’s identity and then using the “Society’s” favorite playbook methodology, “the numbers game” at another’s expense can be very tricky & may backfire when the individual who was (is) imprisoned for success to be achieved finds out. This “numbers game” involves the following as needed: 1) the use of overwhelming numbers of individuals (all with alter egos and/or fictitious identities) claiming to be all related but with questionable origins, such as a fictitious family branch created from a “mistake” on a business card, 2) claiming to be either from South Carolina (and/or Alabama) to subtly feign connection to Barbados to justify legitimacy in this country, when such connections and/or heritages are non-existent and 3) the elevating of some of these types to positions of power and influence etc. (see the post
ELECTRONIC NETWORKING RECORDS FRAUD ON A SIGNIFICANT SCALE). The problem with such a path to cover-up an intolerant executive’s actions (see the post THE COVER-UP IS MORE COSTLY THAN THE ORIGINAL ACTION), is that every action carried out by the “imprisoned” individual has to be accounted for, and this often includes illegal monitoring of every action of the individual, ignoring past events that don’t fit into the carefully compiled histories and existences for their “Society’s” types (see the following postsTHE DANGERS OF LIVING WITH CO-DEPENDENT “VIRTUAL” IDENTITIES as well as A TRIBUTE TO MOTHERHOOD).
The challenge today remains the same; produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and ("stand alone" achievements) clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant by those and their supporters claiming to have the exact history as me “superficially”. The one important caveat is that the evidence must NOT be associated with any product or service, whether purchased or freely obtained.
The challenge today remains the same; produce evidence from the dates in question (March 14, 1985, March 3, 1988 & March 14, 1988), of my professional accomplishments containing a signature(s), that are unique and ("stand alone" achievements) clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant by those and their supporters claiming to have the exact history as me “superficially”. The one important caveat is that the evidence must NOT be associated with any product or service, whether purchased or freely obtained.
This day of this challenge is being used to emphasize the fact that deceptive claims sent to the email address jfbrazant@gmail.com, at carefully selected times to justify dreaming up fictitious events to satisfy this challenge does not provide any “Society’s” type identity-seeking individual with legitimacy. As a result, on this day of the challenge, an added criterion is being included, namely that the evidence CANNOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE PERIOD, WHETHER PURCHASED OR FREELY OBTAINED. (NOTE: THIS ADDRESS, WAS INITIATED BY ME FOR MY PERSONAL USE ONLY AND WAS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE ANY IMPOSTOR WITH AN ALTER EGO TO HIDE BEHIND, REGARDLESS OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN)!!!!!!!!
DAY SEVEN (7) 9/30/2012
This day of this challenge did not produce a resolution and as a result, was uneventful, as it still was not met!!!!!!!
DAY SIX (6) 9/29/2012
Today is day six (6) of this challenge and counting!!!!!!
DAY FIVE (5) 9/28/2012
This day of this challenge serves to collectively reinforce the requested criteria, as follows: for the individual(s) who is(are) hiding with their alter egos and trying to prove that they have had the exact history as myself with the assistance of those with the resources to produce anything and claim my history, please produce evidence demonstrating precisely what I (James F. Brazant) accomplished of a professional nature on the following dates:
· March 14, 1985
· March 3, 1988
· March 14, 1988
Please show by producing evidence, what was accomplished professionally by James F. Brazant (whom you are claiming to be) on those dates in question. Furthermore, the challenge evidence must: 1) contain a signature(s), 2) be unique and 3) clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant. In summation, it must be pointed out that IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANYTHING PURCHASED.
This day of this challenge serves to collectively reinforce the requested criteria, as follows: for the individual(s) who is(are) hiding with their alter egos and trying to prove that they have had the exact history as myself with the assistance of those with the resources to produce anything and claim my history, please produce evidence demonstrating precisely what I (James F. Brazant) accomplished of a professional nature on the following dates:
· March 14, 1985
· March 3, 1988
· March 14, 1988
Please show by producing evidence, what was accomplished professionally by James F. Brazant (whom you are claiming to be) on those dates in question. Furthermore, the challenge evidence must: 1) contain a signature(s), 2) be unique and 3) clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant. In summation, it must be pointed out that IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANYTHING PURCHASED.
DAY FOUR (4) 9/27/2012
This day of this challenge points out that you cannot: 1) be removed from divorce proceedings completely as the below evidence supports (see
 |
| Brazant Divorce Selected Pages & Newly Required Heritage Requirement |
photo), 2) be devoid of personal unique details free of any cross-contamination that purchases can bring about as carefully shown here and 3) rely only on unjustifiable financial history alone that does not match up with the immediate individual claiming to be the legitimate James F. Brazant while relying on a pot-pourri of hastily strewn together band of "international" identity-seeking types and still pretend to be James F. Brazant in a covert alter ego while actively being another personality publicly. All the “King’s” Horses And All The “King’s” Men Can’t Make Such Individuals Brazant’s Again and NEITHER DOES ILLEGALLY DIVERTING MAIL FOR A FAMILY'S MEMBER'S APARTMENT BELONGINGS CURRENTLY IN STORAGE (DANIELLE'S), AND ATTEMPTING TO PAY FOR IT, DOESN'T CHANGE ANY INDIVIDUAL'S IDENTITY OVERNIGHT.
DAY THREE (3) 9/26/2012
There is an important reason why activities/accomplishments from the dates in question were chosen and equally as important is the basis for excluding any association with purchases, namely to free these more subtle achievements from the potential of being cross-contaminated by those whose philosophy is centered solely on financial capability as a measure of historical legitimacy, irrespective of whether or not this “new fund” capability is borrowed or stolen. “Society’s” types who brandish this feature as their “mark” of legitimacy, forgot that other things apart from the major accomplishments do play just as important if not more important a role in an individual’s identity, because if it were not for these otherwise more subtle or mundane details, the major accomplishments would not have been achieved since they are a testament to them. These details include those unique chronological details, which can’t be transported across international continental borders conveniently (see the posts 1) ANOTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF HAVING A ‘VIRTUAL” IDENTITY, 2) SUMMARY OF HIDDEN DANGERS/UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND OTHER ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING "VIRTUAL" IDENTITIES - UPDATED and 3) the highlighted sections of ADDENDUM TO GIVING "LIFE" THE OLD FASHIONED WAY UPDATED (9/1/2012) TO INCLUDE AN EXAMPLE OF CONSISTENCY). Note: just because a purchase from the dates closer to the latter date used (from a then Dealer that sold multiple disconnected makes/models of vehicles (see photo included below - removed become of my commitment to refrain from including anything on this Blog's Pages that promotes any individual/entity in anyway involved in the mangling of my identity) and located on a street with the and located on a street with the name of a prominent
THE INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED HERE WAS REMOVED CONSISTENT WITH MY COMMITTMENT NOT TO MAINTAIN ANYTHING ON THESE PAGES, WHICH IN ANYWAY CONTRIBUTED TO THE MANGLING OF MY IDENTITY.
Northeastern City), resurrected and transferred to “Society” types for legitimacy and this is in turn supported by those with financial inducements to validate such as legitimate as well as to corroborate the “dreamt-up” achievements, does not change the main premise, that these achievements/accomplishments, each with a specific signature(s) cannot be associated with anything purchased, as emphasized above. And finally, I would like to reiterate the message of the post from January 23, 2012 and apologize to anyone who was truly deceived by those “Society’s” types using financial history alone as their measure of legitimacy and by so doing misled some into thinking that Conservery was just another run-of-the-mill Proprietorship offering targeted political strategy that would be just willing to “throw” contests when the “Society’s” conditions so desire it, (see the post TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN).
DAY TWO (2) 9/25/2012
The challenge evidence must: 1) contain a signature(s), 2) be unique and 3) clearly have been achieved/undertaken by James F. Brazant. In summation, it must be pointed out that it does NOT and is not supported by anything purchased.
The reason for the purchased stipulation is to avoid those who FREQUENT PAST ESTABLISHMENTS AS A "MARK" OF LEGITIMACY, digging up past records, such as the purchase of a used Mercury from the then Merriam Motors Lincoln/Mercury Dealership of Wallingford, CT (circa 1983), massaging this transaction and assigning it to some "Society's" type as supporting evidence of having been in a location and at a time that begs of blatant records switching to support ID transfer along with some other contrived pieces of evidence "dreamed-up" to support the specific dates identified. The inclusion of this stipulation is to avoid anything of the above nature occurring.
DAY ONE (1) 9/24/2012
This follow-up to the post AN A-TO-Z EXPOSE OF THE "VIRTUAL" SOCIETY'S METHODOLOGY is intended as a challenge, because I am not in the business of producing details from my history, which Entities with untold resources can duplicate and dispute once they are aware of them. Therefore for the individuals who are fond of producing information after the fact and supporting those hiding with their alter egos and trying to prove that they have had the exact history as myself with the assistance of those with the resources to produce anything and claiming my history, please produce evidence demonstrating precisely what I (James F. Brazant) accomplished of a professional nature on the following dates:
· March 14, 1985
· March 3, 1988
· March 14, 1988
Please show by producing evidence, what was accomplished professionally by James F. Brazant (whom you are claiming to be) on those dates in question.
· March 14, 1985
· March 3, 1988
· March 14, 1988
Please show by producing evidence, what was accomplished professionally by James F. Brazant (whom you are claiming to be) on those dates in question.
12 comments:
Unlimated resources can only purchase "legitimacy" when it's already known!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Could it be that all these various accidents (see the posts HOW DOES STATE SPONSORED ID THEFT WORK? as well as CRISES “INDUCED” IDENTITY TRANSFER - links on COMMENTS page), was an attempt to recreate this accident THAT TOOK PLACE IN BARBADOS (discussed on day 32 10/25/2012), in order that a con artist could justify a) using the MRI x-rays, b) his alter ego via medical copying and c) and his limp, my identity and financial history?
The significance of the delivery date on the MRI x-rays [as depicted in DAY 33 (10/26/2012)] is an indication that a quid pro quo deal was made for the support (to “Society’s” types) by some politico (connected with that date with a penchant for hiding behind others) in exchange for something in return. All that have to deduced, is to examine what significant political event transpired politically after October 1991, and it will explain why the “undying” is being provided by a certain politico to obvious impostors/frauds and “angle makers”, regardless of the clear actual “evidence” to the contrary. If you an impostor, you are an impostor, there is not another angle to “pull out of the hat”, which will make you legitimate. There is a name for that; it’s called “thugism”.
The significance of the delivery date on the MRI x-rays [as depicted in DAY 33 (10/26/2012)] is an indication that a quid pro quo deal was made for the support (to “Society’s” types) by some politico (connected with that date with a penchant for hiding behind others) in exchange for something in return. All that have to deduced, is to examine what significant political event transpired politically after October 1991, and it will explain why the “undying” support is being provided by a certain politico to obvious impostors/frauds and “angle makers”, regardless of the clear actual “evidence” to the contrary. If you an impostor, you are an impostor, there is not another angle to “pull out of the hat”, which will make you legitimate. There is a name for that; it’s called “thugism”.
No individual should put himself (or herself) in the position of making "deals" to deliberately impact the life of another; who gave such the right to think that another scheme will "cover-up" their deal-making. It make take decades sometimes, but "deals' concocted in secret have a way manifesting themselves eventually!
No individual should put himself (or herself) in the position of making "deals" to deliberately impact the life of another; who gave such the right to think that another scheme will "cover-up" their deal-making. It make take decades sometimes, but "deals" concocted in secret have a way manifesting themselves eventually!
There are some of other “Clubs” who imply that their way is a better and clear alternative to that of the “Society”. However, some of their most fervent and prominent collaborators (who in part assisted in the historical re-arranging of events in Connecticut to provide a con artist with a semblance of “virtual” authenticity), suggest otherwise. A different course would have to be chartered for this statement to have “real” meaning!
Who specifically did this opportunistic Politico (discussed on Day 33 of this chllenge) with a penchant for hiding behind others specifically make a quid quo pro deal with? Which “Society’s” type representative was so bold as to “deal” away an individual’s identity and accomplishments to a con artist? A look back at events should provide some clues in, which the answer lies hopefully. On the very last day of this Politico’s two terms in office, after eight (8) years it was announced that throughout these years the only State in the Union that he had not visited was ironically State no. 37, which he saved for last. How revealing this action was symbolically, of, which the question previously asked in the post WHO REALLY IS THE OWNER OF THE NUMBER 37 PLAYBOOK? (- link on COMMENTS Page). This is a peek into the Mogul who decided to play “god” and rearranged the identity and accomplishments of an individual because he chose to ask why was he ignored when seeking financing in a place one is supposed to seek such answers, a bank! Who gave you the authority to implement an illegal redistribution scheme to “correct” (or cover-up) this unfortunate event?
These “Society’s” types without realizing it, are validating my entire position by their actions, for example IF THESE INDIVIDUALS WERE ORIGINAL AS THEIR “PROTECTORS” AND “SUPPORTERS” CONTEND, WHY WOULD THEY HAVE TO RESORT TO STEALING MY BILLS (vehicle insurance, vehicle registration, etc.,) FOR THEIR LEGITIMACY? This proves my point that mail fraud occurred as documented in the post GIVING “LIFE” THE OLD FASHIONED WAY- UPDATED TO INCLUDE AN EXAMPLE OF CONSISTENCY (link on COMMENTS Page), in order to provide these impostors with SOCIAL SECURITY records and as a result “legitimacy” for a heritage that has its origins in a quid quo pro deal made (as indicated in comment no. 1 from 10/26/2012 on THIS COMMENTS Page); which “they” (“Society’s” Mogul, Titan, Arbiter of “THRUTH” and Opportunistic Supporter) are all “working” overtime to try to demonstrate as valid. (This is a very good reason as to why it is not good policy to make such deals in exchange for any position, because it can potentially imperil future actions to such unethical practices enacted years earlier, necessitating constant involvement in trying to manipulate circumstances in order to ensure that the sleazy deal-making made doesn’t come back as the proverbial “ghost” to “haunt”). IF THESE “SOCIETY’S” TYPES ARE REALLY ORIGINAL, WHY CAN’T THEIR “LEGITIMACY” BE DEMONSTRATED WITHOUT RELYING ON ANY OF MY RECORDS!
If any individual was holding onto my vehicle’s Registration, (which was mailed out and should have been received since October, as documented in comment no. 1 for 11/5/2012 on THIS COMMENTS Page), as a basis for illegally voting in my name, I am sorry to have spoiled the charade of “Society’s” types by paying it in person today. As stated previously, if “Society’s” types were original, (see comment no. 2 from 11/4/2012 on THIS COMMENTS Page), the need for absconding with my records would be unnecessary. Just because the crimes of “Society’s” types are adjusted by their Supporters/Protectors (see THE CRIMES OF “SOCIETY’S” TYPES BEING COVERED-UP - link on COMMENTS Page) this does not validate them.
CHALLENGE FOLLOW-UP (SNAPSHOT FOR MARCH 14, 1985) - 11/29/2012
Since it is clear that the Challenge cannot be addressed as “Society’s” types were not provided with upfront information, which could be reproduced, since experiences are more than placing LABELS AND NUMBERS on targeted locations as an indication of “legitimacy” and involve actual experiences, had the impostors pretending to have the exact same professional experiences as I did, should have known had they been in the Company as the “Titan” (based in CT and whose support was critically needed, by other “Society’s” types maintains - see comment # 3 from 11/28/2012 on the COMMENTS 1 Page). The date was associated with the events surrounding the first major project/assignment that I was given as a young Applications Engineer at The Kerite Company. It involves the developments (an obstacle) that occurred with the purchase of high voltage test equipment needed for my first major project’s success and it’s eventual resolution (see the below photos included - on COMMENTS 1 page). NOTE: NO MAKE-UPS ARE ALLOWED FOR THIS DATE, AS PRODUCING EVIEDNCE IS NOT ALLOWED ONCE ANY INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY ME!
Post a Comment