Facts Push Buttons
Only When You Gambled
As a quick recap, with my estate inquiry files marked A-Z, I understand that after someone strips one of their estate and estate role, without permission, and falsifies property ownership documentation, why inquires only about those issues trigger this in my little sister, from P.M. crutch’s voice, verbatim:
A) [C]arrie has been so upset from the [fiduciary estate inquiry] letters she’s waiting to talk to her psychologist before she talks to you.
B) i do believe i know something of the cash card but you have to talk to Michael for that. i just know what they were thinking of doing.[1]
Little sister has a deep problem with omitting material facts that are the direct cause of my reactions. Little sister has a deep problem with attempting to re-write real simple history and real simple rules of estate engagement, which is the sole issue ever raised and wholly dodged by her ill-informed voices who she, with malice, set in motion to attack me – point blank.
Again, if I stole a car from someone’s estate and hoped that I would never get called on it, and then was called on it, I too would be “upset,” which is a crooks nature:
Saying – Hey, You Stole My – Estate Property – Pushes Buttons
Q. I say hey guys, what’s up with my down payment (18K) that I all alone got me & my Mom into a roof that she could call her own into – and what about my 3.333 of the car you converted, e.g..
A. You – say: How dare you speak of mom [which I didn’t crooked liars] where were you, you’re on drugs & asked for drugs from Carrie [liars].
Little sister’s speaker was directing her voice in the wrong direction, I think, when she said this, verbatim:
A) [I]gnoring a problem is not the right answer either;
B) [Y]ou made your bed and now your reaping the consequences of those actions.[2]
I do thank you, however, for furnishing another first hand real world account of how hypocritical mud slinging fibbing man animals behave in response to facts about their open & shut violations of black & white rules, all in accord. I shall get to your slander next, as your not quite done with “counseling” yet.
Some Hate Facts – Bill Lerach et al Did Too
Chinese Proverbs – If you don’t want anyone to know, don’t do it [or cure it]. Sending your wiener dog James is very cute – I love his sloppy feistiness!
My Book Club Supplements
Hope Your Enjoying My Estate Ashes
[1] Re: Night Owl – From: Patti Munoz (patti_rn2006@yahoo.com)
Sent: Fri 2/02/07 4:54 AM – To: Cash Bonas (cashbonas@hotmail.com)
[2] Id.
Bradley O’Husky
5122 Via Castilla
Oceanside, Ca. 92057
Date: 08-29-07
On 08-28-07, at 3:27 P.M. I received, at my wireless number 661-993-0780, the below message from number 760-757-1646, which I transcribed as soon as I fielded it:
Hey Cash, this is Brad. Hey, sorry I haven’t gotten back to you, but we got, I got your letter after we got back from vacation on last Thursday. I don’t know when you sent it, but I did not get it until last Thursday. I got your Second letter today, but…. Um hey, you know what, I don’t really have uh that information as far as how much we are holding for you or anything. So I had to wait until we could get to the bank and we didn’t actually get their until the weekend & now it is Monday, so you know, I –I just wanted to make sure we had the right information before I talked to you. Give me a call back, I am at home, & we will figure this out & get what, get you what you need. O.K. – talk to you.
It sounded like Mr. Bradly O’Husky, but it could have been someone calling from a twin number of Mr. O’Husky’s. Some reasons I am unsure about this being a genuine message from Mr. O’Husky follow. I personally wrote & mail dropped 3 letters to Mr. O’Husky personally, the present guardian of my nephew, Kevin:
A) One on Friday, August 10 2007, exactly 18 days ago (or 19 if you count today);
B) One on Sunday, August 12, 2007, exactly 16 days ago (or 17 if you count today); &
C) One on Friday, August 24, 2007, exactly 3 days ago (or 4 if you count today).
Anyway, until I hear otherwise, I will assume that was you. Thank you for confirming that you received both my “B” & “C” dated letters. By omission, are you telling me that you did not receive my “A” letter to you & my nephew on 8-10-2007? I am pretty sure I addressed it correctly (I always triple check that type of thing), & I haven’t fielded that speech communication as returned mail for an incorrect address.
Next, if that was you, I sure hope you all had a dandy vacation, which you say you returned from on “Thursday, August 23, 2007.” You said, “I had to wait until we could get to the bank.” Are banks not open on Friday where you live? Or did you have jet lag on Friday, the 24th – from your party vacation – such that you were otherwise too busy to respect the urgency of the psychological financial stresses I desire to assuage for two women I love dearly, my Nina & Polly. You say, “I don’t know when you sent it.” That is not an accurate statement. You knew exactly, within a couple days, when I sent it. And now you know exactly the date I sent it. And, so you know, you can always check the stamp on the envelope it came in IF you ever wonder about something like that, which is important, no doubt.
You seem a little confused Bradley. If you read IT, Bradley, I never mentioned the word “holding,” I never inquired about “how much.” And you have spoken with your partner about the $25,000 check you, your partner, cut to me about a year ago, which I tore up. Perhaps you can look at your check-book to confirm that instead of delaying what I asked for. Now, Fed Ex delivery would be nice. Now, you asked me to phone you. I prefer handling this in black & white, to avoid the unfortunate party crasher situations, e.g., like parts of the Munoz team you (partner) enlisted (Slander?)
Mr. Administrator/Executor O’Husky, today is 02-06-07:
This confirms that you have made zero effort to communicate with me, your client, in connection the in testate estate you appointed yourself to administer. I sure don’t want to jump to any ill-founded conclusions, because maybe you haven’t received my multiple, on file correspondences about it.
This confirms that when I made an oral inquiry last August, 2006, about my ’93 purchase of A. Petersen’s 50% interest in the estate’s Condo property, you (partner) replied, aka:
Well I donated the decedent a couple hundred dollars a month [after bleeding her for thousands of your & Rose’s cash in condo write offs plus] while you were in the witness Alt program protection custody, so I agreed with my princess, to come up, to ignore that legal reality. I decided to just split it in equal thirds, in accordance with the rules of in testate succession.
This confirms that you, an non-party without any interest whatsoever in the estate, decided to allocate the property from that estate without any effort to communicate with me about it, having my current address & knowing exactly where I was the entire time.
This confirms that you (partner), a non-interested party, said to me, aka:
I, Bradley O’Husky, decided to keep the car for me, my 14 year old, so that I don’t have to buy him a car when he turns 16.
This confirms that you clumsily omitted the fact that you (partner) have been using the car for your own personal benefit for two years now, because, as you (partner) told me in August 2005, aka, “I am driving it long distance to work because I save a lot of money in gas wearing & tearing it.” And this confirms that today, two years later, all of a sudden, your voice has echoed through the grapevine, indicating that your now conflicted position is, aka, “well the car really isn’t worth anything today.” To the contrary Mr. BO, it’s worth exactly my out of pocket car costs!
Now I am really unclear on what rules of side contracts & in-testate you read up on & chose to align with in connection with your duties, but it seems like you did something of an odd tri-brid. With regard to all the estates stuff, you appear to have sided with some inverted version of the ancient & current common law rules of Primogeniture, which is the common law right of the first born son to inherit the entirety of it, to the exclusion of younger siblings, by giving the dowry to the eldest daughter, your wife, instead of the eldest son, with a token forwarded to the eldest son.
I have no idea what title you unilaterally chose to transfer to the youngest of the three beneficiaries, all of whom were well over 18 at the time you elected yourself administrator/ executor/fiduciary over someone elses’ affairs My unstable little sis made a wise choice in you.
Shifting, I sure enjoyed my brief stay with you. I recall witnessing you (partner) training that lovely daughter of yours to oogle over jewelry one night. That sure was special. Speaking of jewelry, who did you decide to grant title to all of that to yourself, your princess partner? Or did you decide to give some of it to some one else? Or something else? I was just wondering, as client of yours who hasn’t heard a peep out of you short of some really reckeless excuses. No buts Bradley – ignoring it & pretending that I am somehow off base. Your lies help me, a lot! On a friendly not, how is my brother in law Doug O’Husky?
I swear under penalty of perjury the facts contained above are true.
Your UN-Lost & Found Client,
In holy matrimony, two become one, by definition, by contract:
Bradley O’Husky
5122 Via Castilla
Oceanside, Ca. 92057
Re: Embezzlement/Elements Plus
On 08-28-07, in the single talk about your unilateral decisions to hold a life ceremony against the decedents wishes (without unanimous consent) & embezzling from my estate, over 1.5 years after the fact, I said to you, verbatim, “a fiduciary owes a conversation to each of his beneficiaries. You responded with this, in writing:
Bradley’s 8-29-07: In his sole fiduciary communication Bradley said, verbatim:
A) “I hung up on you….”;
B) “We have … this money … not in [an] … interest bearing account….”;
C) “I called Katherine to get more information….”;
D) “That way we are free from having to deal with you….”;
E) “[B]ut, it is not being sent to you the way you [instructed] ….; &
F) We do not need nor do we want you-….
My Bradley 09-05-07: My Beneficiary to fiduciary Bradley speech, verbatim:
A) A logical Estate conversation is exactly what I asked for long ago;
B) Your quizzing Kathy about … my money wasn’t a good idea [snoop(e)];
C) [Y]ou … declined, by refusing to communicate with me about a single thing, my invitations to have a civil family talk about a single issue ….”;
D) [M]y past pattern of O’Husky charity … like the apple … regrettably”;
E) You really come from deeper than left field, Mr. O’Husky. To put your mind at ease, I shall double insure that your O’Husky family tree has no connection with anything relating to me, past, present, or future.; &
F) Your logic defies logic, Mr. Fiduciary. Had you pulled up some basic executor rules that have been at your tips the whole time [two years], or … made a single effort to communicate with me over the past almost two years, frustrations could have been avoided.
My Bradley 08-29-07: “Take … the trailer down payment. You’re a real eager beaver”
A) [M]y past correspondence to you, some acknowledgement of which I have been waiting for, from you, for … months. One core of which is my 7 pager to you (partner) dated February 2, 2006.
B) On a cycle of life update, Kathy Hawkins pasted away recently, from cancer. She, like the Rose, had plenty of time to address her affairs, formally, which comforts me.
Formal Presentation Intro Sample
Totten trusts can only be created with certain types of depository accounts or securities; in particular they cannot be used to convey real property.
My Log Of Our Sole Communications
And Bradley O’s Daily “F” U Cash Communications
a) We held a metting, talked about it and decided that we were not going to reckognize that you bought ½ ht condo in 1993 for 18 plus in hard, out of pocket cash from Aaron Petersen or anything else that you sacraficed. We decided to rape you while you could do nothing about it – so “F” off cash –
Not Very Brotherly Mr. Hot Dog Game Boy
Dear Kin, today is 11-18-07:
Out of professional courtesy, I provide the following itemization of facts relating to our prospective formal engagement, as a reminder:
A) Ex My 02-16-02 Power of decision making Attorney – to Rose only, which relates to ALL ESTATE (INTESTATE) BUSINESS – Condo 2!
B) Ex My 3-4-04 P-H D. Smith said, verbatim:
a. I first met with [him] … in February 2000, at the early stages of his [family & complex lit partner] psychiatric difficulties.
b. [He] … made significant gains … no evidence of paranoia or psychosis.
c. [He] … is … receiving help from his [JD, PHD] support groups.
d. He is anxious to return to [formal] productivity.
e. I am confident [in him] … and very optimistic about his future.
C) Ex My 01-29-07 My Estate Property Speech, reading verbatim:
a. ABOUT STEALING … FRAUDULENT CONVERSION;
b. I NEVER SAID KEEP THE CHANGE – YOU MAY NOT;
c. 50% –STRAIGHT UP – MY INVESTMENT – MY LABOR; &
d. YOU DIDN’T GET HER INTO IT – YOU DIDN’T BUY MY ½.
As I explained, I rescinded my power of attorney to Rose, in writing, shortly after receiving Dr. Smith’s 03-04-04 “clean bill of health” proof. I did that after witnessing, first hand, 24/7, for two solid months, Rose’s failing condition, like no one else. I went to Dr. Smith to secure that proof, for unbiased input. I did it for the record. I did it to show & tell in my court in response to my estate business & business, which involves your continued slander & libel against me, confirmed by Joanne (voices), multiple times over, who said, projecting her lush self onto me, verbatim:
A) [Y]our … doing … drugs. [That’s actionable, all in accord]
B) [Y]our … venting because she didn’t give you drugs; [It is actionable]
I thank Joanne, whose voice is her two chub cubs, for that & other bacteria lip bits.
About “A-1” above, I gave no one but my Rose my short term, dual shot calling authority. You possess no such instrument from me. And you did not secure a legitimate court order of decision guardianship over me or my affairs, for any purpose, including your selling my condo without my signature, which was & remains required to effectuate an encumbrance free transfer of my title
On a pleasant note, I look forward to playing with my cousin James Junior!
Jump On The Lerach & Weiss Bandwagon To Infect Lies About Me Roundly
The Bain & Burden Bourne Boy – Hallmark Holiday Card Publishing – Mr. Deeds
Dear Ex Brother Bradley:
Today is 09-08-07. Pursuant to your sage advise I have gotten yet another persons input on the business of your administering my in-testate estate, without a word of logically supporting about your decisions. In addition to all the other proof I possess, On Thu 9/06/07 6:48 PM Carol Kangus, a lifelong friend of the decedent’s estate you chose to administer, wrote this bit to me, verbatim:
I also remember her [Rose] telling me that you [Cash] had purchased the condo in Solvang with her when she could no longer stay in the house [in 1993 when Aaron re-nigged on his 30 year partnership contract with her].
After paying the better half of the entire mortgage for the 1992 to 1993 school year, that is why I deferred going to law school, to assist with the Condo & Bills, I decided to buy Aaron out. I thought you knew this as everyone else does, but maybe you didn’t. I made a, $18,000 hard cash outlay for it instead of putting that money into an interest bearing account, beginning back in 1993. Interest on that alone sure adds up to more than $24,000.00, which I understand is about the amount you chose to pay hard cash for in connection with a State emission of a bill of [Visa] credit, without any notice to me. I guess it would have been nice if you had mentioned something to me before doing anything with another persons’ estate property. I know you had my address because you (partner) wrote me a couple letters at my residence during the relevant time. Those were very nice letters. I have them all if you would like to see them. Oddly, not a single one mentions anything substantive about the estate. I did appreciate, however, your pictures of the kids.
On the other hand, I was shocked to learn that you scheduled the celebration 6 weeks before I was confirmed to be out, 8 months after the passing. What was your rush there? In your last not so nice letter to me, you mentioned our communications over the past two years, 99% of which have all been in writing. You reference those communications as your basis for your unwillingness to have any mature discussion about estate matters or anything else me. I went head & provided the majority of our communications below, verbatim & unedited, for the record; they openly confirm just the opposite of your libelous words about my character. Typically when someone desires to have a bit of credibility when make stuff up in creative writing & words they cite something other than their own ipsi dixit to support it, logically. You don’t do that Brad, because, I suggest, you can’t.
It is less than candid of you to suggest that your personal history & acts in connection with handling this matter are beyond reproach. I am less than perfect & less than diplomatic at times, my friend. But you sure can’t say that your acts & omissions do not come to bear on the way in which I communicate with you about “IT”. As a fresh example, why did you intentionally placed my $20,000.00 in a non-interest bearing account? Did you do the same with the other beneficiaries?
Now I understand that it is “hurtful” recognizing facts & duties, & I understand that you don’t want any communications about it, but that sure doesn’t align with your role as a fiduciary in connection with the duty to both communicate & to act without my having to ask or hound you about it, almost two years later. Do you really wish to continue slandering me by saying that I am off balance about the fact of my Condo contract you pretend doesn’t exist & the reality of a constructive trust that is in place right now? Or do think we might be able to be adult about this & avert further wasted time & bad feelings.
My counselors suggested that you might be jealous of me. Is that part of your theft plus?
By:
Patty & Joanne Munoz Receipt Of Stolen Property
Patty Munoz took receipt of stolen property (My car) from Bradley O’Husky, who didn’t own it. He sold/gave it to her instead of parking it in a storage unit with my estate stuff & paying for it with my estate & my in-test-ate funds, as required. He agreed with his partner, Carrie O’Husky, to liquidate & convert the entire estate, including my car. He sold it to her, in part, in exchange for her promise to remain silent about Bradley’s bank fraud & theft – the “I’ll pay you too keep quiet about it” thing, like Carrie & agreed to with James & Joanne Munoz, who came up too on My Estate stuff!
Patty Munoz, not having a car off her own, even though she lived at home off her mommy until about age 30, decided to break & enter & take my car (Honda), while I was away, without a written permission slip.
Patty Munoz, to safe a few hundred dollars a month in a lease, did a lot more than just take the keys, with intent to convert, then open the door “borrowing” my car for a quick trip. She actually claimed ownership over it, which fact is confirmed by these acts:
A) She put girly flower seat covers on it;
B) She put a girly flower steering wheel padding on it; and
C) She put girly flower stickers on the back window & back bumper.
Patty Munoz did this after talking about & then agreeing to do it with her mommy, Ant Joanne Munoz, who never could pass the test to actually become an RN due to what my Rose identified as a learning (reading & comprehension) disability. Joanne, according to my Rose, was always a little slow in the mental facilities department. My Rose said that, not me, although now, having experienced Joanne’s I-Q of a speed bump behaviors, I definitely concur.
A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved:
! The person [Brad stole & gave it to & P. Munoz] received my car property
! The items were moveable
! The item[s] had a value [garage sale value, pawn shop value, sentimental value].
! The person acted knowingly and willfully.
Now, upon getting caught, upon my return from protective custody, Patty Munoz did return the property, many, many months later. When I mentioned the rule, true to guilty criminal denial form, she waged this attack on me, verbatim:
A. I told Carrie your just venting because she [Carrie O’Husky] didn’t give you drugs! [Why to you people lie so much?]
Cc: The District Attorney or Attorney general must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person either received, concealed, stored, sold or disposed of the stolen property.
Dear Kin, today is 11-24-07:
Quickly, I write, as a professional courtesy, to apprise of the following points:
Grand theft, Mr. O’H, is a major felony crime in the United, defined as the theft of objects exceeding a certain monetary value, as set by statute or court ruling.
Grand theft is usually distinguished from petty theft where the value of the item taken is substantially lower in value. However, this distinction is not always the case. In the United, for example, the theft of an automobile, like a Tan, 4-door Honda Accord, is considered Grand theft even if the vehicle is a salvage or scrap, having no or a very small value. In the United, the value necessary for a crime to rise from Petty to Grand theft can be as low as $100 depending on the jurisdiction, but is usually $200 or $1000.
THE SALE OR RECEIPT OF STOLEN PROPERTY
BY CLAIMING 100% OWNERSHIP OF OTHERS’ PROP
Mr. & Mrs. O’H can be found guilty of the offence of receipt of stolen property only if all of the following facts are proved:
A) The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property; B) The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce, which have crossed a state/county border line, like from S.B. to S.D.; C) The items had a value in excess of $5,000; D) The person acted knowingly and willfully.
MONEY, OF COURSE, IS AN ITEM OF PROPERTY
It is a federal/state crime under 18 U.S.C. § 2315 to knowingly receive, conceal, or dispose of stolen property with a value at least $5,000. The prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person either received, concealed, stored, sold or disposed of the stolen property, without the true owners consent! For purposes of this section, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United, like S.B. & S.D.
MR. O’H’S BANK FRAUD
Bank fraud is a federal crime in many countries, defined as planning to obtain property or money from any federally insured financial institution. It is a white-collar crime. § 1344. Bank fraud 2004-08-06 Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, a scheme or artifice — (2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds … or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false … pretenses, representations …; shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. [The Million Dollar Bablon Baby]
C: Longs CEO – Sigma Chi brother
Hi Ant Joanne & Slim Jim (08-25-07):
It was sure great seeing you and Uncle Jimmy at your mom’s sister’s Wake a few weeks ago. You look like 1.5 million bucks. I love what you did with your hair, & you looked hot in that sexy little black dress. You are a real looker. I sure wish we could have talked a little, but I guess you were in a rush to beat the traffic getting back to the desert.
I want to thank you for being such a pillar of support in my life, like when you cooked me dinner on my birthday, after arranging for me to spend some time with Roxie & to see my Rose. I was curious about you telling me that in a coma like state, just hours before passing, one has the cognitive ability to assimilate when spoken too. Did a real Doctor, like a Neuro-Surgeon, teach you that, or were you just saying for some odd reason?
I do appreciate your sua sponte transport, so you know. You do, however, act in a vacuum of info about me & on my behalf. For future reference, & in the spirit of healthy family communications, because you know next to nothing about my profile, I am not big on surprises, no matter where I am. Now if you had asked first, about anything, which you never did, I would have explained that long before I checked myself back into camp “college” (11-19-05) I was well adjusted to the imminent reality of my Rose’s Stage 4 condition. You see, from January ’04 through March ’05, with the exception of my one week ’05 Christmas tour, across multiple borders, I alone was with my Rose 24/7, which time I cherish. Like you, I know what it’s like tending to someone who can’t always: A) get out of bed themselves, B) bathe themselves, C) feed themselves, D) use the facilities for themselves. Like you, I did it because that is who I am, in part, no questions asked. And, like you, I did & do not expect compensation for my work in connection with my Rose.
It makes me happy that you all, without my presence, had the gift of my Rose’s company for the entire Fall ’05. Her company and the gratitude she shared with me, for me, are gifts no one but I possess, so you know. Did you know that she was smiling cheek to cheek when I made, for her, a little extra in tips the first few weeks of Christmas 05. She told me, with tears, paraphrased/verbatim:
I would not have been able to buy Bradley’s kids any presents but for you. Thank you.
It made me feel good giving her every single penny from every single check & every single dollar in tips I made above my meager, basic costs – food, gas, cappuccino, insurance & clove habit, less than $400 of the $1,500 a Month I earned from March ’04 – ’05. And I enjoyed picking up my mom’s extra little cash job watching/parenting Wyatt a couple days a week thing, because she couldn’t. I helped him a little homework, we played with Roxi in the park, played soccer, a little baseball, went to the pizza parlor & played games. It was awesome – he is an all-star kid to me. Londi & Kelly insisted on paying her, knowing she was well under water, financially. I probably should have asked James about financial responsibility & saved it for me, for a vacation? I suppose I would have been much better off had I kept some of IT for myself, so that I wasn’t flat broke for my short tour in San Diego. I’ve learned that I am truly irresponsible when it comes to immediate money management & should have taken, instead of giving, right?
That is one of my major character flaws, & always has been. I do wish I was more like the man you raised – James Jr. In retrospect, I should have taken James path & found a relative’s couch to free load off of – free room, board, electricity, cable & so forth to cut overhead through college. He sure is a wise man, & has been from a very young age, so sources say. I sure hope he doesn’t give up on his CIA aims. I’ve also been told that I should consider being a bit more like you, spending my time & my money pampering me – cars, vacations, diamonds & stuff, not aiding my partner, financially. I probably should have done that from 1991 to ’05, instead of buying a condo (my investment), which your princess niece lies about.
I know can’t go back, but I am learning, thanks to people like you, who steal others’ ashes plus!
January 29, 2007
AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
I thought you three might want to break your pact of silence ABOUT STEALING FROM ME before I submit my dear Abby letter about IT to your local newspapers, your places of employment.
The letters, which are easily attached to a check box negligence complaint, I can edit & verify, because I don’t lie, like you all do by silence. Attached are SOME FACTS – IT IS A CRYSTAL ICE CUBE REMINDER of some facts. Here is a preview:
ROBBING FROM A BROKE & BROKEN MAN
WORSE THAN KICKING A HORSE WHILE DOWN
To remind you, mom couldn’t afford to get into a place after the divorce with dad. I, after taking a real estate class at Santa Barbara City college, got her a partner, Aaron Petersen, to go in halves on the condo, an investment for him, & a real home for mom. That thought obviously never crossed your minds, because you are selfish. I did that, all alone. Then I, all alone, bought half out in 1993 before going to law school, forming a partnership as an investment for me, with every penny of spare cash I had from 1993 through 2005 & for a home for my Rose, which contract is documented, as you have known for 14 years.
Under California law, embezzlement is defined as the theft or stealing of property that has been entrusted to the defendant under Penal Code 503. Embezzlement has also been defined as the fraudulent conversion of another’s property, when the defendant had a fiduciary or other relationship of trust to the property owner.
Shifting, as I said, I thought about it, but I never consented to you keeping my change:
50% –STRAIGHT UP – ALL MY INVESTMENT
Someone TRUE TO THE CORE inspired me to do this. I despise writing letters like this, so you know. Of course I have a choice to do it, & based on your very, very bad acts, I chose to vent a little this way, & see what happens. And yea, I guess I’m just overly generous when IT comes to my money, for not saying & doing something before now. I thought you all might want to break your pact of silence ABOUT STEALING FROM ME & cementing your fraud on the bank & to Mr. Erin Daniels before I submit my dear Abby letter about IT to your local newspapers, your places of employment.
NICE WIDFALL FOR YOU DIAMOND DIGGER CARRIE
To remind you, mom couldn’t afford to get into a place after the divorce with dad. I, after taking a real estate class at Santa Barbara City college, got her a partner, Aaron Petersen, to go in halves on the condo, an investment for him, & a real home for mom. That thought obviously never crossed your minds, because you are selfish.
In case you are unaware, there are two classes that I have an uncanny aptitude for, as I demonstrated in law school – booking Wills & Anti-Trust – a clip of my CV is attached. This actually involves both, because what you’ve done does not constitute acute business acumen, & IT is business, it was my business, the business I, not you, invested in – property – right before law school.
50% –STRAIGHT UP
ALL MY INVESTMENT
If you think that because your name replaced Aaron’s on the title you became owner, without buying him out, you are flat wrong. I have the contract – I have IT off-title with Aaron Petersen, & I have had it since 1993, our side contract, signed by both of us, because I bought him out when I was 23 years old. For mom & me as an investment, which you have known for 14 years.
To prove the crime of theft by embezzlement, the prosecution must prove:
1. The owner or agent for the owner entrusted property to the defendant;
2. The owner or agent for the owner did so out of trust in the defendant;
3. The defendant either converted or used that property for his own benefit;
AND
4. When the defendant converted the property, he intended permanently to deprive the owner of it, or to take it from the owner’s possession for so long a period of time that the owner would lose much of the value or enjoyment of the property. [1]
YOU SURE DIDN’T BUY THAT ½ CONDO
YOU SURE DIDN’T GET HER INTO IT EITHER
I find it conveniently fraudulent of you (Bradley/Carrie) to tell me to my face that I never bought all of ½ of the Condo. Yes, I bought his half of IT for $18,000 hard cash, plus a butt load of interest, out of my pocket, in addition to paying pretty much the whole mortgage the year between college & law school & during 2004, on top my monthly contribution plus a whole lot more, when neither of you stepped up to the plate. And 3-4 hundred dollars a month all through & post law school (Plastics, CO2, Nissenbaum Plus, e.g.), after I over compensated with thousands of dollars more from my commissions up until mom got grandpas inheritance (& after), when she told me that I should save some for myself because I had done way too much as it was. That is on top of the $10,000 she lent me for school, which I also repaid, because mom was struggling from go, which Carrie & Brad sure didn’t even think about doing, knowing she was hand to mouth, beyond strapped, after she lent them 10K to get out of the Condo she helped get them into, because Bradley is a flat party boy under-achiever. You are both beyond selfish, & always have been.
Much Of What I Had I Gave To Her/Me P-Ship
While Little Sis’s Hubby Was Playing Ball & Partying
Compare how many vacations I have had in my entire life to you all – zip, because I my addiction is work-a-holism & commitment to my Rose. You just don’t & never have thought about her, you only think about yourself & you only take, take, take – it’s just true. While you were out playing, like going to girls weekend in San Lous Obispo, dropping your kids off for me to sit, which I loved doing, you could have been helping her – you chose you over her, across the board – & you always have!
If she never told you, now you need to know – I gave her my entire check & tips when I lived with & worked close by to be near her, because she was broke. I didn’t go to the Casino & Gamble, I wasn’t out doing anything but working, on my books, at the restaurant, & being there for & with her. Not you, not selfish Michael, I chose to live with & take care of her. And I am glad I did, because I got to spend time with her – the up & down times.
The Anti-Rejection Med Costs
Do you know how much of her pittance when to medications. About half of her SSI check, literally. Who do you think paid for her meds, for her teeth, because her insurance didn’t cover IT. I did, not you, because people as selfish as you don’t even think about stuff like that. When she was strapped, she lent you money, because you couldn’t afford a down payment. Of course, because your so special, you never even made an effort to repay her, knowing she struggled hard to make ends meet – we both did – to keep a roof she could call her own over hear head – & that goes back to 1992 Carrie – not 2003!
Nice Windfall Diggers (Dirt & Jewels)
It’s exactly your kind of behavior, Carrie, that I am single today. I chose not to partner up until I had financial security, to give my partnership the best chance possible when the odds are stacked against IT. Look at what money has done to you, and you have plenty.
I know exactly HOW IT was supposed to be done. You didn’t do IT, for whatever reason. IT doesn’t matter what mom said, when she was dying, on morphine, painkillers, & marinol. Unless you hid a written will, witnesses by non-interested parties, IT is void & flows through normal channels, here a real simple 1/3, 1/3, /3 – that includes everything, the car (BAD CARRIE), the ring, her jewelry, & every single piece of the very little she had. IT has sentimental value & IT is not Carries & IT is not yours to pick through, point blank. A conversation was owed & is owed about ALL of it.
You really don’t need a lawyer to figure that one out – it is common sense.
I haven’t decided what I am going to do about IT yet. First, I’m thinking about dropping a dear Abbey letter about IT to your local newspaper.
I Thought About IT, But I Never Said To Keep My Change
If I seem harsh, that’s because that is the way I feel right now. I don’t know how I will feel tomorrow. I could be a lot harsher, with FACTS. But I am restraining myself right now. IT isn’t healthy for me to keep IT bottled up in side. I wasn’t well enough to address IT before, not emotionally & not physically. I was also concerned that if I took a stand it might affect my relation with the kids. But that thinking isn’t healthy for me. I am feeling much better now.
So you know, IT will not be ignored. From my view, it was & is your ongoing very bad, very greedy, very selfish behavior that led me to this.
All else aside, I do love you both very, very much, unconditionally, & always will! And once this is out in the open, I think we can move on to having a much healthier relationship. I hope we can be adult about this!
And I am very interested in hearing what else you have to say about it – perhaps you too should put your thoughts in writing, before we talk – maybe you have venting of which I am unaware that needs to be aired too!
Have a nice day, & I do love you very much – this is called FIRM LOVE!
Gary Joseph Bonas II
P.S. To avoid any gossip & slants about this letter, & bad mouthing relatives & others to make their shallow selves feel better, which some people like Carrie, in my opinion, have a bad habit of doing, I am going to save a copy of IT to show the Jen & Michael, Denise, Joanne, Jimmy Patty & others directly, if necessary! Right now, however, I prefer keeping this just between the three of us. If you desire to involve Brad, which IT does, I can open & slam shut that door too. I may anyway!
In Re: Bradley O’Husky Wage Garnishment (EZ via Ex Part & Default Entry)
Dear Kin:
Today is 01-05-07. This confirms that you are in receipt of my peaceful ADR memos directly & indirectly to you, marked A-Z.
First, on an Ex Kin note, I was wondering why you, Carrie, have lied for Bradley, Mr. I almost have a college degree, for going on 20 years now saying, verbatim:
Bradley only needs to take two Spanish classes to secure his four year degree, so it’s really just like he has a college degree. [And you say I’m dillusional!]
That’s untrue & you know it, but you lied to me and my Rose about it because you are embarrassed of what your choice in partner turned out to be.
Second, in the garage one day in August 2005, during my brief quartering at what used to be our 5122 Via Castilla roof, Bradley boasted himself as a real hero to me. He said, verbatim:
You know Cash, I saved Carrie from going down the wrong road in college. But for me, she would have gone down the wrong road in life.
Third, you are welcome, by the way, for me holding down the fort during your Yosemite vacation: feeding the pets (Dogs – Cat(s)). And you are welcome for me taking out the Weed/Tree/Bush Bradley got a kick out of changing his mind times over in the task I volunteered to do, having me trim the same thing repeatedly, then changing his mind, again, & then just take it out altogether. I am not one bit adverse to gardening & manual labor, so you know.
Fourth, do you know what I call my Ruby Code (Common law) mandates as my remedy in connection with every penny you stole from me?
Hamarubi’s Law #8:
8. If one steal … an ass … or a pig or a goat [or hard cash & Gold Bracelets, China, foam mattress, e.g.], … the thief shall pay thirty times the value at stake.
I suppose if your hero of a hubby, who claims to be really smart, was semi interested in edifying himself, for himself, his partner & his kids, he would do so. He has cemented, however, that he is more interested in Beer, Sunday Football, & playing games. Related, I think that it is just adorable that Bradley & his peasant brothers see who can eat the most on holidays, stuffing themselves the point of being ill. You don’t find that in too many real men, that’s for sure.
Fifth, I recall when you lived in El Cajon you had your cats’ front paws de-clawed, leaving it incapable of defending itself outdoors in the city jungle. Obviously, it didn’t survive. Like that, you all stole from me, thinking it was incapable of defending myself in the wake of your incessant selfishness in life & stream of excuses for the overtly inexcusable. I don’t think my guardians, many of whom are reading “IT” right know, condone your behaviors. I could, however, be mistaken, as your newest crutch in life, Joanne Mocos, thinks.
Sixth, shifting to a bit of history, do you recall the movie “Troy.” It is a classic indeed – the Trojan horse & taking out an entire empire from the inside out, with just A Few Good Men, unmatched in their abilities, trained for a single purpose. I love that movie, as I do Gladiators. It’s nothing someone like your Mr. Mom hero, Bradley, would be remotely interested in.
That’s All For Now, My Self Admitted Unstable Princess With An Attitude!
… OF ONE.
SIMPLE FACTS & SIMPLE 101 RULES
Upon notice of Stage 4 parting, all the Rose’s estate stuff & my stuff was put stored in two locations, one a public storage facility, the other at a resident storage facility. Those two locations is exactly where all was to remain, untouched, because:
Upon passing, the personal estate [the cash] and effects [the gold bracelets, the china, the foam mattress et al] of the [intestate] person vested in the court.
Naturally, with a small estate, the beneficiaries, by unanimous vote only, may agree to “dip in.” or otherwise “allocate” the inventoried items. Snubbing the rules, here, at passing, Bradley O’Husky, at 5122 Via Castilla, Oceanside CA., 92157 & his Bride (BB) were foaming to get their greedy little hands on the cash, jewels & stuff, so they broke into the cash, took it, & looted the estates stored items, with their accomplice Ant Joanne. In so doing, they, including Patty Munoz, all in accord, trespassed:
“The essence of the action for trespass is an ‘unauthorized entry [accessing the cars,] the [money property account] of another.” The action is broadly applied, “
! Action for trespass is stated where [all] … exceeded consent….
! Trespass occurred when three year old child[s play] entered neighbor’s residential backyard without invitation; &
! Action for trespass is stated where [BB] exceeded consent conferred;
TWO HUNDRED & FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
Exactly one half of, ball park, $250,000 Bradley & his Bride flat stole from a bank account that wasn’t theirs, intentionally, after consulting with Ant Joanne. The remaining $125K was to be divided by 3 (me about 170K). It wasn’t, because due to, e.g.
Bradley & His Bride’s Felonies – Committed
Crimes commonly considered to be felonies include, but are not limited to: aggravated assault and/or battery, arson, burglary, embezzlement, grand theft, treason, espionage, racketeering, robbery, murder, rape, kidnapping and fraud. The federal government generally considers a crime punishable by more than five days up to a year in prison to be a misdemeanor, while considering crimes punishable by greater than a year in prison to be felonies.
100K Plus Las Colinas Women’s Colony – San Diego
CC: Kin – Your Roughly 125K short! – My numbers control, due to your theft!
DIRTY GIRL CARRIE & FILTHY BOY BRADLEY O’HUSKY
A) Strike 1 Bradley (Coward)
Bradley fraudulently signed property documents, deceitfully representing to Mr. Erin Daniels, Countrywide & the real estate agent that I in fact did not buy Aaron & Elsa Marie’s half of the condo in 1993, then again, after re-sell, in 1998, when he in fact knew & knows I did. He first lied to them orally & then lied to all three sectors in writing by signing off. See my Ex Kin Files, containing unchallenged direct proof!
B) Strike 2 Bradley (Coward)
By doing so, Bradley calculated to secure 100% control of hundreds of thousands of dollars, not one penny of which was his. He accomplished this by depositing the entire fund into an account bearing his own name, not a dual signatory account, as required. This way, he thought, I would never see the bank statements identifying his theft.
C) Strike 3 Bradley (Coward)
In furtherance of his cover up, to hide the source of bank he deposited my money in, in his name, he, the man of the house, cut me out of doing my legal contract work to secure my mothers 10K My Trailer Park Brad deposit back for her. Naturally, as an unwanted guest, I submitted, out of respect for mom, & out being broken down even more by Bradley. Bradley took control over that 10K too, for himself.
D) Strike 4 Bradley (Coward)
Immediately after fraudulently signing property, Bradley did not want too see me as a reminder of his filthy fraud. He actually pretended to be a nice guy by offering me $500 to leave my own families home, giving me dirty looks while I was there, behind his partners back, & making me feel totally uncomfortable during the entire, very short extended lay over I was there.
E) Strike 5 Bradley (Coward)
Without a penny, because Bradley stole it all from me, he succeeded in removing me from his presence, after being badgered to leave. I moved in with my dear friend, the beautiful, late Ms. Kathy Melatti Hawkins, to whom I paid rent, which Bradley owes too (600 a month at two months, paid up front, from the $2,000 my god mother lent/gifted me because of Bradley’s theft.)
F) Strike 6 Bradley (Coward)
After fraudulently signing property, Bradley did not want me to come back, ever. He literally locked me out of my own families home, forbidding me to ever come over to see my nephews & niece, silently warning me, like a dog, “IF you ever want to see the kids I know you love again, THEN you will never mention to anyone what I did.”
Worse, Brad got James, Patty & Momma boop Munoz to cover it up. Id.
Today is 12-29-07.
I wanted to thank you C.O’Husky for your letter to me saying, verbatim, un-fogged:
A) It is difficult for me emotionally;
B) When I got your last letter I [passed you off to] Joanne;
C) Did you get the glasses from Katherine? She [paid for them and] sent me a bill for [reimbursement, as Cash instructed] … funny.
D) Michael [Brad] & I are … dividing up the $;
E) Joanne will have some of yours;
F) It’s hard for me to get money orders;
G) I talked to Sandrine. She wants you to come to France;
H) I have been mad at God;
I) When I get so sad I really try to do something mom would have liked or enjoyed or I just think of how I can be more like her;
J) So … Brad is coaching ….;
K) Don’t worry about a place to stay. I know Joanne … will help you in any & all ways;
L) Michael & I are going … dividing up [your] … $;
M) Michael & I are going through [your stuff] … and divvying [it up]…;
N) Michael & I are … paying the taxes. [What taxes you refuse to show]!
Shifting, I remind you that in August, 2006 when you & Bradley locked me out, I called Michael & left a message inquiring IF you all took into consideration the fact that I owned half the condo? He never returned my call. You, the next day, told me, verbatim:
A) Michael called & passed your message off to me;
B) Michael & I decided against that because we gave mom $200 a month for a little while.
Next, I said, some months later, after healing a bit from the crash, verbatim:
“I find it rude of you all to pretend that I did not buy Aaron’s .5 of the Condo.”
In response to that Needle, you & Michael both initiated a series of assassination (of character) attacks on me, through a combination of acts, with Joanne Munoz, which really crosses way over line, in my view. I’ve detailed the rules you all have scoffed at in my U-files, which you have.
Last, again, I thank you for confirming that you broke & entered into both my money property & my stuff & that you, without my consent, decided to go to some tax guy for me, without a permit, refusing your duty to furnish me a single bill from that & refusing me a single withdraw slip from my bank you embezzled from, in large chunks.
I liken what you all did to jacking a bum in wheel chair while he is asleep.
Absolutely Wicked
Today is 12-21-07. Recently, A life long friend of My Rose’s, Carol Kangus, on Friday, September 7, at 5:53:40 P.M. wrote to me, verbatim:
A) [About] Rosemarie…. I … remember her telling me that you [Cash] had purchased the condo in Solvang with her when she could no longer stay in the house.
A) Talk to Fr. Peter first before you do anything [like have Brad prosecuted]; &
A) He knew your mom and what troubles she had to overcome and deal with and he has the utmost respect for her as he does you.
On September 4, 2007 at 6:57 P.M., I communicated to Carol’s, verbatim:
A) I agree with you about Carrie;
B) We have never been close;
C) I am going to contact father Peter.
Carol asked, & I now answer, this question, verbatim:
Q. Not that it is my business, but why didn’t you cash the $25,000;
A. It is a fact that Carrie & Brad stole about $150,000 of mine. Knowing they might do it again, I decided to allow them to hold it for me, as a check on myself, allowing me ample time to secure unbiased input & alternative approaches before cementing a Major Crime prosecution.
Guess how much in My interest float alone Carrie & Bradley embezzled? Thousands!
To be clear, Carol’s view of Carrie, so you know, is right on with the view of My Rose’s real friends, who I actually spent time with & who actually energized her, as opposed to bleeding her, both emotionally & financially. And that she actually said this to me, by her proxy Joanne, nails my case in chief shut:
I have forwarded his writings to some [peasant] lawyer friends [including Kelly Kaiser] of mine who say this comes from a … 10 year old.
It is flat corrupt that Bradley O’Husky & Joanne Munoz’s (BO-JAM’s) entire family (with the exception of Anthony) have flat called me, Carol K & Aaron Petersen whom I bought the Condo from flat liars, expressly & collaterally. (See my Ex Kin Files). They already have committed perjury, informally, & plan on calling all of my My & My Rose’s dear friends liars too, a short list of those include: Nancy Petersen, Lisa Carroll, Dr. Bill & Kathy Heringer, Debbie Daily, Colleen Wade, Londi & Kelly Caldera.
CHAPTER DELTA – Ask Lisa Carol
The Estate Speech Spark
Triggering Deep Mirror Effect
Ex 01-26-07 My Estate Speech to Carrie, Bradley & Michael that sparked their & their Munoz attacks on me, verbatim:
Hi Michael, Nice to hear from you Michael.
I haven’t watched the CD – I’m not ready to do that yet, but I shall be soon.
It is nice living with my nina. It is nice feeling [real bonds] by family, which I know I wasn’t at Carries. You know, I left here a few pages of some information about the situation & she did not even have the respect to comment on it. If you don’t understand it, I think a reasonable person would ASK what it means. I find it rude that I took the time to explain some things to her & she ignored IT.
If you don’t mind me venting a little bit, I also find it conveniently rude of you & Carrie to ignore the fact that I owned (& still own) half of the condo. Yes, I bought his half of IT for $18,000 hard cash, out of my pocket, in addition paying pretty much the mortgage the year between college & law school, when neither of you stepped up to the plate. And 3-4 hundred dollars a month all through law school to the time mom got grandpas inheritance, in addition to giving her my entire check & tips from Cabernet Bistro the year I was with her. In addition to paying her back the $10,000 she lent me for school, which Carrie & Brad sure didn’t do, which is [another O’Husky theft reason] why she ran out of money & they & you coughed pocket change compared to me.
If you think that because your name replaced Aaron’s on the title you became owner, without buying him out, you are flat wrong. I have the contract I have with Aaron about IT.
In case you are unaware, there are two classes that I rocked in law school – Wills & Anti-Trust, a clip of my CV is attached.
I know exactly HOW IT was supposed to be done. You both didn’t do IT, for whatever reason. IT doesn’t matter what mom said, when she was dying, on hordes of drugs. Unless you hid a written will, witnesses by non-interested parties, IT is a real simple 1/3, 1/3, /3 – that includes everything, the car (BAD CARRIE), the ring, her jewelry, & every single piece of the very little she had. IT has sentimental value & IT is not Carries & IT is not yours to pick through without a simple itemization.
I do know that I can walk down to the court house & get an order clearing IT all up. I haven’t decided what I am going to do about IT yet.
If I seem harsh, that’s because that is the way I feel right now. I could be a lot harsher, with FACTS. But I am restraining myself right now. IT isn’t healthy for me to keep IT bottled up in side. I wasn’t well enough to address IT before, but I am feeling much better now. I don’t know how I will feel tomorrow.
So you know, IT will be resolved, one way or another.
All else aside, I do love you both very, very much! And once this is out in the open, I think we can move on to having a much healthier relationship. I hope we can be adult about this!
CASH
P.S. To avoid any gossip & slants about this letter, I am going to save a copy of IT to show Joanne, Jimmy & Patty & others directly, if necessary! Right now, however, I prefer keeping this just between the three of us. If you desire to involve Brad, which IT doesn’t, I can open that door too!
False Sincerity – Full Circle
>From: “Michael Bonas”
>To: cashbonas@hotmail.com
>Subject: RE: FRAMED
>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:30:45 -0800
>>Hey man hows it hangin? How is it living with your nina? You
>working? Florida was OK, I dont think I would go back. I am
>thinking about moving to New York. Did you like the CD that carrie
>made?
A ONE-WAY COMMUNCATION LINE
Mother Teresa-Rose’s wishes, expressly from My Best Friend & Angel, who was not my crutch, like unstable Carrie – ’04:
A) You said (by omission) no way to family counseling;
B) You all said (by omission) no way are we going to family talk;
C) You combined Joanne Munoz, after talking about & agreeing to steal.;
D) You rushed My Rose’s celebration due to all My Rose Friends, who know;
E) About IT, you said, in fact, screw Cash, he put himself in jail, so we get his; &
F) You all furnished, on request, my family estate stuff to party crashers, seeking & securing acts in fact to justify the inexcusable. See My Ex File.
Like Rose said, we don’t always get what we want! Take this for example: Unstable & off balance – Carries’ words, verbatim modified:
Poor me, I am an orphan now [Wow James, get it right!]
See My Ex File Facts – Ex Kin BO-JAM Communication Exhibits
As a sample of my offer of proof in a civilized resolution, on 12-21-07, at 7:56 P.M., I wrote BO-JAM’s team this, with proof exhibits attached, verbatim:
In connection with your last communication about wanting to see ‘proof’ of my getting assistance, I have attached 9 short pagers/picks, which obviously is just a very small dab. Most people don’t look at the dates, which usually assists in ascertaining one’s state of mind at a given point on the TIMELINE.
About moving forward, I am grateful for Bradley’s sole correspondence to me, dated, which I shared earlier. It gave me necessary closure. About that, did you know:
A) Bradley cancelled my credit card (Discover/mine/mom) (proof EX 1999 attached) [3 times now, two more times this year, recently again, past 3 weeks;);
B) Bradley went through & shredded (tossed) the contract I have with Elsa M;; &
C) Bradley, based on the sole things returned to me, chose to throw away my hard drive & a whole lot of other items that I had in my room, which he personally packed. There is lots & lots more (Dubs & Dubs)!
I wonder if you all ever thought about why Bill Lerach sent Jerry Sanders State Troops into the house Bradly currently lives in to abduct me, without a warrant. My FBI pickup sure didn’t do that – they nocKed, politely, with a warrant.
I shall be changing my phone numbers & U.S. e-mail communication accounts soon.
– Status Quo Ant e
Dear Twisted Sister & former In-Law O’Husky:
Today is 02-20-08. Here, again I remind you of what your husband stole from me & his under poverty, dying mother in law:
Condo Tax Right Off Dollar Theft/Embezzlement/Tax/Fraud/Evasion
Owing to the fact that you failed your duty to furnish me a single document in connection with my condo sale, which you held in constructive trust, & every single receipt in connection with the proceeds of that transaction & my estate, I now verify the following facts:
In connection with my & the Rose’s condo, I calculated tax right-offs in connection with my purchase of Aaron’s half, which you have lied to many about. Using highly accurate round numbers, for about 10 years that right-off was forwarded to you, with my permission on a single condition: that every penny in tax savings was forwarded back to my Rose, which you never once did. The dollars you laundered from a very ill, under poverty mom/in law I present:
1994 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
1995 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
1996 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
1997 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
1998 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
1999 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
2000 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
2001 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
2002 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
2003 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose; &
2004 $1,300 mortgage (at 25%) = $2,575 hard cash you stole from me/Rose;
Total Roundly – O’Husky stole on this multi-count alone: $28,325.00 (w/interest)
You have concealed this fact from both me & Michael, which I did not learn until 2004, just a few months after you drove Rose to secure a second on the condo in the amount of $25,000, while I was in protective custody. Without/without interested, the hard cash you laundered from your own mom/in law (me) amounts to significantly more than $25,000.00. Only out of respect for my dying mom did I not raise your wicked theft from me & her to you in 2004 & 2005, the year she died. Shortly after I was released to my safe house (here) from protected custody, in 2006, after you fiendishly kicked me to the curb due to your stealing from me to tune of over 100 grand,[1] I orally raised this, which triggered your really mean attack on me through your proxies, your own brother MJB, your liar ant Joann – James & Patty Munoz.
Your tax returns close this part of your unconscionable theft, which will be made public if you want! I have previously detailed you on the rules of constructive trust:
Ex Constructive Trust Law Operation – ½ + 1/3 & now times three – owing to your piracy!
I hope you enjoyed the vacations plus that I paid for all those years. There is no bankruptcy protection; you may liquidate your retirement accounts, which are mine, period!
Gary Joseph Bonas II
In My view, my mom’s sisters, Kathy being the sole exception, fall way under the ‘honorable’ mark! Materialistic tramps would be a nice understatement, who align with my twisted for life in deep denial liar & thief sister, by agreement with her partner, which means ….
Bradley O’Husky et al bcc: Lots of my Federal Guardians, so you know.
5122 Via Castilla
Oceanside, California
An Entire Pac Of O’Husky – Munoz Lies
Hell o kin:
Today is 12-25-07. The following I present based on the fact that you, 100%:
A) Cut me out of my estate, entirely;
B) Engaged in a wholly fraudulent property sale;
C) Agreed to kick me to the curb after deep embezzlement;
D) Wholly deny me a single receipt of a single bank transaction; &
E) 100% cashed out & stole a big chunk of my cash/property, stored & estate paid.
First, about it, after talking about & fraudulently coming up with a host of excuse justifications for raping me, you, all in accord, lied to me & others by this attack on me, verbatim:
What about the $24,000 in credit card bills that you racked up for mom [lie]? Yes we paid it with the condo money [lie]! Hotel bills, rental car bills,(very expensive) computers that mom bought for you [lie], … I am so glad mother is not here to see how fucked up you [Carrie, Brad, Joanne & Michael] are.
Second, to clarify this lie you published to many, you never paid that $24,000, which would have been utterly stupid for you to have paid in the first place, owing to the following facts, some of which you discussed prior to not paying the so called $24,000 un-owed anyway bill of credit debt:
A) An under-poverty woman, with an un-collectable debt, no sane person would have paid;
B) You artificially inflated the number of the un-owed bill of credit debt & pretend that it was mine, 100% already paid for & not yours, like Bradley’s tax evasion laundering of my write of my $2,500 per year write off per year for about 10 years; &
C) If you weren’t wholly illiterate in U.C.C. law 101 (U.S.C. section 17), which I took & mastered while I was in protective custody & in 2004, you would know that it is already paid for, 100%, at passing, for example.
Third, the transaction report, which I have access to but was hoping not to have to present to my guardians about you, confirm your satanic lies to others & me, to cover your fraud, which takes your devilish, greedy acts into a deep criminal zone. That fact is roundly confirmed by your acts to bully me into silence & attempts in fact to have me muzzled/kidnapped, under colors of authority, by lying, via your Parole Agent inquiry attack. The phone records cement that you pretend that I somehow committed a first amendment speech crime against you, owing to your crimes, which I package, present & air in self defense! The context of my U-Files, which you savagely lie to others about, seals IT – period!
G
Dear Ex Kin O’Husky – Mocos:
Today is 12-25-07 & this is to summarize a key part of the time line/facts.
First, as I’ve confirmed to you, in black & white, you perpetrated deep bank, buyer & real estate agent fraud in selling the property (639 Roskilde), which never was yours to sell:
Ex 12-23-07 – Just like Joanne Mocos & her “investment property.”
A) 1st, I wrote Aaron & Elsa Marie Petersen a note for 10K at 10%;
B) 2nd, (‘98) I wrote A & M P. a 2nd note for “out of pocket, & interest;
C) I met every term of both my 1st & 2nd with A&MP, to the absolute “T”.
You were on actual notice of both contract deals, because I told you. You chose to have no part of either of those contracts, because that would have required some Cash contribution on your part & working perhaps a bit harder for the cash, Lazy boy Brad. Your vacations were more important. Like your little brother’s 5 star vacations (MJB).
Ex 11-24-07 – The difference between “renting IT & the mortgage – 400-600 a Mo.
About my condo, someone said to me, “wow, you can get way more than your mortgage payment IF you were to rent it.” I responded, of course I can, & I shall. I get all of that out of the estate when ever it vests, which hopefully won’t be for many, many years to come. I am absolutely fine with deferring my life vacations until later in my life, for me, in part, like you all do – for my Rose, in past part.” Well, it is vested now, fully!
I sure am glad that I made that decision to buy Aaron’s interest in that Condo out, & that I sacrificed my hard earned money & my time getting that deal closed, ongoing. For the record, I ran the numbers prior to doing so, & it just made sense when viewed in connection with the hard cash tax write-offs that could be & were transferred to another land-owner, in exchange for hard cash, which is exactly what my Rose & I did with Aaron P. & B.O. – dollar for dollar – flat! See My Ex Kin Memo 02-02-06 (Trust Acts)
YOU STOLE MY HARD CASH WRITE-OFF AS IF YOU OWNED IT
Shifting, about your rush to erase my presence & voice from you, your circle & my Solvang circle, in a clumsy effort to hide your major crimes, you calculated to hold my Rose’s ceremony just before my expressly scheduled to be released from the last round of my tour:
Your X-Me date: 06-06 (Proof attached)
My Release date: 07-06 (Proof attached)
When K.O. directly confronted you with this fact, you lied to her & all others involved, saying, verbatim, “Oh, Katherine doesn’t know what she is talking about. You published that lie script to very specific people, with Joanne Mocos, in concert!
Next, about my diamond you stole, pretending because Bradley can’t afford one, if you watch the move “Blood Diamond” it may change your artificial desires (Joanne Mocos 30K.K.)!
Lastly, do you want to deliver my Honda to me by January 3, 2008, to mitigate your undeniable treble damages plus, or shall I continue doing exactly what Bradley & Michael expressly told me to do, “get help,” meaning, to me, bring others up to speed on the rules & facts?
Cc: Nancy Petersen (The full CD, Fully “Cash” loaded)
Como estas Aunt (e) – Kin:
Today is 11-24-07. This is a quick thank you for proverbially “co-signing” to insure the preservation of my entire estate, & to thank you for personally sponsoring, for your mom/sister, her proverbial life celebration “re-hearsal.” I am indeed fortunate to have someone as wise as you as a guarantor. I am truly grateful that you have top notch Esquire in your family tree that debriefed you about TRACING my original over 25K solo investment, in addition to my, on average, way over 1/3 support, roughly tripled to about $75K, according to those holding in the owed segregated account.
For the record, this summarizes the transmission numbers & lienable stuff:
In law tracing is a process by which a claimant demonstrates what has happened to his property, identifies its proceeds and those persons who have handled or received them, and asks the court to award a proprietary claim against [lienable land, pension, pay check, car or whatever] property, which is an asset substituted for the original property or its proceeds. Tracing allows transmission of legal claims from the original assets to either the proceeds of sale of the assets OR new substituted assets.
Tracing is ordinarily an equitable remedy, subject to the usual equitable limitations and remedial bars in common law forums, where there are often two concurrent remedies, common law tracing & equitable tracing.
I sure am glad that I made that decision to buy Aaron’s interest in that Condo out, & that I sacrificed my hard earned money & my time getting that deal closed, ongoing. For the record, I ran the numbers prior to doing so, & it just made sense when viewed in connection with the hard cash tax write-offs that could be & were transferred to another land-owner, in exchange for hard cash, which is exactly what my Rose & I did with Aaron P. & B.O. – dollar for dollar – flat! See My Ex Kin Memo 02-02-06 (Trust Acts)
About my condo, someone said to me, “wow, you can get way more than your mortgage payment IF you were to rent it.” I responded, of course I can, & I shall. I get all of that out of the estate when ever it vests, which hopefully won’t be for many, many years to come. I am absolutely fine with deferring my life vacations until later in my life, for me, in part, like you all do – for my Rose, in past part.” Well, it is vested now, fully!
I appreciate your holding, in constructive trust, my cash. And I appreciate your providing me limited access to it, to keep me on a budget. I, however, kindly request that you tender IT ALL, or part, without delay, as my MJB account is very near out & in need of replenishing, so that I may enjoy a festive winter solstice in financial comfort & celebration, like you all! Or perhaps even a vacation (Florida trip?), like you all! I do not require it all now, but I do require good & plenty, like My Blue Book Car Value!
Shifting, I have yet to present my informal presentation to my federal guardians in San Bernardino. Do you have any thoughts on what I should include in that filing? I shall be submitting it in the next 1-2 weeks, for input, if any! If not, that’s O.K too.
Gary
Ex Kin – Little Sis Prof. Lynne L. Dallas
Carrie & B. O’Husky Anti-Trusts/Wills
5122 Via Castilla University San Diego
Oceanside, Calif. 92057 lawpub@sandiego.edu
Date: 01-08-08 San Diego, California
Buenos Noches Bandits:
Today’s I summary the facts, rule & max criminal exposure relating to the princess Bride’s laundering plus. Simply put, it’s NOT CHO CHEESE:
First, you laundered (denying the source/ownership of) the Condo, marked here:
Ex 12-02-07 – My Off Title Ownership, which you have known for 14 years:
A) In 1993 I bought A.P. out (at 23), for mom/me, not you – my investment
Ex 12-01-07 Bradley & Bride flat stole after consulting with Ant Joanne M.:
A) Exactly one half of, ball park, $250,000 Bradley & his Bride flat stole
Ex 12-19-07 Corrupt Princess Carrie & Bradley Condo Ex
A) I alone, with zip from B.O.’s princess, met every term of my ½ Condo K;
Ex 12-19-07 Dirty Boy Bradley (Coward) & His princess Bride (Mi-Mi)
A) Bradley calculated to secure 100% control of hundreds of thousands of dollars, not one penny of which was his.
B) Brad fraudulently signed property documents, deceiving the buyer (E.D.)
C) To hide the source, he deposited my cash in his name, not a 2 sig account;
D) This way, he thought, I would never see statements identifying his theft.
Ex 12-21-07 Carol K., a lifelong Rose friend, citing reality all (Munoz) know too:
A) I … remember her telling me that you [Cash] had purchased the condo in Solvang with her when she could no longer stay in the house.
In the United States, Federal law provides (in part): “Whoever [Carrie, Bradly & Michael] . . . knowing[ly] . . . conducts or attempts. . . a financial transaction which in fact involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity [like the fradulent sale of property & conversion of the proceeds] . . . with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity . . . shall be sentenced to a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the [money] property involved in the transaction[s], whichever is greater, or imprisonment for twenty years max, or both.” See 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a).
For years know I have been searching deep for faith in my little sis & hubby.
G
Dear Kin:
Today is 12-02-07. This is a follow through regarding my estate, which you stole.
When I move, Ex Parte, for and as the receiver, with my log of all speech to you regarding your intentional crimes, one black & white element of the damages you have caused me is my time, which I shall be awarded in addition to the hard cash, about 125K, that you stole from me. Attached Ex. 300 is confirmation of my hourly price, verifying that I in fact set up my JD price by the sole legal price protocol.
Now, to summarize, recall this, from almost a year ago:
Ex Kin memo January 29, 2007, verbatim:
The letters, which are easily attached to a check box negligence complaint, I can edit & verify, because I don’t lie, like you all do by silence. Attached are SOME FACTS – IT IS A CRYSTAL ICE CUBE REMINDER of some facts.
To remind you, mom couldn’t afford to get into a place after the divorce with dad. I, after taking a real estate class at Santa Barbara City college, got her a partner, Aaron Petersen, to go in halves on the condo, an investment for him, & a real home for mom. That thought obviously never crossed your minds, because you are selfish. I did that, all alone. Then I, all alone, bought half out in 1993 before going to law school, forming a partnership as an investment for me, with every penny of spare cash I had from 1993 through 2005 & for a home for my Rose, which contract is documented, as you have known for 14 years.
50% –STRAIGHT UP – ALL MY INVESTMENT
If you think that because your name replaced Aaron’s on the title you became owner, without buying him out, you are flat wrong. I have the contract – I have IT off-title with Aaron Petersen, & I have had it since 1993, our side contract, signed by both of us, because I bought him out when I was 23 years old, for mom & me, not you, as an investment, which you have known for 14 years.
ABOUT HER ESTATE – EVERY SINGLE ITEM
I know exactly HOW IT was supposed to be done. You didn’t do IT, for whatever reason. IT doesn’t matter what mom said, when she was dying, on morphine, painkillers, & marinol. Unless you hid a written will, witnesses by non-interested parties, IT is void & flows through normal channels, here a real simple 1/3, 1/3, /3 – that includes everything, the car (BAD CARRIE), the ring, her jewelry, & every single piece of the very little she had. IT has sentimental value & IT is not Carries & IT is not yours to pick through, point blank. A conversation was owed; you failed.
Naturally, the criminal & civil actions track each other, like in the O.J. case!
By
Universal Judicial Denial/Excuse Cancer
Denial is a universal defense ploy in which one is faced with a fact that is too painful to acknowledge, so one rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite overwhelming factual evidence. The subject may deny by dodging the reality of the unpleasant supreme law & facts altogether (simple denial), admit the fact but deny its seriousness (minimisation) or admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility (transference). The concept of denial is pivotal to the study of [money, control & liability] addictions.
The fact of denial was first researched seriously by Anna Freud, who classified denial as a mechanism of the immature mind (like Juan & Arminta), because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality. Where denial occurs in mature minds, it is most often associated with exposure, liaiblity, embarrassment, ego & so forth. Denial of unwanted realities is a universal reality, as when one is informed of the close death, a first reaction is, “No! It can’t be true, when obviously it can be true!
The general existence of denial is fairly easy to verify, even for non-specialists. On the other hand, denial is one of the most common defensive excuse mechanisms, since it can be easily used to create excuses: anything the subject says or does that some might believe to excuse misbehavior is explained, not as evidence that the interpreter is wrong, but as the subject’s being “in denial.”
A commonly-cited example of spurious denial is the psychologist who insists, against all [the rules &] evidence, that his patient, e.g., is homosexual [like James & Adam]: any attempt by the patient to disprove the theory (as by saying he’s not & that he desires women) is evidence of denial and thus evidence of the underlying theory. This tension can become serious, especially in areas such as child abuse and recovered memory. Proponents often respond to allegations of false memory by asserting that the subjects are genuine victims who have reverted to denial. Critics reply (some seriously, some less so) that it is the proponents in denial about the tenuousness of their position.
The concept of denial is important in twelve-step programs, where the abandonment or reversal of denial forms the basis of the first, fourth, fifth, eighth and tenth steps. The ability to deny or minimize is an essential part of what enables an addict to continue his or her behavior in the face of evidence that, to an outsider, appears overwhelming. This is cited as one of the reasons that compulsion is seldom effective in treating addiction — the habit of denial remains.
Understanding and avoiding denial is also important in the treatment of various [money & lialiby] diseases. Because the symptoms are identifiably varied, by verbal & non-verbal explanations, the opportunity exists for the patient to deny the emergency, often with big consequences. Just like it is common for patients to delay mammograms, e.g., or other tests because of a fear of cancer, even though this is clearly maladaptive. It is the responsibility of the care team, and of the nursing staff in particular, to train at-risk patients to avoid such behavior.
Types of Denial Excuses
Denial of Supreme Rules: Intestate succession, Price Right Protocol, parent partnership support formulas, Labor Code 351 (Managers Stealing tips), Article 3 Standing Elements & so forth.
Denial of fact: This form of denial is where someone avoids a fact by lying. This lying can take the form of an outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details in order to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something (assent, also referred to as “yesing” behavior). Someone who is in denial of fact is typically using lies in order to avoid facts that they think may be potentially painful to themselves or others.
Denial of responsibility: This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by blaming, minimizing or justifying. Blaming is a direct statement shifting culpability and may overlap with denial of fact. Minimizing is an attempt to make the effects or results of an action appear to be less harmful than they may actually be. Justifying is when one makes a choice and attempts to make that choice look okay due to their perception, in liue of the rules, of what is “right” in a situation. Someone using denial of responsibility is usually attempting to avoid potential harm or pain by shifting attention away from themselves.
Denial of impact: Denial of impact involves a person avoiding thinking about or understanding the harms their behavior causes of has caused themselves or others. By doing this, that person is able to avoid feeling a sense of guilt and it can prevent that person from developing remorse or empathy for others. Denial of impact reduces or eliminates a sense of pain or harm from poor decisions.
THE “I DIDN’T KNOW” DENIAL EXCUSE
Denial of awareness: This type of denial is best discussed by looking at the concept of state dependent learning. People using this type of denial will avoid pain and harm by stating they were in a different state of awareness, i.e., “I didn’t know” or were in a self induced intoxicated ed state. This type often overlaps with denial of responsibility.
Denial of cycle: Many who use this type of denial will say things such as, “it just happened.” Denial of cycle is where a person avoids looking at their decisions leading up to an event or does not consider their pattern of decision making and how harmful behavior is repeated. The pain and harm being avoided by this type of denial is more of the effort needed to change the focus from a singular event to looking at preceding the effort needed to change the focus from a singular event to looking at preceding events. It can also serve as a way to blame or justify behavior (see above).
EVERYONE DOES “IT” EXCUSE
DENIAL OF RULES & RESPONSIBILITY
Denial of denial: Denial of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one’s personal behavior. This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of denial, but involves more self-delusion.
Hostility & accusation mud slinging, to shift the focus from the facts & rules, is a form … denial in psychology.
Here I mark Joanne Munoz, to illustrate, in the context of My Ex Kin fact & rule files, verbatim:
The Remains & The Remainder
The facts here are simple. Before being diagnosed with stage four pancreatic cancer, the Rose did not have complete mental faculties, & she definitely did not after that diagnosis & additional treatment rounds in fall 2005. Before diagnosis & Chemo poison injections, in a lucid state, in ’04 I expressly explained to the Rose that IF she desired any of her personal effects (Ring, Bracelets, Necklaces, dimes, etc.) to go to any one in particular, she should jot it down & sign it. She expressly declined that, saying she desired her estate to go equally to her kids – no one else (simple in-testate succession).
Here, in a weakened, vulnerable state, literally on her death-bed, Carrie at her side, episodically, like I witnessed her do before, said to the Rose, verbatim, “I want the ring, for Rachel.” “I want the bracelets, for Rachel.” “I want ….” “I want….” “I want …” “May I have….” “May I have….” As a result of Carrie’s “I want I want” undue influence to come up, the Rose naturally acquiesced to Carrie’s begging & I have no doubt that many a Mocos Munoz heard her parrot her begging daughter’s words, while on drugs saying, verbatim: I want Rachel to have the Rock & Gold Band.
The fact is that in ’04 I too could have exercised selfish influences, the “I want, I want, I want” tactics, like Carrie. I did not. If I had, however, I would have done it right, securing the Rose’s item identification & signature, as opposed to Carrie’s sloppy “the Rose said” excuses, which I have no doubt she did in fact say, on her death bed. The fact, however, remains – there is no will. The legal reality is that there is no “gift” of anything from a double transplant anti-rejection & depressant dependent diagnosed with Stage 4 Cancer, weighing in at 65 lbs. max, with a Carrie begging her for a rock/band, to come up, to satiate her selfish desires.
Next, the two Rock Ravens expressly told me, by acts: The Rose specifically instructed us to insure that Cash was not at her ceremony, unlike the delay arrangements the Rose made for Cash’s biological father, insuring all kids had the chance to be present.
The fact you lie & admit at the same time is that the Rose “wished” me to be present at her ceremony, which the Rock Ravens crossed. The fact is the Rose wished for her remains (or some of them) to be sprinkled in Hawaii, a place she loved. The fact is her estate had plenty to grant those wishes, which were &/or have been, to date, disrespected by the Rock Ravens.
Shifting Joanne Munoz told me that she, who is not next of kin, decided to take possession of & keep the Rose Remains because she doesn’t like the rule which clearly states that IT goes to ME, owing to the fact that un-stable Carrie is not competent to handle those & other affairs. Health and Safety Code section 7100 provides in pertinent part as follows:
“(a) The right to control the disposition of the remains … vests in …:
“(3) … the majority of the surviving competent adult children. . . .
“(e) be faithfully and promptly performed. . . .”
Here, a non-heir took & keeps the remains plus, violating … [my] clearly enumerated rights. At this point, in light of My Ex Kin Files A-Z, it is more than just a little over the line.
I swear under penalty of perjury to the facts I am first hand witness to, stated above.
01-23-08 G
Dear Queen B Carrie:
Today is 02-02-08. For the record, you know that Denise’ friend Emanuel, who worked at Tehachapi, checked up on me, silently. He reported exactly what I did while there:
A) Kept solo by enlarge;
B) Wrote, Read & took lots of notes; &
C) Worked out a lot, running 4-8 miles a day.
These facts, my Queen B, were my program across the board while I was in protective custody. You knew this because I shared this with you & a few others. And I shared with you the fact that by working for .13 cents an hour I earned the minimum good behavior release date for the last leg of my tour, which was July 21, 2006. That fact always has been black & white.
Next, knowing my unbendable release date, you calculated to erase my presence from my Rose’s ceremony because you did not want anyone to know that you perpetrated a major Condo money crime – especially not Rose’s friends in Solvang. Unlike you, her friends I was close with. Again, the Rose orally instructed you, Queen B, to hold her ceremony at a time when “everyone,” meaning I, could be present. Owing to your Condo/proceeds crimes, you spat on the Rose’s oral instruction & me. Worse, you spread this lie to those who inquired about IT:
A) He isn’t going to get out for a really long time (Before excuse/lie); &
B) I didn’t think he might get out on his scheduled release date (After lie).
The above facts known, I shift back to the root of what triggered your series of written & oral personal attacks on me. After you perpetrated an open & shut fraud on Ms. Erin Daniels (E.D.), behind my back, about who the Condo ownership, I understood exactly why you conceal from me, in breach of your fiduciary duty, every single document in connection with that fraud transaction. I understood exactly why you conceal from me the bank, ban deposit & withdraw slips on my proceeds, & continue to deny my papers, in really bad breach.
Knowing the above, disappointed, I understood exactly why you & your prince Brad O’Husky’s waxed me from under our 5122 Via Castilla roof right after you falsified docs & wired the cash to yourselves only (summer ’05), then offered me $500 of my own cash to leave. Only because of what you & your man did is exactly why you both kicked me out from under our roof during my short stay with you. I was with you before you did it. After, you booted me, like a stray cat. The date lines do not lie. Owing mainly to your Condo Crimes there existed an unspoken tension during the short time I was with you. Yes, you held all the cards; I was broke & broken. You converted 100% of my money, denying me a single penny. Deeming me help less, you gutted me, assisted by P, J, J & J Munoz all backing you 100%, which shocks me.
Next, your crew told me that I “needed help,” like cats, but failed to offer any, failing to explain what I needed help with, in your view. I suggested kin counseling, you all refused. I have secured lots of psychological plus, about IT. My court is about ready for IT, which is how I shall address your crimes – criminal & civil, owing to your wicked denial plus, ongoing. I find that a sad waste of energy & resources, but, on principle, I stand at this point, which is a direct result of, in my view, you, all in accord, complicit in unspeakable acts, marked in my U-Files!
Last, my short family album is just about ready to share with my Rose’s Solvang friends. After that, I shall have it prepared for my Bonas nephews & niece when they turn 18. The formal aspect of it & thereafter, will add to a great family reality history record, don’t you think?
G
The Money Sadists
Money sadists play vicious power games with money as a way of asserting their power & greed. They often, for example, make you wait for money that is owed you, promising things like “the check is in the mail” or ignoring a legitimate debt reality.
The Bargain – Demon
Powerful people judge everything by what it costs, not just in money but in time, dignity, & peace of mind. And this is exactly what bargain demons can not do. Wasting valuable time, they balk.
The Cash & The Power
In the realm of power, everything must be judged by its costs, & everything has a price. What is offered for free or at the bargain rates often comes with a psychological price TAG – complicated feelings of obligation, compromised rule bending & so forth.
The powerful learn early to protect their most valuable resources: independence and room to maneuver. By paying the full price, they keep themselves free of dangerous entanglement & worries.
Being open & flexible with money also teaches the value of strategic generosity, a variation on the old trick of “giving when you are about to take.”
The Greedy Fish & False Sincerity
The greedy fish take the human side out of money. Cold & ruthless, they see only the lifeless numbers & chances to come up at another’s expense, viewing others solely as pawns, they trample on people’s sentiments & alienate valuable allies. No one wants to work or associate with the Greedy Fish, & over the years they end up isolated, which often proves their own undoing.
Some play with money control power & lose it all by a fatal mistake. Some go too far. Others make all the right moves, drawing power to oneself with an almost superhuman dexterity.
The Mirror Effect
The mirror reflects reality, but it is also the perfect tool for deception; when you mirror your rivals words & behavior, they, like human animals, often over-react. Few can resist the power of the Mirror Effect. Mirrors have the power to disturb us. In using the mirror effect, mimicking their acts & words, in context, they feel mocked, they get angry & react defensively, often animal like, lying & creating false records of fact & character assassination attacks. The Mirror Effect is a powerful psychological tool because it operates on the most primitive man animal emotions, as expected.
The “verbatim” mirror effect applied, in the money control context, follows!
A Intro
To I-Can-D
Pump Kin Capers
“KEVIN THE BUM IS WAITING FOR CANDY”
“LOOK AT THE CAMERA!”
As a verbatim Mirror Application introduction, I present False Sincerity, all in accord, confirmed facts of which are Inside – Man. Here are some previews:
Ex January 25, 2007, 10:30:45 -0800, MJB, after stealing, with Brad, verbatim:
:
Hey man hows it hangin? How is it living with your nina? You working? Florida was OK, I dont think I would go back. I am thinking about moving to New York. Did you like the CD that carrie made?
…
To answer MBJ’s question, the CD Carrie made was slop, a disgrace to the Rose, given the available resources. It shall be used as a sample, for compare & contrast purposes, side by side with a professional job I shall have done. Carrie agreed to with Michael & Bradley to not to spend a couple grand of my money for my Rose, instead keeping it, without permission. This again confirms how very little to zip (support & memory wise) Rose’s princess daughter viewed her own mom. In my view, anyone that told you to contrary was untruthful, like the entire Munoz team (with the sole exception being Anthony Munoz)! Thanks for allowing me the chance to be honest, unlike some.
Now, I also thank you for providing me with good & plenty of materials in my Robin & Dr. Phil presentation about “IT”, which I was personally invited to present!
Personality Synopsis
Chapter 9: Behavioral Theory Applications and Research
Behavior Modification
Since the only thing worth measuring in behavioral theory is behavior, it is only logical that the one thing behaviorists focus on changing is also behavior. Behavior modification is the generic term given any process derived from learning theory where the goal is to change a person’s behavior or the way he or she interacts with the [rule based] world.
Definition: The term black op often refers to a “Black operation,” a type of covert operation typically involving activities that are either secret or of questionable ethics and legality. The term itself is often used in political, military, intelligence and business circles. Agents or persons who specialise or are involved in a black operation are typically referred to as a “Black operator” or “black operative.”
Black Ops missions often fall into the deniability category, where no government will claim responsibility for the action, or where responsibility is shifted to another actor in the case of a “false flag” operation.
This type of operation is normally used by various secret services to achieve some goals while trying to operate secretly (so the connection between “black operations” and secret agents or even the country of their origin cannot be found).
INFRA RED IMAGING
To understand behavior modification, you have to understand the two main concepts that it is based on: Classical and Operant Conditioning. Class-ic-al conditioning refers to the pairing of naturally occurring stimulus-response chains with other stimuli in order to produce a similar response. Operant conditioning started as an experiment in learning and developed into the Law of Effect and our knowledge of reinforcement, punishment, and extinction.
SYSTEMATIC DISSEMINATION PRESS
SYSTEMATIC EDUCATION – PERMANENT PRESS
Shaping – Changing complex behaviors, hence, requires complex behavioral modification. The steps involved are often called successive approximations because they successively approximate or get closer and closer to the desired behavior.
In behavior modification, we apply these same techniques in order to effect change on the way a person acts or responds to the environment. Changing complex behaviors, hence, requires complex behavioral modification. The concept of shaping comes into play here. Shaping refers to the reinforcement of behaviors that approximate or come close to the desired new behavior. The steps involved are often called successive approximations because they successively approximate or get closer and closer to the desired behavior.
Research has found that this technique works well for phobias and anxiety related disorders. Take arachnophobia for instance, the fear of spiders.
Web Security: First Draft of “Web Security Context”; Last Call of “Web Security Experience, Indicators and Trust”
To be diagnosed with an [info leak] phobia you must have both an irrational fear that is not justified by current outcome and significant distress or negative consequences because of this irrational fear. To modify this fear or the behavior of avoiding or running away from spiders, behaviorists would apply the concept of shaping.
The process of shaping involves the creation of a hierarchy ranging from the least feared situation (such as a stuffed animal that looks like a spider) to the most feared situation (a real tarantula, for example). We would then fill in the space between the two with situations that progressively produce higher levels of fear. The following is an example of such a hierarchy:
Excommunication & Liability
Excommunication is a censure used to deprive or suspend one in an exposed community. This presentation explains the reality of excommunication and slanderous condemnation associated with excommunication for alerting identified marks to their black & white crimes based on black & white rules in our rule based society.
First, Excommunication is the most serious penalty to levy against one. It is a seldom used punishment to discipline unrelenting defiance of rules. Prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law, there were two degrees of excommunication:
A) vitandus (shunned, literally “to be avoided”), where the person had to be avoided by other Catholics), and
B) toleratus (tolerated, which permitted [all theo sectors] Catholics to continue to have business and social relationships with the excommunicant).
Now, the past basis of business or social excommunication is anathema. The references are found in Galatians 1:8 — “But even if we, or an angel from Heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be anathema!” Then also, 1 Corinthians 16:22 — “If anyone does not love the Lord, he is to be anathema.” The word can be translated several ways; the King James Version translates it accursed.
Next, we have limited examples of excommunication. Jesus, in Matthew 18:17, teaches that those who repeatedly offend others should be treated as “Gentiles or tax collectors.” In Romans 16:17, Paul writes to “mark those who cause divisions contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them”, (meaning from Jesus and the apostles); and in 1 Corinthians 5, he instructs the Corinthians to expel an immoral member of their community. Also, in 2nd John vv. 10 & 11, the elders write unto the elect lady “whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine, hath not.
Shifting, the Romans (meaning Christain/Catholics), acrosss the globe, have an extensive history of the uses of excommunication for alerting the exposed to rules, especially during the Middle Ages.
Anathema (in Greek Ανάθεμα) meaning originally something lifted up as an offering to the gods; later, with evolving meanings, it came to mean:
A) To be formally set apart;
B) Banished, Exiled, excommunicated; or
C) Denounced, sometimes accursed.
Ask & you shall receive, the gospels say!