"Gaza Aid" - 3.19.2024

UPDATE: "Stock" from March 14, 2024, part of matching outlay process.

Verified last evening before 6 pm CST on April 13, 2024 in anticipation for today.

1:44 pm CST

April 14, 2024

Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse

Re: 15 days after Oct. 29, 2023.

_________________________

Regarding 26 days:

______________________

Within 20 days of having completed the inventory of the catalogue, I understand it should have been delivered. Instead, what happened is that when I took my solar charger – which was the back-up energy source for my proposed power grid plan from Summer of 2021 – to the Martin Luther King, Jr. library and put it on the table to charge, within 15 minutes it had been stolen.

I had never taken it offsite before that.

I did not “consent” for you to accept it as a “divestment” for “free solar” or as a bid on any other item, including a “generator” being bid through the Catholic Relief Services in Iraq.

That “solar charger” was already backend coded in connection with the theft of the receipts, as well as the inventories that it was a part of when the unlawful proceeding in 2021 stole the rest of the items from my emergency preparedness supplies. It was “hacked” when my camp was illegally entered and subjected to an act of burglary which was not only a threat, but a sexually based threat. I have already identified the items strategically and intentionally stolen – they were not “looking for drugs” when they entered. They specifically stole the “power bank” from the box without taking the other items with which it was supposed to be used in order to secure it, which were in the box. THAT was evident when they “hacked” what was supposed to be the backup later in the year. That “hack” however was not of the specific items that were a part of the power grid security system, but OTHER items that were identified at the same time as another form of “tracking” or “backup.”

THOSE items have been used in crimes committed – including on the Congressional level – since then that have been played out locally, including in connection with a third eviction of another person/group of people on June 15, 2022 in correlation with speculation on HUD housing. I contacted the local justice courts of concern and would have and did provide an affidavit about the events; I collected evidence as well about that as well as the other two incidents, including one that was at the same location months earlier. The verbal affidavit was in the voice recordings that were stolen on Aug. 4, 2022. 

These items would have been available in time for the alleged “storm” that purportedly required over $1 billion of “emergency assistance” in order to “relieve.” I was in a TENT at the time of the storm. I required merely the use of my duct tape and the already acquired plastic sheeting to make a minor repair. I took an inventory of a number of food items that were subjected to water damage. However, my food reserve was prepared and kept from being impacted in manners that would have required disposal or some form of accounting for as “damaged.” The food supplies that were damaged were boxed grain items representing less than 20 percent of the total inventory of such items. There was also damage to two bags of nuts, but that was a result of a rodent problem and that they were improperly stored to guard against such at the onset (ie., my error). The major difference was in the manner in which the boxed items were able to be “transferred” to airtight glass jars for storage, as well as the other nuts.

There are merely two “structural repairs” that in the current condition could be said to be a result of “wear and tear” on the fort since it was first established. I have the necessary items for one, I do not have the necessary items as of yet for the other one. The second one would meet a minimal standard that is not otherwise met at this time, however, there has been an accommodation that has been made internally that has provided a form of “backup.” (ie., The entire floor of the area under the tent is not elevated, but every item in the tent is elevated.). This makes a difference in consideration of “habitability” and “structural soundness” and I know it. Would NOT having the entire floor of the tent elevated be considered “wear and tear?” NO, actually it would not. Would it have necessarily have needed to be elevated before attempting to use it as a habitation? Technically, it is a waterproof tent, but there is a hole in the floor, and THAT was a result of “wear and tear.” I have “repaired” the hole, but another standard required elevation of everything that could be affected insofar as there would be a flood risk.

Should I be inside an actual “house?” How many “title flips” have I obtained evidence for? If I am correct, the most recent one was this past weekend, however, that was on a different timeline than the one I am on. Did someone “swap” my “schedule” as they did last year? I have recorded over ten “title flips” in the last year and a month. Every time this process comes up, I use the money to purchase a book or books that reflect the context for the event. These books would represent the sort of “underwriting” I would have expected in connection with my “home office” and commensurate with not only what I was doing at the time but also what I was already in accordance with doing PRIOR TO THE UNLAWFUL PROCEEDING.

I contended that every item left on the front lawn was to be returned to my home office, locked up and secured until the court proceeding had finished. If I find something that someone “threw out” (or “disposed of”) on the street, or even in a “dumpster” after it has been “disposed of” I consider the possibility that it was “disposed of” in connection with CRIMES. The items that were “disposed of” on the lawn were items under sanctuary – they were mostly items on altars. The other items that were still in the home office at the time of noon on Sept. 22, 2022 should still be in the home office WITH THE RETURNED ITEMS UNDER SANCTUARY. It is notable that they did NOT “dispose of” any items or put on the lawn any items that were NOT under sanctuary, or that were not the specific items in the inventories, as opposed to the inventories themselves. They did not “dispose of” the legal books or other books I had purchased myself, or any of the emergency preparedness supplies, including the tent and the sleeping bag. They did not even “dispose of” my shoes or my second pair of prescription eyeglasses. 

Recall also that on that voice recorder is my initial assessment of the audit of the State Bar of Texas dated for as of May 31, 2021. I understand that that audit has been used for “bidding” or for “options” intended to be used for a substantial amount of time past the timeframe covered in the audit. I am certain that it is a five-year time frame from the time it was published. It was published in April of 2022, but it was nearly a year while the results were available to the legislature and the State Bar of Texas before it was published. That means it would have been “working options” or even “creating options” in July of 2021, August of 2021, and September of 2021. ANY ITEM THAT IS NOT IN THE ROOM HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO CRIME, INCLUDING CRIME IMPLICATING THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS AND ITS MEMBERS. 

I had a pre-existing claim against the State Bar of Texas. I see the past year or more as a direct act of retaliation as well as “theft” and “burglary” in accordance with previous charges. Because of what was done in the unlawful proceeding and the insistence for addressing it in accordance with Texas law, then I also understand the “appeal period” is two years. That, however, I contend is a means by which to engage fraud and extortion in connection with denial of my rights to due process in my other efforts, going back to my first effort to contact the Houston Police Department in December of 2016, and after attempting to request assistance from a then-member of the State Bar of Texas with a referral to a lawyer that could assist me with matters pertaining to events that I understood had potential criminal, and possibly national security-related, implications. THAT lawyer was the second lawyer in two states who said he had former experience working with the Department of State. I contend there was a reasonable expectation that I had that they would be required to provide assistance in the event that someone informed them that they had information and evidence on the level that I did. For the record, neither of them identified themselves as working for the Central Intelligence Agency or any other “intelligence” agency – they said they had worked as attorneys for the Department of State in other countries. 

1:04 pm CST

Oct. 14, 2022

Charity Colleen Crouse

Proofread by 1:10 pm CST

________________________

 Posted on 3.19.2024 at 5:44 pm CST.

Understand this: Those "contracts" on "blood replacement" that you bid through the DoD on Women's Day are mine now.

You were already busted in December of 2023. What you did was completely unacceptable. This right now is an act of extortion. You are not getting your "bloodline replacement." That is NOT what is happening. You ARE being "publicly noticed."