If anyone curious about what exactly this article means, this someone's curiosity can be helped by asking an own friend in the attorney profession to help out the reading. It truly means my any money is irrelevant with any Rockefeller's any wealth, legally, financially and materially (April 8th, 2019). This is a lengthy article, but please ask your own friend in the attorney profession to read it entirely (April 25th, 2019).
About the famous JPMorgan Chase technology upgrade, the complaints have been about if I did what I was asked.
- I was asked to take a look at this bank's technology network as an outsider security specialist.
- I did find out there is a security gap between securing physical access to money via internet money-transferring, and regular information security provided by the bank's technology department.
- I did help out upgrading the bank's security aspect in physical access to money via internet transferring, by establishing a quality mechanism to let physical access security specialists extend their specialty to include securing internet money-transferring access, with the technology department's help.
- 09-07-2018 The Sweeping Change of Technology Upgrading in JPMChase
Widely shared negativizes about me is how I dis-appreciated the gentlemen from 2003's Hyatt Regional Hotel's reception lobby, especially after I got the deal of the radio program that helped me to be handsomely financially independent (June 21st, 2019). Actually, it is not appropriate to imply so after the broadcasting of the story featuring his friend's presence upon his wife's request on that very next day at the bar of the same Hyatt Regional. Also, the radio program deal was my successful hard-sale which was 100 % totally, completely and factually based on a very shrewd market segment analysis of the radio industry(June 21st, 2019). and the true reason how I got that radio program can only be best described as similar to the famous IKEA model from Harvard Business Case. It landed my radio program a leading National broadcasting channel, a best broadcasting window and a rebroadcasting window, unlimited free & full access to a fully equipped recording studio, a ready producing team, a ready promotion team, and ready supporting resources fully provided free by the Radio company. All in July 1st of 2004's meeting-record. (June 22nd, 2019).
Reference of chronicle complaints about Rockefeller(s): Chronicles updates of events
Three meetings in 2007 and related confusion
It seems that the big name R has a shared family habit to announce their own speculation as if an authoritative statement is THE reason for a lot of my troubles. I heard they "have been announcing" that I don't have inheritance since 2005, which has been almost the exact same way they have been kept announcing on the radio since 2014, as you heard from, all those official public statements from the big authority R houses about everybody else's all private matters, the only difference is those since-2005-announcements are not addressed to the public audience so that my inheriting related knowing-groups never even heard of it. This is the reason for why I have been complaining that it seems nobody needs to listen to my anybody's saying regarding if I have inherited my birth grandfathers' money no matter how credible this my anybody might be, which insulted a lot of people who have tried to explain the confusion as well as kept me screaming this entire time.
I say it aloud again: My inheriting has my own inheritable and own inheriting administrative attorneys that absolutely & completely independent from any R's family wealth. My Trust-inheriting is irrelevant to any R's wealth.
Reference of chronicle complaints about Rockefeller(s): Chronicles updates of events
----April 5th, 2019
Heard 2007's three meetings have been reasons for a lot of confusions. I heard there were three meetings in 2007 (January, June, and July respectively) intended to address some confusion regarding 2004's three meetings but resulted in broadcasting original confusion only.
June of 2007's meeting, I heard it was all about confusion if my 2004's inhering can be valid:
1: How can an inheriting without any identification verification?
- My inheriting day was June 30th of 2004, my inheriting related identification verification was January of 2004, I was not asked to present my photo identification was because I was presented with the attorney in my U.S. resident immigration application attorney's office where all my identification (photo ID and legal documentation) were in records.
2: How can anyone inherit a company when being objected at the inheriting moment already?
3: How can anyone inherit without public known inheritable nor public-known inheriting attorneys?
My-side personal status prelude for that famous marriage discussion on July 1st of 2004:
I was 37 years old in 2004 who newly inherited some handsome Trusts-wealth that a family with an heir, some children, and a marriage partner(s) naturally became such a concentration in my life, but I was in a biologically exhausted health situation that sexually involved romance was not appealing at all. So, I participated in that discussion for the reason to have children in a (polygamist or not) marriage with one (or more) marriage partner(s) who did not have any biological offspring yet in 2004. To me being a polygamist, a man who already a biological child means a leftover male who is old and undesirable in considering seriously involved romance.
The reason for the comprised prenup became fundamental for that famous 07-01-2004 marriage discussion
Not willing to let any part of the own-wealth to be in risk of the possible taken-over was from all participants of that famous 07-01-2004 marriage discussion.
What I think what might have happened after that marriage discussion?
I don't have a clue about what might have happened after July 1st of 2004, but I am positive, which means not assertive, that I may have biological and legitimate children from definitely a factually virgin-father man that, in 2004, I was willing to be involved in marriage. The not-assertive is about if I do have a biological child or children but I don't think that is any public interest but my own private matter.
Do I positively look forward to reuniting with my biological children and the marriage partner?
That depends on if that is a marriage partner who only shares biological children with me and still in the marriage with his heart. To me, marriage means a willingness-based responsibility, relationship, and exclusive inside-marriage sex (when I am healthy enough).
How long it takes for me to be healthy from my current health situation?
I have already asked law enforcement's help to free me from possible sexual harassments of any party that intended to maim my biological nature appearance, to compromise my health, to take over my wealth, to replace me from my possible marriage, or to destroy my way of living my life.
----March 16th, 2019
My understanding of all those financial confusions:
If confusions are about if someone's lawfully-owned money, this someone should have no need to commit any crime in order to get this lawful money when laws-help are already available all around,
If the intention is to get not-lawfully-owned money, this someone is also not privileged at all to commit any crime without being prosecuted as well.
----March 17th, 2019
January of 2007's meeting, I heard the clarification included:
* non-staff means employed but not on the payroll, similar to college's honor professor, sit-in professor for the semester(s), faculty, staff, etc.
I heard anger illustrated in July of 2007's meeting was regarding why the Chinese government tolerated a nobody in the U.S. military's name to insult the Chinese government?
Reference of my claimed five years providing paying companies:
I heard the five years paying companies' upstream Trust-investors have been:
- On June 30th of 2004, I was being objected the eligibility to inherit several U.S. companies, but my 2004's inheriting on June 30th of 2004 was actually Trust-Inheriting which should not involve any specific business investment company so that those objections in 2004 to against me inheriting those companies were irrelevant to my Trust-Inheriting.
- All those companies, who expressed objection on June 30th of 2004 as mentioned above, have never been owned by any Rockefeller name, nor any Ford name, nor any Walton name. ( reference link of how to verify a company's lawful ownership --updated on 04-03-2019)
- It is rumored there were other inheriting events on the same day of June 30th of 2004 as well. All were irrelevant events because each had a different wealth to be inherited and each had different inheriting administrative attorneys groups. Family inheriting normally administered by attorneys who are known to inheriting families. (--updated on 04-03-2019)
- How to tell it is irrelevant or not-inheriting? The paid-out is gifting or Trust-annuity payment is different on money recipient's income tax type and income tax rate. Gifting is gift tax, Trust-annuity payment can be either ( Form 1040) yearly income tax or based on each annuity payment's investor tax. I am qualified for investor tax. (01/11/2020)
- How to tell Trust-inheriting validly inherited the Trust's investment chain? Same to all investors who bought stock shares from all public-traded corporations that have each's own downstream corporation-investment-adventures. 2004's rejections were from those equivalent to corporation-investment adventures, Trust I inherited is equivalent to a stock-owner of a public-traded corporation,. (01/11/2020)
2-1: The anger if I am the reason for those confused families lost their "confused family wealth"? (--updated on 04-09-2019)
- The efforts have been on clarifying that, according to company registration historical records and commercial registration laws, those objecting companies are not part of the wealth of those confused families, which means those confused families historically never own those companies so that they never lost their "confused family wealth".
- The efforts have been on clarifying that, according to Trust laws, Trusted wealth is beneficiary owned wealth since the date of the establishment of the Trust, which means a company-ownership confusion is not the reason for anyone to "take over" such already owned Trusted wealth, which is also according to Trust laws.
- The efforts have been on clarifying that, those confused families did not lose any of their family wealth because of my birth nor because of my Trust-inheriting.
- All these companies have never been owned by Rockefeller holdings, nor any individual Rockefeller, nor any individual Rockefeller's any marriage partner(s). ----August 12th, 2019
- My 2004's inheriting was a sole beneficiary person's Trust-Inheriting, my inheritable was some Trusts set up by some of my birth Chinese grandfathers, so no reading needed.
- My Inheriting attorneys are those Trusts' entrusting attorneys who have no reason to be known to the public because of the nature that my Trust-Inheriting is a private inheriting event.
- My financial providing have been paid-out on time as decided schedule already presented to the public that my 2004's private Trust-inheriting was a valid inheriting event.
- It is announced that I am eligible to pay investor income tax rate for all these paid-outs(06/26/2019).
- Due to the private nature of inheriting, a signature is not the deciding factor in validating wealth inheriting after financial wealth's lawful ownership is already lawfully factually validly transferred.
- I entrusted my newly inherited wealth to June 30th of 2004's same entrusting attorneys' groups. I expressed my willingness to entrust my newly inherited Trusts on the same inheriting day which was June 30th of 2004.
- My financial providing have been paid-out on time as decided schedule already presented to the public that my 2004's private Trust-inheriting was a valid inheriting event.
My-side personal status prelude for that famous marriage discussion on July 1st of 2004:
I was 37 years old in 2004 who newly inherited some handsome Trusts-wealth that a family with an heir, some children, and a marriage partner(s) naturally became such a concentration in my life, but I was in a biologically exhausted health situation that sexually involved romance was not appealing at all. So, I participated in that discussion for the reason to have children in a (polygamist or not) marriage with one (or more) marriage partner(s) who did not have any biological offspring yet in 2004. To me being a polygamist, a man who already a biological child means a leftover male who is old and undesirable in considering seriously involved romance.
The reason for the comprised prenup became fundamental for that famous 07-01-2004 marriage discussion
Not willing to let any part of the own-wealth to be in risk of the possible taken-over was from all participants of that famous 07-01-2004 marriage discussion.
What I think what might have happened after that marriage discussion?
I don't have a clue about what might have happened after July 1st of 2004, but I am positive, which means not assertive, that I may have biological and legitimate children from definitely a factually virgin-father man that, in 2004, I was willing to be involved in marriage. The not-assertive is about if I do have a biological child or children but I don't think that is any public interest but my own private matter.
Do I positively look forward to reuniting with my biological children and the marriage partner?
That depends on if that is a marriage partner who only shares biological children with me and still in the marriage with his heart. To me, marriage means a willingness-based responsibility, relationship, and exclusive inside-marriage sex (when I am healthy enough).
How long it takes for me to be healthy from my current health situation?
I have already asked law enforcement's help to free me from possible sexual harassments of any party that intended to maim my biological nature appearance, to compromise my health, to take over my wealth, to replace me from my possible marriage, or to destroy my way of living my life.
----March 16th, 2019
My understanding of all those financial confusions:
If confusions are about if someone's lawfully-owned money, this someone should have no need to commit any crime in order to get this lawful money when laws-help are already available all around,
If the intention is to get not-lawfully-owned money, this someone is also not privileged at all to commit any crime without being prosecuted as well.
----March 17th, 2019
January of 2007's meeting, I heard the clarification included:
- 1: Eligibility for a veteran status is enlisted after a full year.
- 2: A researching non-staff military strategist only has commanding power when on assignment.
- 3: U.S. uniform personnel cannot be hostility to the United States nor the banking industry
* non-staff means employed but not on the payroll, similar to college's honor professor, sit-in professor for the semester(s), faculty, staff, etc.
I heard anger illustrated in July of 2007's meeting was regarding why the Chinese government tolerated a nobody in the U.S. military's name to insult the Chinese government?
- I did not attend July of 2007's meeting, I did not attend any of 2007's meetings.
- The rumored insulting was about what I said regarding the Chinese-Japanese war, and confusion was based on the fact that war was an invasion to China. I was only expressing my understanding about that war from the aspect of war strategy. The talk was never a deny regarding that war was an invasion to China.
- I am a birth child (possibly an heir) from the famous Chinese Emperors of Tang dynasty was acknowledged since 1989 by a lot of historians from a lot of Chinese colleges.
Reference of my claimed five years providing paying companies:
I heard the five years paying companies' upstream Trust-investors have been:
- The first year's settler was Tang dynasty's Emperor Xuanzong（唐玄宗李隆基), at about 1300 years ago. The known heir of the Tang dynasty Emperor Taizong(唐太宗李世民), both featured in those published paintings which were copies from the digital version of those original ancient family portraits.
- The second year's settler was painter Zhang, Guotao（国画大师张国焘), at about 800 years ago. He was a famous painter in China, one of whose paintings was discovered with the royal collection stamp that cost all his non-heir children been prosecuted by the Emperor of the Song dynasty. I heard this painter's private (royal) collection stamp is identified as the same or characteristically same to the royal collection stamps from the Chinese Tang dynasty and the Chinese Southern Tang dynasty.
- The third year's settler was Southern Tang dynasty's Emperor Yuanzong (南唐中主唐元宗李璟), and at about 1000 years ago.
- The fourth and fifth years' settlers were father and son. The father was Tang dynasty's Emperor Wenzong(唐文宗李昂) and the son was Tang dynasty's Emperor Wuzong(唐武宗李瀍), at about 1200 years ago. These two Emperors are historically known heir-grandsons of famous Chinese Tang dynasty's Emperor Taizong and Emperor Xuanzong.