Saturday, November 17, 2018


Note: This post is future-dated in order to keep it at the top of the blog. For now that's the only way it can be done. 

This post will stay at the top of this blog until these men receive justice. (For Sonny, it will be posthumously). We also know the identity of the boy involved in the "threesome" with Fr. Antonio Cruz (deceased) and then-seminarian, Anthony S. Apuron as described by Mr. Ray DePlata (here, here, here, and here). The boy is dead.

Roy Quintanilla: Video - StatementFile
Walter Denton: Video - Statement - File
Doris Concepcion (Mother of Joseph Quinata): Video - Statement - File
John "Champ" Quinata (Brother of Joseph Quinata): Video - Statement
Roland Sondia: Video - Statement - File


Friday, January 19, 2018


From the Guam Daily Post story
Alexander Chen · 
Tim, in 10-20 years from now, the only 'disaster' done to this diocese was by you and your followers who have deliberately scorned and demonized a dying Bishop who claims 'innocence', WIHTOUT due process nor any undeniable-proof other than 'allegations' for lucrative settlements in a very impoverished region of the world.

Apuron is dying, what benefit did you get for fabricating stories with NO HARD EVIDENCE as the Bishop claims 'innocence'? whereas waiting for the Vatican verdict would have been the wise and prudent way to adequately face these allegations, you deliberately 'chose' to relentlessly and viciously demonize not only Apuron, but even the Pope, Vatican’s dicasteries, any Cardinal, Bishop or person that may threaten to disagree with your predetermined conclusions... it begs the question... why?

God is the God of history and he is the God that "chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong" (1 Cor. 1:27 RSV)

May the powerful 'dark' forces in the island learn what St. Paul meant by 'the Power of God' (i.e. Christ unjustly crucified) from Apuron's humble prayer for his enemies.

Mr. Chen gives me too much credit. In fact, other than being willing to be the one to keep the news in the news, I don't deserve any credit. APURON DOES. 

I didn't accuse Apuron of molesting anyone. John Toves, Roy Quintanilla, Walter Denton, Doris Concepcion, Roland Sondia, and Mark Apuron did.

I didn't run Apuron out of town. Apuron ran out of town.

I didn't tell young men that they couldn't be priests in the Archdiocese of Agana unless they joined the Neocatechumenal Way, Apuron did.

I didn't create a neo-only seminary and then pretend that it was not a neo-only seminary in order to raise money for it, Apuron did.

I didn't create what now appears to be a fake charitable corporation that for nearly a quarter of a century solicited money from the public to care for the poor and instead used the funds for personal reasons, Apuron did.

I didn't craft a deed that gave away control of a mega-million dollar property to a shadow board, Apuron did.

I didn't pay for a false certificate of title for said property, Apuron's attorney did.

I didn't illicitly - and in violation of canon law - terminate the pastorship of Fr. Paul Gofigan, Apuron did.

I didn't publicly trash Msgr. James Benavente, Apuron did.

I didn't ordain men I knew who shouldn't be ordained, Apuron did.

In short: Apuron did, Apuron did, Apuron did.

And most, if not all, of these stories were already news before I posted about them in JungleWatch. So what exactly did I do, Alexander Chen?

It is absurd to think that the pope and powerful Roman cardinals are even reading my blog let alone being influenced by it. What a laugh.

Let's look at the list of people I would have had to influence to get where we are:

  • Over 155 alleged victims
  • Many attorneys
  • Federal judges and magistrates
  • Superior court judges
  • The Pope
  • Cardinal Burke
  • Archbishop Hon
  • Archbishop Byrnes
  • Several other powerful church prelates
  • All of the local media
  • Hundreds of local faithful
  • etc., etc., etc. 

Wow, I must be really good. To believe Mr. Chen, I would have had to con all these people and keep conning them. Really? A guy with a blog? Or was it because I had facts? documents? truth? And more importantly because of what Apuron himself did: HE RAN. 

And by the way, Apuron was in perfect health when he ran. In fact, let's revisit that moment because Apuron's defenders like to cast his running in the current context of the mega allegations that have now poured forth.

Apuron ran to Rome just days after Roy Quintanilla came forward on May 17, 2016. We know this because of this series of pictures taken by a Vatican photographer on May 25, 2016:

Archbishop Apuron runs to the Pope from Undercover Neo on Vimeo.

Now let's review. 

At the time Roy Quintanilla came forward, there was no law in place lifting the civil statute of limitations on sex crimes against minors. In fact, there wasn't even any talk about it yet. Roy Quintanilla had NO legal recourse at all. In fact, it was Apuron who had all the legal power. He could have simply sued Roy for defamation and there wouldn't have been a thing Quintanilla could have done about it. Attorney David Lujan might have been standing next to Quintanilla, but at that point, there was nothing Lujan could have done either. 

Apuron had already shown his willingness to sue as he had already threatened to do so to both John Toves and myself. So why didn't he threaten to sue Roy? In fact, why DIDN'T he sue Roy? At this point there was only one allegation from someone who hadn't lived on Guam for many years. And yet this was reason to run to the Pope?

As already mentioned in the previous post, Australian Cardinal Pell had been accused of the same thing as Apuron. And Pell responded by immediately leaving Rome for Australia to face his accusers and exonerate himself, while Apuron did exactly the opposite.

Yet, Mr. Chen and others want you to believe that I am the cause of Apuron's downfall and the reason he is "dying." 

Of course, Mr. Chen's pathetic attempt to impugn me as the cause of all this is as absurd as any sane person believing the Vatican has the resources to render a verdict that will even matter in the civil sphere. It won't. Apuron's guilt or innocence (or his liability since it is a civil and not a criminal case), will be determined in our own Superior and Federal District Courts, NOT the Vatican. 

But to answer Mr. Chen's question: "what benefit did you get..." The answer is absolutely nothing, unless you want to count the 4 subscribers I have at $5.00 per month:

 In fact this has not only cost me 4 years of my life, but threats on my life, and much, much more. So why did I do it? The question is: DID WHAT? Report on the news? Run a blog? 

For those who don't know, keeping injustice in the news was something I had already long since been doing:

In 2008, I learned that Guam was the easiest place in the nation to get an abortion because of our scandalous lack of pro-life legislation. In response, I and a friend initiated The Esperansa Project which essentially exposed the scandal about Guam's almost completely unregulated abortion industry, and then as we tried to get legislation through, we began exposing the legislators who opposed it. 

In addition to The Esperansa Project, I maintained a web log at If you follow any of the work I did there, you will notice that senators who played a major role in trying to derail our legislation are no longer senators. And I (and others) accomplished this simply by keeping the injustice in the news. 

(Note: While Senator Aguon was a major opponent at one point, he later became our greatest ally. When he did, I offered to take down the posts showing his former opposition to our legislation. To his credit he asked me to leave it up because it was the truth about what he did and he was sorry for it.)

When I learned of the injustice against Fr. Paul, and later Msgr. James, I simply did what I was already doing: keeping injustice in view. At the time, I had no idea that doing so would lead to the uncovering of decades of debris of the type we are now seeing. I recounted all of this in Orchestrated

Lastly, I find Mr. Chen's quoting of following scripture to be quite ironic:

God is the God of history and he is the God that "chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong" (1 Cor. 1:27 RSV)

It's ironic because Archbishop Apuron was the most powerful man on Guam. More powerful than any government official because he could not be voted out of office. In fact, this is why he often bragged: "No one can get me." And he was right!

Also, he was not subject to any open government law that would permit us to view records. And of course, there was the centuries of fear inculcated into the Catholic faithful that kept so many from "speaking against the priest." 

By contrast, I had no position, no money, no power, no authority, no pulpit, no newspaper, no radio station - all of things Apuron had. And I had everything to lose and nothing to gain. And when we look at the people who finally did bring the house down on Apuron, we see that it was the elderly and infirm who kept up their rosaries and their signs, Sunday after Sunday, walking and walking. 

So at least Mr. Chen is right about something. God really DID chose the " shame the strong." 

Thursday, January 18, 2018


Many people have been accused of things they did not do. And if they did not do them, they do not run. Apuron ran. To justify his running, he has trumped up stories from everything from being ousted by an evil Chinese gambling syndicate to now some people with a so-called power agenda and the "powers of darkness." More comments after this:

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Dr. Ricardo Eusebio <>
Date: Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 2:12 AM
Subject: Apuron statement

To Guam media:

   I am forwarding a letter I received from Archbishop Apuron that he wanted published to the media. Please do so accordingly. Thank you.
R. Eusebio, M.D.,FACS

-----Original Message-----

From: Ricardo Eusebio []
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 12:00 PM
To: Dr. Ricardo Eusebio <>
Subject: Dr. Eusebio,

Dr. Eusebio,

Si Yu’os Ma’ase for all your prayers. May I ask that you send my statement below to the media. I do not want to reveal my email address.

May God bless you.

Statement from Archbishop Anthony Apuron :

I have been made aware of an interview given to a Guam news publication in which Mark Apuron accused me of committing an act of sexual abuse against him many years ago. As I lay sick after another surgery and I face the final judgment approaching evermore close, having lost interest in this world, God is my witness: I deny all allegations of sexual abuse made against me, including this last one.

All these events are helping me to direct my hope towards the only righteous judge, and for this I am very thankful. I am saddened, however, by the timing of this latest accusation that alleges an act which supposedly happened in incredible circumstances and surroundings. All these allegations have been mentored and promoted by the same source and this one seems particularly timed to influence the verdict of the Vatican trial conducted by the Holy See, as a last resort out of fear that I may be exonerated.
As the Church in Guam is being destroyed by people who have only their power agenda at heart, may God have mercy on us all and save His Church from the powers of darkness. I pray that the truth may prevail; I pray for my accusers: fill them with what they desire; as for me, when I awake, I will be satisfied with Your face, oh Lord (Ps. 17,15)


The plight of Cardinal Pell in Australia provides a perfect example of what one does when one believes he or she is falsely accused. After being accused of sexually molesting young boys, Pell, who was working and living in Rome at the time, immediately went home to Australia to face his accusers and exonerate himself. And while Pell went "Rome to home," by contrast, Apuron ran "home to Rome." 

So who are these people with a power agenda? Why doesn't Apuron just name them? Because he can't. Because there is no power agenda. Power over what? This dilapidated soon to be impoverished diocese at the edge of the world? Really? 

And destroy the Church in Guam? Huh? Even without the sex abuse allegations, Apuron's running of this diocese for three decades was - in the words of the Vatican appointed coadjutor bishop - a DISASTER


Wednesday, January 17, 2018


On June 28, 2017, Cardinal Fernando Filoni, Prefect for the Congregation of the Evangelization of Peoples, wrote Archbishop Michael Byrnes, the following:

Full letter here

In effect, Filoni was warning Byrnes that he plans to block the sale of the Yona property if he closes RMS. 

As Filoni notes, the sale will need approval of the Holy See, and in this case, he, Filoni, is "the Holy See," since it is his Congregation which represents the so-called "mission territories" of which Guam is a part - though why after 400 years of Catholicism we are still considered a "mission" is a mystery. 

Well, as you know, Archbishop Byrnes has closed RMS. And here's what Filoni's actions will mean: It will mean the closure of and selling of your churches and schools. 

Here's why.

Currently there are efforts to mediate the 155-plus lawsuits out of court. The central motivation to do this is the belief that the Archdiocese of Agana currently has enough insurance and "non-essential" assets to satisfy the attorneys and the plaintiffs. 

The "gem" in the list of non-essential assets is the Yona Property, formerly occupied by RMS, which has been valued between 40 and 70 Million dollars. But even if the value is lower, it is still the largest, most valuable asset in the mediation pot. 

You can bet that if this property is removed from that pot - by Filoni blocking its sale - mediation will immediately fall apart and all 155 cases will head to court. 

At that point the archdiocese will have to declare bankruptcy and place all of its properties at the mercy of the court, including the "essential properties" - your churches and schools. 

At this point, Filoni will no longer be able to block the sale of anything because control of all properties will lie with the courts and no longer with the Archbishop of Agana. 

We must remember that this is no small matter. This archdiocese now has 400% MORE abuse cases per capita than the infamous Boston scandal which was made into the movie Spotlight. 

With 155 cases already filed at 5 to 10 MILLION each, that's 775 MILLION to ONE AND HALF BILLION DOLLARS in law suits. Even if only 25% of this has to be paid out, that's still TWO HUNDRED to FOUR HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS. 

Given the list of "non-essential" properties the plaintiffs and their attorneys appear willing to settle for, it appears the most this could cost us is between 50 and 100 MILLION dollars, with all of that coming from properties that are not churches or schools. 

But if Filoni blocks the sale of the Yona Property - as he is intending to do - mediation is out the window and your church and your school will be on the chopping block. 

Having endured the most vile tactics from the neocat power brokers for nearly two decades, and seeing the lengths their local puppets were willing to go through to cover for them, we should not be surprised at a scorched earth policy that intends to wipe out your parish church and your children's school. 

That's just how they roll. 


Kamalen Karidat Inc. held on Monday its first board of directors election in several years, hoping to address issues that the nonprofit organization has been facing. CONTINUED


Mediation of 155-plus clergy sex abuse cases still hangs in the balance

Lawyers in the Guam clergy sex abuse cases could not agree on final mediation protocols to settle the cases, the parties said during Tuesday's joint status conference for lawsuits filed in local and federal court. CONTINUED


A theological institute that the Neocatechumenal Way used to operate has officially closed, a week after the movement's former seminary also closed. CONTINUED

Monday, January 15, 2018


Saturday, January 13, 2018


Thank you to Jose Martinez for capturing these Diana screen shots and posting them on his FB Timeline. They are more evidence of what we already know, but apparently Rome STILL needs to know.

Link to Jose's original post

Link to Jose's original post


Comments on this and all posts may be made via email to or at our Facebook Page.

Friday, January 12, 2018


Apuron's nephew says he was raped by the archbishop as a teen

Archbishop Anthony Apuron's nephew, Mark M. Apuron, Wednesday filed a lawsuit in federal court, accusing the archbishop of raping him when he was a teen, in 1989 or 1990. CONTINUED

Guam Daily Post STORY

Wednesday, January 10, 2018


The Vatican has been alerted about the newest allegation of abuse against suspended Archbishop Anthony Apuron, according to the Archdiocese of Agana.

Apuron’s nephew, Mark Mafnas Apuron, in an exclusive interview with The Guam Daily Post, accused his uncle of sexually abusing him in 1990 while at an event at the Archdiocese of Agana Chancery Office. CONTINUED


Nephew accuses archbishop

"He asked, 'What are you doing?'" Mark Apuron said. He said he froze, afraid of what trouble he was in, when his uncle allegedly pulled down his pants and pushed him onto the vanity. The teen thought he was going to get a whipping for smoking and drinking but instead, he said, his uncle raped him.

For the last 27 years, Mark Mafnas Apuron has held onto a secret, one that resulted in him being estranged from his immediate family members and left him ashamed and petrified.

"When my experience happened, I thought I was the only one," Apuron said, as he sat in an office in Hagåtña yesterday, speaking with The Guam Daily Post.

But Apuron resolved to make this year different by coming forward and speaking of the past. CONTINUED

Note: Comments can be made via email at We will post them with your name and email address. Or you can post comments directly to the JungleWatch Facebook Page:

Tuesday, January 9, 2018

PDN: Archbishop Byrnes names 8 to tribunal, reassigns 3 priests

"Byrnes said Quitugua's past assignment, as associate judge on the metropolitan tribunal, is no longer in effect."

Archbishop Michael Jude Byrnes appointed eight priests, five of them canon lawyers, to serve on the Archdiocese of Agana's metropolitan tribunal, or the judicial office that examines whether a marriage is valid or not. CONTINUED

Monday, January 8, 2018


  1. Dear Anonymous at 11:32 pm

    Could you create a username for yourself? Alexander Chen listed 4 things in his comment, but Tim Rohr only chose to address the first two. The evidence he used to support his claim was the March 7, 2012 Apostolic Delegate letter to Archbishop Apuron. The letter listed Canon Law 537. Unfortunately for the Apostolic Delegate, his advice to Archbishop Apuron went against the Canon Law he cited. 

    According to Canon Law Made Easy: 

    "The Code of Canon Law (537) mandates Parish Finance Councils in each parish. The role of the Parish Finance Council is to assist and advise the Pastor in overseeing and controlling the financial affairs of the parish, including any schools. The Parish Finance Council is accountable to the pastor who has the responsibility for final decisions. If the advice of the Parish Finance Council is unanimous on a given matter, the pastor will give serious consideration to the recommendation."

    The Archbishop does indeed have the final decision on the Parish Finance Council. And if there is a unanimous vote in the Parish Finance Council, the Archbishop will give it serious consideration to their recommendation. And that is all their unanimous vote means......a recommendation. The Archbishop makes the final decision. He can choose not to follow the Parish Finance Council. 

    Furthermore, the Canon Law is much higher than the letter of the Apostolic Delegate cited by Tim Rohr.


Poor Diana does not even know the difference between a parish and a diocese:
DIANA: "The Archbishop does indeed have the final decision on the Parish Finance Council."

Ummm, no. The Archbishop does NOT even preside over the Parish Finance Council. The PASTOR does! That's why it's called a PARISH finance council and NOT a DIOCESAN finance council! SMH. 

Per Can. 537, the only involvement of the diocesan bishop in the operation of the parish finance council is to issue "norms" and is only to "assist the pastor in the administration of the goods of the parish:"

"In each parish there is to be a finance council which is governed, in addition to universal law, by norms issued by the diocesan bishop and in which the Christian faithful, selected according to these same norms, are to assist the pastor in the administration of the goods of the parish..."

By contrast the DIOCESAN finance council is very different in that the bishop needs the consent of the finance council to "alienate the good of the diocese:"

Can. 1292 §1. ...when the value of the goods whose alienation is proposed falls within the minimum and maximum amounts to be defined by the conference of bishops for its own region, the competent authority is determined by the statutes of juridic persons if they are not subject to the diocesan bishop; otherwise, the competent authority is the diocesan bishop with the consent of the finance council, the college of consultors, and those concerned. The diocesan bishop himself also needs their consent to alienate the goods of the diocese.

Art. 5. § 2. Diocesan and parochial Pastoral Councils and Parochial Finance Councils, of which non-ordained faithful are members, enjoy a consultative vote only and cannot in any way become deliberative structures. Only those faithful who possess the qualities prescribed by the canonical norms may be elected to such responsibilities.

Notice the particular council this section leaves out. 

It states that Diocesan and parochial Pastoral Councils and Parochial Finance Councils enjoy a consultative voye and cannot in any way become deliberative structures. Notice that DIOCESAN FINANCE COUNCILS  are not mentioned because in fact DIOCESAN finance councils DO in fact enjoy a deliberative vote in certain cases such as that which is denoted in Can. 1292. 

Dear Diana. You are right to keep your pseudonym. I'd do the same if I was that ignorant.  


I will say this for Zoltan. He was NEVER afraid. He NEVER hid. And he is right to call out the cowards who hide behind their rocks but have no problem throwing stones at those of us who put our names and faces to our beliefs. Good on you, Zoltan. You are worthy warrior. 

  • Dear Anonymous at 2:09 am

    Rohr's purpose of digging up any information on Zoltan was to get him in trouble with his job. He managed to dig up information that Zoltan wrote about 11 years ago. Notice Rohr's last statement? It was addressed to Dr. Underwood. While it is true that Zoltan made some negative remarks about people with Aspergers Syndrome, Rohr was only telling half the truth. The next day, this is what Zoltan stated:

    testing_the_truth October 17, 2006
    Oops, I made some exaggarated statements here about people suffering from Asperger syndrome. I apologize! I apparently misunderstood some aspects of this contition. I found some information handily available on the Internet to better understand Asperger syndrome, that helped me a lot.


    That was what Zoltan wrote the next day after he made those negative remarks. He apologized and retracted his previous statement. This was what Rohr omitted from his blog. Telling half-truths while omitting pertinant information and then addressing Zoltan's boss with the intention of getting him in trouble at work is not freedom of speech. It is a tactic of manipulation. 

  • Diana, I cannot endorse what you say. I am sorry. It was my conflict with Rohr and we have already moved on. It is you who is digging up things.

  • Sunday, January 7, 2018


    Even though we've only made (until today) one new post in the last two weeks, with very little activity over the last couple months, the world is still checking in:

    Wonder why? (smile)


    Alexander Chen ·

    "Apuron secretly deeded the Yona seminary property to the Neocatechumenal Way against the advice of his own advisory council, which he later fired."

    1. Apuron was the Archbishop with absolute canonical power over his diocese.
    2. The advisory council's job is to offer advice, NOT to mandate or lead the diocese... that is the Archbishop's canonical job.
    3. Apuron drafted the deed the JUST/CORRECT way, foreseeing any possible archdiocese bankruptcy situation, he drafted the deed so that the diocese maintained ownership while shielding the property from being sold as part of any settlement the diocese may incurr. Apuron was way too smart for his (could it be greed? Tim Rohr is a real estate agent? Council was accused of mismanaging cemetery property? hmmmmm) council.
    4. The fact that the keys of the seminary and the possibility to sell it is in the hands of the Ordinary Archbishop contradicts any and all statements that hint that Apuron had a malicious-will in deeding the Yona seminary to the NCW, who never had total control of anything at any time, as drafted by Apuron.

    This is just another example of why PDN, Tim Rohr and CCoG are still deliberately disseminating negative propaganda on Apuron without due process, without a balanced opinion of the true events... which proves ill will on their part.

    Shame on Guam for believing FakeNews and the Archdiocese for its sin of omission, for not issuing a statement distancing themselves from all these allegations until the Vatican has issued a verdict.

    We can honestly say that Guam is an archdiocese that is truly bankrupt, not economically, but morally.


    Dear Alex. 

    Thank you. I was getting bored of not having anything to write about - like the old days. There really is nothing new. In fact, there was really nothing at all - until Kikos like you began kicking up opportunities for us to examine you, once again, do here. 

    And just in time too. 

    Rumor is that Filoni-Baloney's strategy is to delay, delay, delay. Just let things go quiet. It's too late to save the neocats on Guam, but Filoni isn't concerned about saving the neocats on Guam. He is only concerned with saving neocat power in Rome (so he can be the next pope). And the Apuron thing was a cancerous hole in what had been heretofore a fairly impregnable neocat power presence in the Vatican. 

    So, the big question for Filoni and his Kiko-handlers was what to do with Apuron!

    Now, if the verdict (already decided in early August) had been innocent, you can bet that your Kiko's would have rushed to the microphones and the kiko-media lap dancers like Zenit and La Stampa. But they didn't. So he isn't. Get it?

    So another strategy was needed: Go silent.  And keep Pope Francis busy with other stuff. 

    It has proved to be a good strategy thus far. The protesters have put down their signs. Archbishop Byrnes is quietly taking care of things. And there has been little for JungleWatch to post about. 

    But thanks to you, especially since your comment appears online and is universally available, we now have the opportunity to again tell the world why Apuron must not only NEVER be returned to the position of Archbishop of Agana. And! Should be sent to Kiko's palace in Galilee for the rest of his days where he can dance about the altar after every heretical liturgy and enjoy his last days with Louie :)

    So now to the task at hand. 

    I don't have time to do them all in one post, so we'll take them one issue at a time. Thanks again, Alex. I was worried that my blog was dying for lack of new stuff. Once again: Saved by you Kikos. 

    1. Apuron was the Archbishop with absolute canonical power over his diocese.
    2. The advisory council's job is to offer advice, NOT to mandate or lead the diocese... that is the Archbishop's canonical job.

    From a letter from the Apostolic Delegate to Archbishop Apuron dated March 7, 2012:

    Full letter here

    Now, let's look again at what you stated, Alex:

    1. Apuron was the Archbishop with absolute canonical power over his diocese. 2. The advisory council's job is to offer advice, NOT to mandate or lead the diocese... that is the Archbishop's canonical job.

    Per the laws of the One Holy Catholic Church, the bishop "is not free to do as he pleases," and when the finance council is asked to give its consent, it's vote is "a deliberative vote," NOT just advice!

    Now, as regards whether or not the finance council was "asked" to give its consent, this is exactly why the Delegate is writing to Apuron. 

    The matter in question - the alienation of an asset valued at a particular amount - REQUIRED the consent of the finance council, and the bishop (Apuron) was "to receive the consent of the absolute majority" or he "acts invalidly," which is exactly what Apuron did. 

    The determination that the property would be alienated by what Apuron wanted to do (and did) is NOT something the Finance Council determined, it was the determination of Apuron's long time personal friend and legal counsel, Attorney Edward Terlaje:

    Attorney Terlaje's opinion of Nov 27, 2011, was prompted by an action put before the Finance Council on September 7, 2011. 

    Full document here

    The concern, per Apuron's own Legal Counsel, was that Apuron would LOSE "ultimate control of RMS and its assets," if the RMS Articles and By-laws were NOT amended. It is clear that the RMS Incorporators (Apuron and the Gennarini's), had demanded that the assets "be deeded to RMS without modification" of the Articles and By-Laws.

    Apuron acted AGAINST the very clear legal advice of his own Legal Counsel. It was the Finance Council which acted (in its canonically prescribed capacity as a "deliberative" body) on the clear legal advice of Apuron's Legal Counsel whose professional responsibility was to protect the Archdiocese of Agana and its Faithful from the marauders that Mr. Alex Chen has been obviously prostituted to protect. 

    Thanks, Alex. I'll be back. Happy New Year. 

    Recommendations by JungleWatch