Saturday, October 1, 2016

MAYBE IT'S TIME TO GO AFTER THIS

In October-November of 2015, Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje procured and paid for four bogus certificates of title for the Yona property and then delivered them to Msgr. David C. Quitugua for publication in the Umatuna. 


All of the documentation is here.

29 comments:

  1. Wonder who's money they used. Maybe we should investigate their finances too. I'm sure they are very sloppy and that's why they are trying desperately to cover up their asses.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've always wondered what happens to the trash bag ($$$) that the NEOs give during their celebrations and if the NCW has a finance council that accounts for it. I also wondered who is in this finance council and do they have a clear audit trail of how much and where these funds are used? This is something that every member of the NCW should ask their leadership. Oh yeah, never mind, I forgot that you believe every single word that comes out of their mouths. Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The idea of a NCW finance council is a joke. Any report from such council is bogus, as illustrated by Lurch and the trained lawyer.

      Delete
  3. Is the Guam Bar Ethics Committee aware of this?

    ReplyDelete
  4. An attorney is held to a higher standard in his dealings. Jackie is in trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is this the same person running for Guam senator?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please do not get Therese Terlaje (who is running for Senator) confused with the likes of Jackie whose not an original Terlaje as Mr Terlaje pointed out earlier.

      Delete
    2. WoW Jackie - What is your maiden name since it seems the comments on this blog are not claiming you as a Terlaje? You really must have messed up your "Borrowed Name" that the some of the Terlajes are against you! Hmmm - I Wonder Why?

      Delete
  6. Definitely! Why keep her out of the loop, when she's been right in the middle. If she's so sure that they're in the right, then I'm sure it'll stand up in court, right? I'm so sick of this, why the hell are decent, intelligent people propping them up? Do they not see? Talk about not being open. Choosing blatantly ignore evidence that they made. There is no logic. There is no rhyme. How long will you allow yourself to attend these Celebrations, Convivances, Triditzios, Scurtiny's. Are the damages against these men at their age not concerning. Why would you want your children to learn to be herded like cattle? Please, just wake up. Walk out! Go back to the mother church. Please for the soul of your children.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They don't read the papers. They don't watch television. Listen to radio. They don't attend the regular mass. Just listen to their leaders. The only way to reach them is thru their leaders. That is the difficulty. Most of the time, if not all the time, these explanations even if there are no reason or rhyme in them, are all that the followers need to hear.

      Delete
    2. Agree DonaMila, that's the puzzling part, they are actually in bondage to their responsibles and catechist. Christ came to free us from the bondage to SIN and Satan and gave us the sacraments to stay in grace, the Eucharist and Reconciliation.

      Delete
    3. Responsibles - What an interesting term.

      You go through the program and progress to a point where you are given some authority over others. They seek your advice, your guidance. You become a "cane" for those walking the "Way." Feels good, doesn't it?

      Delete
    4. Don't be so judgmental Mr. Camacho. I watched his interview on TV. He basically said we are all on a "journey" a walk, to heaven. The "journey" is difficult and some need canes. His cane is the neo. And why would anyone want to take his cane away. That is all. I asked my dad what was a responsible because his Pare is one. He said a responsible in the neo is the head of his community.No big deal he said , and is selected by the community. He doesn't have any authority over anyone and doesnt tell people what to do. He said the doc is a good man and like you and me and even the pope and my dad himself "we are all sinners". He also told me not to speak bad of anyone. He hears that the Doc has a good heart .

      Delete
    5. Eusebio is not a responsible. He is a catechist. Major difference. And absolute authority over people's lives. For real Catholic Christians our "cane" is the grace of the Sacraments. \ But Kiko does not believe in a "sacramental" church. Eusebio supports a theology that is at gross odds with real Catholicism. In order to protect ourselves and our children we must call him out when he presents himself as an authority. On top of that, he's either really stupid or an absolute liar about most of the things he claimed.

      Delete
    6. Ric lies a lot, which makes him stupid.

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous 7:21 PM,

      with all due respect, the time to be judgmental is log overdue in matters related to the Neocatechumenal Way. I believe the NCW proclaims one thing and practices another. It's too complex to go into with this format (a comment stream). But soon I will present a document which resulted from a collaboration of some Catholic faithful who see the NCW for what it really is. Our goal is to shine a bright light on the heretical teachings and aberrant practices of this parallel church, a cultish enterprise which seeks to infiltrate the Catholic Church and destroy it from within.

      While waiting for the release of the document you might learn something from the natural world - the effect of parasites on a host organism.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go_LIz7kTok

      Quite interesting and rather disgusting.

      Delete
    8. Maybe we should ask, "What is so difficult about Catholicism that you need extra help?" Isn't the Church established by Christ sufficient?

      A "Cliff Notes" version or "Catholicism For Dummies" might be acceptable if it taught the true faith. But the NCW doesn't even do that.

      Delete
  7. Q: What do you get when you cross a trained lawyer and a doctor in the NCW.
    A: A quacky quack in a cult.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Tim Rohr regarding Doctor Eusebio. He is A Responsible AND a catechist.And you are right at that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between the 2.

      Delete
  8. Andrew what happened? Your family and mine go way back. Good friends with your mom especially. Your mom and dad never used bad language or speak and write terrible things about others especially your elders. I know your parents will not like the fact that you are with people who are using curse words and insulting others. This is the year of forgiveness. Stop hanging around this group. I couldn't believe my ears when another friend said Emily's son is different. Please be careful. We love your mom and dad very much.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually Andrew decided that being judged by God was much more important than being judged by you. Looks like Andrew grew up. Looks like you didn't.

      Delete
    2. Dear 2:46 AM,

      you know my mother was a very strong and outspoken person. When she fought for a cause there was no one more fierce and tenacious. My father was much more reserved and soft spoken. But he stood for principles and was a staunch supporter and defender of the church.

      I had observed the turmoil in the church for a long time without saying much. As things began to boil over I couldn't stay silent. I had to add my voice to the other voices crying out for justice. It is a new experience for me and I am not completely comfortable with it, but It is something I need to do. I must follow my conscience.

      My sibling, who has been in religious life for 52 years, is my spiritual advisor. She has helped me look at things from different perspectives and has helped me moderate my tone. A while back she gave me some excellent advice: "Keep marching."

      I have never liked activism and harsh rhetoric. I still don't like it. But how are we going to wake people up and and make changes? If I have to be an obnoxious person for a while, so be it. When things are on the right track I will return to a peaceful life. We are looking forward to that blessed day!

      Delete
    3. Andrew, Your mother and father would be proud to know that their son is defending the church! I too look forward to the day that our church will make the necessary changes to clean up!

      Delete
    4. Hear, hear! Well said Mr. Camacho!

      Delete
    5. Mr/Ms Anon @2:46 - Geez! Because you are "good friends" with Andrew's parents, you now have the right to denigrate him? Obviously, you don't know them that well! I know them too, and I would venture to say that they are PROUD of their son standing up and being such a militant Catholic - one who stands firm and vocal in the defense of our Catholic Faith. But what does this "friend" of John and Emily have to say about himself/herself - hide under an Anonymous and throw pop shots at their son? Andrew is not one addicted to harsh words and insults to his elders. On the contrary, I think he is a fine gentleman - and being militant about his faith does not make him any less a gentleman. You, Mr/Ms ??? might learn a thing or two by following his example. Keep strong in the Faith, Andrew, even while a "good friend" of your parents thinks less of you for the strong stance you are taking. Wish we had more of you, and less of him/her!

      Delete
  9. Tim you were molested by a priest in cali and you went with your father to speak with authorities who did not believe either one of you. So why aren't you going back there to start what you did here? Didn't cali lift their sol? Go for it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was not molested. In hindsight I was "prospected," and knew to pull away. I wrote about it here:
      http://www.junglewatch.info/2013/11/chancery-v-rohr-two-stories.html

      I was eighteen at the time time, so this wan't pedophilia. And when I didn't show the right signs, the priest moved on. What my father and I went to report was a homosexual relationship between our pastor and a neighbor as well as a suspected use of parish funds to keep his boyfriend in a house owned by the parish.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch