JACKIE! NO SURPRISE - PART 1

By Tim Rohr

In writing my book "Orchestrated" (a working title) - a record of the unbelievable drama that unfolded in this archdiocese a decade ago, I found myself stuck on what for now is the tenth chapter. It keeps getting longer and longer. In fact, it is already almost as long as the rest of the book put together. I'll fix it, probably by breaking it up into smaller chapters, but there is a reason it is so long. 

More than anything else that happened in those years - and as we all remember, some pretty horrific stuff happened - the tenth chapter, the Neocat conspiracy to steal "The Yona Property," the four lots which made up what came to be the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, once the theft was outed, exposed the worst of the worst of the Neocat leadership and just how deep they had sunk their tentacles into various seats of power, from the local church, to the Vatican, and even into the Government of Guam.

In an April 4, 2016, post titled THE CONTINUING SAD DEMISE OF ONCE RESPECTED PEOPLE, I laid out a most perplexing drama. It's probably the least known drama in this whole sad story about what I euphemistically call "The Fall of the House of Apuron," and it is "least known" because this part of the story had only one protagonist, and the drama was fought mostly on paper, and eventually court filings, and not on the streets of Hagatna with crowds and big signs, as most of this fight was fought.

The lone protagonist was Robert "Bob" Klitzkie (may he rest in peace). And truly, it was a battle only Bob was equipped to fight, because it really needed not just a lawyer of Bob's caliber, but one committed to truth, not just expediency. 

And that was Bob. Moreover, Bob wasn't just going up against Apuron and the Neocats - the usual suspects- his fight on this matter took him into the ring with the then-Director of the Department of Land Management, the then-Attorney General, a mysterious "Counsel for the title holder," and ultimately before the bench in the Superior Court of Guam.

Bob's fight began on November 29, 2015, when he saw a doctored certificate of title for The Yona Property printed on the front page of the Umatuna, and it ended on February 27, 2017, when the Superior Court of Guam ruled in his favor. 

The fight involved thousands of words and hundreds of hours. I know, because I was by his side the whole time, not just as a supporter, but as someone - at the time - deeply caught up in the ugly lies relative to this stupid drama.

Apuron and the Neocats had publicly accused me of conspiring with a Chinese gambling interest to wrestle The Yona Property away from the church and turn the place into a casino. Really. That's what Apuron, at least through his proxies (since by then he was already in hiding), had said.

The aforesaid post of April 4, 2016, will provide a summary of most of the details regarding this terrible part of the story, and, of course, the book will expound on this matter in depth (even if it's boring). But for now, I just want to zero in on a piece of this drama that no one, not even Bob Klitzkie, has yet brought to light. 

To set the stage, here is a short summary of events:

Nov. 22, 2011.    Apuron quietly records a document with the Guam Department of Land Management titled "Declaration of Deed Restriction." He "quietly" records it because he does not have the required approval of the archdiocese finance council, and, due to the value of the property ($75 million), the approval of the Vatican. Apuron is also acting against his legal counsel, the late Edward Terlaje, who warned against filing the document. 

Jan. 11, 2012.    Apuron fires "en masse" four of the five members of the archdiocesan finance council for wanting to discuss the proposed transfer of The Yona Property to RMS, even though the four members have no idea that Apuron had already filed the papers two months earlier, on Nov. 22, 2011. The fifth member of the finance council, Msgr. David C. Quitugua, a Neocat, was part of the conspiracy to alienate the property to the Neocats (RMS). 

Jan. 06, 2015.    After many of Guam's Catholics become increasingly vocal about Neocat abuse and questions arise about The Yona Property, someone (I don't know who) anonymously sends me a copy of the secretly recorded Declaration of Deed of Restriction. I immediately publish it on JungleWatch.

This sets into motion a tumult of activity. The CCOG, recently formed, retains a Guam real estate attorney to analyze the language of the Deed and give an opinion. Apuron and the Neocats go crazy and run everywhere including to the Vatican and a Denver law firm (a weird story in itself) to try to refute the CCOG's claims, (and eventually the legal opinion) that the secretly recorded deed alienated, conveyed, transferred, deeded the property away from the Archdiocese of Agana and into the hands of the Neocat corporation, otherwise known as RMS, that Apuron had formed several years earlier.

Oct. 27, 2015.     After Apuron and the Neocats attempt to invoke the authority of the Vatican and a Denver law firm fails to shut down growing Catholic outrage over Apuron's secret property transfer, Apuron and the Neocats head to the Guam Department of Land Management and get the Deputy Registrar of Titles to produce a false certificate of title showing that Apuron is the owner of The Yona Property and that there is no other document affecting his interest in the title. 

Oct. 30, 2015.     The Deputy Registrar of Titles produces and signs the false certificates of title for the four lots which comprise The Yona Property. They are "false" because all four omit the critical "Declaration of Deed of Restriction" as recorded by Apuron on November 22, 2011. 

Whether the Deputy Registrar created the false certificates purposely for the benefit of Apuron and the Neocats, we don't know. We may never know. But whatever the reason, Apuron and the Neocats would live to regret ever thinking up this scheme, because THIS is what woke up Mr. Klitzkie. 

Klitzkie is on the move

Up to this point, Bob had been watching the pathetic drama (the Gofigan thing, the Benavente thing, the John Toves thing, etc.) in the Archdiocese of Agana unfold. He was concerned and often advised me on how to handle things, but he didn't see a way or a reason for him, a recent convert, to get involved. 

But being a lawyer, a pro-tem judge, and a former lawmaker, and an all-around truth-teller, the erroneous certificate of title, printed on the front page of the Umatuna on November 29, 2015, along with a strong statement (a lie) from the then-Vicar General, David C. Quitugua, that "this" proves the ownership of the "seminary property," was the spark that lit the fuse in Mr. Bob Klitzkie. 

The certificate of title, as printed on the front page of the Umatuna on November 29, 2015, was clearly "erroneous," as Klitzkie termed it in his Dec. 23, 2015, letter to Guam Department of Land Management Director Michael Borja, a letter in which Klitzkie also called the doctored title "the source of great mischief." 

In other words, Klitzkie believed that, especially in the midst of the then-stressful controversy over the secretly recorded Deed, the erroneous certificate printed in the Umatuna WAS NOT A MISTAKE, but was, in fact, "the source of great mischief." The certificate published in the Umatuna failed to display the recordation of the Declaration of Deed of Restriction, which was at the center of the entire controversy.

Bob was right. But he was up against a formidable foe: another lawyer, and a ruthless one...and a Neocat. We'll get to that.

You'll have to wait for the book for the whole da*n drama, but moving forward to the main point. 

Bob and Borja, the Director of Land Management, were on the same page...at first. Both the deed published in the Umatuna and its later handwritten correction were unacceptable, and, per Guam law, a correction or modification of a real property title required a judicial proceeding. In fact, the requirement for a judicial proceeding was the written opinion of the then-Attorney General herself, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson. 

Then, suddenly, everything changed. Borja went mum for several weeks, and after Bob tried to find out what was going on, he was informed that no judicial proceeding was necessary because the AG had "worked something out" with "Counsel for the title holder."

Bob smelled a rat. 

First, who was the "Counsel for the title holder?" The title holder was presumably Apuron, but who was his "Counsel?" 

The legal counsel for the Archdiocese of Agana was officially Attorney Edward Terlaje. But (Edward) Terlaje, pursuant to several written communications, was adamantly opposed to the transfer of The Yona Property to the Neocats (RMS). "Counsel for the title holder" could not be Ed Terlaje, so....WHO was it?

Bob Klitzkie gives us the answer. In his letter to Borja (Director of DLM) dated March 30, 2016, Klitzkie writes:

The way that the two of you sat, with straight faces, through several choruses of ‘I’ve got to sit down with Jackie, ‘ when responding to my question about filing, knowing that there was nothing to file, was the kind of performance not seen outside the confines of Hollywood!

Jackie! No surprise.

This post is already too long. So I'll get back to you with the next part asap.

LET'S SEE IF APURON AND THE NEOCATS TRY IT AGAIN

By Tim Rohr

The Guam Daily Post reported today that Apuron's personal attorney, Jacqueline Taitano Terlaje, has filed a motion to dismiss the remaining civil suit against Apuron.

Per the Post: "The case, first filed in the federal court in 2019, alleged Apuron sexually assaulted a student when he was a minor in the 1990s." And also: "The stipulation indicates plaintiffs’s attorney Charles McDonald had agreed for the case to be dismissed with prejudice."

There were a total of 10 cases filed against Apuron, personally, each alleging sexual assault. Last May, upon both parties' agreement, nine of them were dismissed with prejudice, meaning the decision to dismiss would be final, and the same claim(s) can not be made again. 

As readers may remember, the dismissals in May provided an occasion for Apuron to put on a little song-and-dance via video, claiming the dismissals proved his innocence. The Post article recalls Apuon's "song and dance" as follows:

“Over the past decade, I have been unjustly condemned by the media and in the public opinion because of certain false accusations made against me. In silence, I have accepted this injustice out of love for Jesus Christ, praying for those who were doing evil against me,” said Apuron who further called the dismissals “evidence” of his innocence.

Fortunately, in this article, the Post also recalls the backlash from the new archbishop, which, my sources tell me, involved Vatican input:

In response to those initial dismissals and Apuron’s message, Archbishop Ryan Jimenez, following consultation with the diocese’s legal counsel, stated the dismissals did not “operate as an adjudication about the merits of a particular case, but is a mechanism that allows parties to a particular civil case to mutually agree to end that legal matter."

Jimenez additionally highlighted Apuron was found guilty of committing abuse against minors.

"That determination was made following a canonical investigation and penal trial conducted by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith in Rome. The determination led to the former bishop losing his rank and duties as the leader of the Catholic Church on Guam, as well as perpetual prohibition preventing him from returning to Guam or presenting himself with the insignia attached to the rank of bishop," Jimenez wrote.

"Nothing about that determination has changed," Jimenez added.

Apuron's song-and-dance last May was obviously choreographed by his handlers, the usual suspects. While Archbishop Jimenez handled it well, especially by first seeking counsel from the right authorities, if nothing else, the brazenness of Apuron's performance should be an absolute warning to Jimenez of just how committed Apuron's Neocat handlers are to thwarting every authority, including his.

Let's see if Apuron and the Neocats try it again.

THE "THEY" ARE STILL HERE

By Tim Rohr

In a Pacific Daily News Article dated November 15, 2016, Apuron, via the words of Carmelite Mother Superior, Mother Dawn Marie, spilled the beans and confirmed something most of us knew: that Apuron wasn’t running the archdiocese, that “Pius and they” were pulling all the strings. 

The article was titled: “Nun: We did not want to lie for Apuron, Sammut over Yona seminary property.” The article was about a lie Mother Dawn Marie had caught Apuron in. And, instead of joining in on the lie with Apuron - as he expected her to do - Mother Dawn called a press conference and told the whole story. 

You can read the whole story here. I want to focus on these words:

“Why did you send that letter indicating that we had donated that property and allowing for the deed of restriction when you know it was not true? He reacted, he said, ‘I’m not the one who did it. Pius and they did it. They framed the letter,'” the Carmelite mother said.

• The "He" in "He reacted" is Apuron
• "Pius" is Fr. Pius Sammut (aka Pius the Putrid or The Stinking Monk)
• "They"... well that's the important part. Apuron and Pius are gone. The "They" are still here. 

Pay attention. "If you see something, say something." 

THIRTY FIVE MEEEELLIONS AND MEEEEELLIONS!!!

By Tim Rohr

In THE MANY NAMES OF RMS, Anonymous asked further questions about how much RMS actually cost to run. Coincidentally, I found the answer soon after Anonymous asked the question. 

The question was answered by the RMS Board of Directors on Oct. 11, 2016, in their response to the Visitation Report of RMS of Sep. 12, 2016:

"Subsidy from the Archdiocese to the RMS and the Theological Institute has been an average of only 5% of the total budget."

Given that the average subsidy from the Archdiocese was $105,543 per year and accounted for only 5% of the budget, the annual budget to run RMS was $2,110,086. RMS ran for 17 years. 

The cost: $35,871,472. 

THIRTY FIVE "meeeellions and meeeeellions." !!!

And how many priests did that give us?

CATECHISM BE DAMNED

By Tim Rohr

It's truly hard to keep up with - and make sense of - what continues to pour forth from the so-called "Archdiocese of Agana." I say "so-called" because most everything that is officially said on archdiocesan letterhead continues to be from no one in particular and, at most, is attributed to a Director of Communications, who, by virtue of his job, is simply posting whatever he is being told to post. So it appears we have NO ONE running this diocese. So very unprofessional. 

The most recent posting is this:

As you can see, this Aviso, like most others, is authored by no one, but is...

Sent by Tony C. Diaz, Archdiocese of Agana Director of Communications, (671) 562-0065,

tony.diaz@archagana.org

This is just bad form. WHO is writing these things? Archbishop Jimenez...is it you? Could you please say so? Thanks.

But on to some of the points in this missive.

The first point is as follows:

• First, the archbishop has appointed Ms. Connie Shinohara as Executive Secretary to the Archbishop. She will serve on a voluntary basis effective May 17, 2026.

Before proceeding, today, this exact date, came to mind (my mind). Ten years ago, to the day, May 17, 2016, the first formal "Apuron accuser" stepped out onto an Agana street and accused Archbishop Apuron of sexually molesting him when he was an altar boy in Agat in the 1970's. 

You know the rest of the story. Not a good date to bring up in the history of the Archdiocese of Agana, but then, what does Jimenez know (or care) about our history...since he, most probably, is just passing through, a stepping stone to the Vatican - at least that is what more and more people are beginning to suspect. 

In case Jimenez needs a history lesson, here is what happened on May 17, 2016: 

Former Agat resident says archbishop molested him 40 years ago

Upon seeing the announcement about the appointment of Ms. Shinohara, apparently an unpaid volunteer, no less (see the announcement), Anonymous weighed in:

Anonymous

May 7, 2026 at 4:27 PM

Tim I fear you are on the right path about Archbishop Jimenez. This new appointing of Connie Jo Shinohara is very telling. Did the church’s stance on games of chance change? I don’t think owning House of Liberty game rooms and being Executive Assistant to the Archbishop go hand in hand.

I want you to know my response. And I'll tell you why after I post it:

Tim

May 7, 2026  at 5:06 PM

LOL. I didn't know that. I have nothing against Mrs. Shinohara. In fact, I support gaming and gambling, albeit within the strictures of the Catechism of the Catholic Church Par. 2413. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that Jimenez doesn't have a clue.

I don't think anybody knows this, but I originally "cut my teeth" standing up to Apuron, not over his sex abuse of minors, not over his mistreatment of Fr. Paul and Msgr. James, not over his secret alienation of the Yona Property, but over his abuse of us normal Catholics in the pews back in the days when he was triumphantly trying to make a name for himself amongst the protestant clergy by being their hero in their anti-gambling crusade. 

It's too far back to remember all the details, but Apuron, maybe (in hindsight), to recruit allies wherever he could, given his fear of ever being exposed, as he would be on May 17, 2016, became his own White Knight in his crusade against a proposal to bring gaming back to Guam. 

Apuron's campaign was intense. It was also a lie. From the pulpit, he forced pastors to read his letters proclaiming that gambling was a mortal sin. 

The Catholic Church does not teach this. The Catholic Church has never taught this. Here is, pursuant to my reference to the Catechism, what the Catholic Church magisterially teaches regarding "games of chance:"

2413 Games of chance (card games, etc.) or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice. They become morally unacceptable when they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others. The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement. Unfair wagers and cheating at games constitute grave matter, unless the damage inflicted is so slight that the one who suffers it cannot reasonably consider it significant.

As anyone with a brain can see (you don't have to be Catholic), the Catholic Church, in the fullness of its wisdom, guided by the Holy Spirit, is ultimately pragmatic about "games of chance." But Apuron didn't care. The issue was making him a hero amongst the "born-agains." And since he was so openly despised by the majority of his own (for shamelessly raping their sons - as we would eventually learn), he used and abused his own by forcing his pastors, from the Sunday pulpits,  to make a new mortal sin out of gaming. 

I remember confronting one of these pastors with a copy of the Catechism opened to Paragraph 2413. He threw me out. No surprise. He was a Neocat. And Apuron, the Neocat rubber stamp, had to be protected at all costs. Catechism of the Catholic Church be damned. 

I'VE BEEN SHUT DOWN

By Tim Rohr

If you have been looking for me on Facebook or Instagram, my accounts have been shut down since the beginning of May. On May 4, I filed an appeal, but have heard nothing back despite several follow-ups. 

I can create a new account, but I want to wait a few more days. I've been on Facebook since 2009, have made over 40,000 posts, and have 1,600 friends. Additionally, I've created several groups and pages, which I manage. 

This sort of thing happens when someone files a complaint. It's happened before; however, my account was usually restored right away. Not this time. 

There are only two possibilities for the complaint: 1) My JungleWatch posts - specifically those about the NCW, which, as you can see from this blog, have been increasing in frequency and intensity as research for my book continues to unearth items I had forgotten about; and 2) my personal posts about parental alienation and parental estrangement. 

I can see why those posts would bother certain "readers." And I know people in both camps who want to silence me. 

We shall see what happens with Facebook. In the meantime, I would encourage you to check here on JungleWatch for updates, as well as my Substack.

Thank you for following. 17 Million page views and counting. 

THE RMS FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME

By Tim Rohr

In THE MANY NAMES OF RMS, I noted that one of the names was a fictitious business name: The Redemptoris Mater Archiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam. 

The fictitious business name, otherwise known as a "DBA" (Doing Business As), was filed with Rev and Tax on Feb. 25, 2004. 

The Visitation ad hoc Committee report of September 12, 2016, noted the following about the DBA (emphases added):

"Many of the faithful are speculating on why the RMHF and RMS felt a need to hide behind a fictitious name like “The Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary.” There is speculation that the reason is to justify receipt of subsidies from the Archdiocese of Agana, and/or to fulfill the stipulation of the donor who desired to support an Archdiocesan seminary." 

Here is the document:

PDF

THE MANY NAMES OF RMS...AND WHY

By Tim Rohr

RMS, the former Neocat “seminary,” which was at the center of so much controversy in the days of the “Fall of Apuron,” had several names:

The Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary Redemptoris Mater - Dec. 8, 1999. Decree, signed by Archbishop Apuron

The Redemptoris Mater Seminary, Archdiocese of Agana (RMS) - Nov. 27, 2002, Articles of Incorporation filed with the Government of Guam

The Redemptoris Mater House of Formation, Archdiocese of Agana (RMHF) - Nov. 27, 2002, Articles of Incorporation filed with the Government of Guam

The Redemptoris Mater Archiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam - Feb. 25, 2004. Certificate of fictitious business name (DBA) filed with the Guam Department of Revenue and Taxation

WHY?

Why the different names? In 2016, RMS "Inquisitors" attempted to answer that question. Here's what they said:

"Many of the faithful are speculating on why the RMHF and RMS felt a need to hide behind a fictitious name like “The Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary.” There is speculation that the reason is to justify receipt of subsidies from the Archdiocese of Agana, and/or to fulfill the stipulation of the donor who desired to support an Archdiocesan seminary." 

- Visitation ad hoc Committee Report, September 12, 2016, Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary Redemptoris Mater, Archdiocese of Agana, Guam, Pg. 7

However, I believe there is another reason for one of the names, and it's an indicator of what most of us knew all along. The name is "The Redemptoris Mater House of Formation, Archdiocese of Agana" (RMHF). 

Notice that Apuron incorporated TWO corporations on the same day (November 27, 2002) for the same entity: 1) The Redemptoris Mater Seminary, Archdiocese of Agana (RMS); and 2) The Redemptoris Mater House of Formation, Archdiocese of Agana (RMHF). 

From the aforesaid Visitation ad hoc Committee Report, Pg. 4:

"On November 27, 2002, the Archdiocese of Agana filed two separate Articles of Incorporation with the Department of Land Management, Government of Guam..." 

Now, why would he do that? 

You can Google it for yourself. There is a difference between a Seminary and a House of Formation:

Apuron (his Neocat handlers, actually) knew that if he openly called it a seminary, one day Rome would want to know if, in fact, it really was. It wasn't. It was never a seminary. A seminary, like an accredited college, must conform to established standards. RMS was never even close. 

According to the aforesaid Visitation Report, there are "Four Pillars of the Program for Priestly Formation:" 1) Human Formation; 2) Spiritual Formation; 3) Intellectual Formation; and 4) Pastoral Formation.

Here is what the Visitation Committee concluded about each:

1. Human Formation - The seminary seems to rely on a seminarian’s “walk” in the Neocatechumenal Way to be sufficient to meet the human formation criteria found in the PPF. (In other words, there was no program for formation in the "seminary" itself.) 

2. Spiritual Formation - There is a lack of integration into and appreciation of the broader Catholic community’s spiritual practices, such as the celebration of the sacraments outside of the neocatechumel liturgies and equitable support for other ecclesial charisms. 

3. Intellectual Formation - (The committee sets out 9 points. The following is a condensation.) 

• The seminary is dependent on visiting professors for many of the courses. 
• A structure of prerequisite course requirements for the appropriate sequencing of courses is lacking. 
• The seminary does not have a standard language of instruction. Proficiency in reading, writing, or speaking English for college-level work is not required. Translators are used. Some students and even professors struggle with English as their second language, potentially affecting comprehension of subject matter. 
• The Blessed Diego Theological Institute does not offer a U.S.-accredited bachelor’s degree, nor can seminarians earn a master’s degree through the institute. 
• There is a lack of consideration given to the educational diversity of the students. That is to say, distinction needs to be made between a high school graduate-seminarian versus a seminarian holding a college degree. 
• A liberal arts program of studies is lacking.

4. Pastoral Formation - The pastoral approach is predominantly shaped by the Neocatechumenal Way. New Evangelization” is understood narrowly in terms of the practices of the Neocatechumenal Way.

In other words, none of the four standards for priestly formation were being met at RMS because, in fact, it was never a seminary, and, at most, it was hardly even a "house of formation." 

However, given that Rome's standards for a "house of formation" were a lot looser, Apuron decided to create two legal entities: one, so he could cover himself to Rome (RMHF) and the other (RMS) because it would be easier to bilk money from us locals because of the word "seminary," and especially, as the Committee report pointed out, if it was called "Archdiocesan Seminary," which was its fictitious business name. 

So, how much money did Apuron and the Neocats' fictitious seminary cost us? Well, ultimately it would cost us mega-millions after the Apuron and the Neocats drove us into bankruptcy, but per the Committee Report relative to money raised for the fictitious seminary:

The average for these six years is $105,504.33 per year. And given that the report says we have been subsidizing Apuron and the Neocats' fictitious seminary since 1999 (17 years by 2016), the total could be estimated at $1,793,573.67. Nice. Very nice. 

While we are having to do bake sales, car washes, and take out expensive loans (from Apuron's favorite bank) to repair our broken down churches and schools, Apuron and the Neocats waltzed away with a cool TWO MILLION off our backs, making us think that we had, as the Neocats loved to call it: "A Seminary for Guam!" 

Once again, I must remind the reader. This isn't past history. This isn't old news. The Neocats are still here. And they are richer, more powerful, and more in control than ever, thanks to their new archbishop. (Emphasis on "their.")

One more thing

There's one more thing...a very important thing. I will copy this section from the Committee Report in full (Pgs. 12-13, emphases added):

Evaluation of candidates for Ordination

As with the Norms for the Admission of Candidates, the PPF clearly articulates a set of rigorous standards meant to guide seminaries as they develop and implement the policies and practices relative to seminarian evaluation in the Norms for the Continuing Evaluation of Seminarians (See PPF 273-289). These norms emphasize the importance of the ongoing assessment of each seminarian and advise that there be a number of opportunities for them to demonstrate their readiness to progress to the next stage in their formation. The PPF requires that individuals who are involved in the evaluation of seminarians are provided with clear criteria and expectations that they must follow to maintain a high level of rigor and quality.

Based on RMHF/RMS’s written description of the process used to evaluate seminarians, there seems to be little or no correlation between the Norms for the Continuing Evaluation of Seminarians as outlined in the PPF and their evaluation practice. The process for evaluation described by the RMHF/RMS lacks clear benchmarks of achievement, timelines and criteria for acceptable performance.

Furthermore, those charged with the informal and formal evaluation of seminarians seem to lack a prescribed framework for evaluation to help guide each of their processes. This lack of any formal evaluation structure may lend itself to inconsistent and subjective evaluation decisions that lack substance or any foundation grounded in what it means to be a well-rounded seminarian or those demonstrable characteristics required to progress to the next stage of formation.

A major consequence of an inadequate evaluation process calls into question the quality, accuracy and overall integrity of any evaluation decisions which subsequently may lead to the progression of candidates to ordination who are not ready and do not meet the standards and expectations articulated in the PPF, nor have the concurrence of the Faithful.

There you have it. For nearly 20 years, thanks to Apuron and the Neocats, we spent "meeeellions and meeeelions" (to quote a certain Neocat presbyter) to produce and ordain Neocat presbyters "who are not ready and do not meet the standards..." because they never cared about the standards. 

And they still don't.  

THE INQUISITION OF RMS

By Tim Rohr

Archbishop Savio Hon Tai Fai, the Vatican-appointed Apostolic Administrator who administered this archdiocese between the time Apuron ran away in May 2016 and the appointment of Bishop Michael Byrnes as coadjutor bishop in October 2016, made some big errors that cost him. But the one good thing he did while he was here was the ordering of an Inquisition on the Neocat's seminary, RMS. 

The church doesn't call it an Inquisition anymore. They call such investigations a "Visitation." Thus, we have:

Visitation ad hoc Committee Report

September 12, 2016

Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary Redemptoris Mater

Archdiocese of Agana, Guam

The full report can be accessed here. Of particular interest is what the "Inquisitors" reported on pages 6 and 7:

For the past several years, the “diocesan” identity of the RMHF and the RMS has been seriously challenged. There are four basic concerns regarding this matter:

1. A legal opinion by Attorney Jacques G. Bronze (see Appendix V) was presented to the Archdiocese of Agana and holds that the land which is currently being used by the RMHF and RMS is not owned by the Archdiocese of Agana. The Bronze study concludes: 

It is my opinion that based on Guam statutes governing interpretation of deeds and contracts, the property interest conveyed is an absolute conveyance of the entire fee simple title of the subject properties to RMHF, subject to a restraint in use.

This uncertainty of title is due to the Declaration of Deed Restriction issued on November 22, 2011. (See Appendix M) without the review of the Archdiocesan Finance Council nor approval from the Holy See, which is required if, in fact, the alienation of Archdiocesan property resulted from the Deed Restriction.

The clandestine nature of how the Deed Restriction was filed has driven the belief among the faithful that the “absolute conveyance” of the property was intentional. Furthermore, it made clear that the “Archbishop of Agana, Corporation Sole” on the one hand, is a separate legal entity from the 501(c)3 nonprofit RMHF and RMS, on the other.

2. The statutes of the RMS are specifically designed to form presbyters for the “New Evangelization” as understood by the Neocatechumenal Way. As a result the seminarians’ formation does not prioritize the importance of parish ministry, parish management and the general familiarity of the seminarians with parish life.

While the RMHF and the RMS is strictly Neocatechumenal in its formation program, it was canonically erected as “The Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary Redemptoris Mater” and legally operates under the fictitious name (dba) “Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary”, names which emphasize its affiliation with the Archdiocese of Agana but this is not substantiated in its program. While this may be interpreted as a lack of transparency, at best, the seminary’s harshest critics call it dishonest.

Many of the faithful are speculating on why the RMHF and RMS felt a need to hide behind a fictitious name like “The Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary.”

There is speculation that the reason is to justify receipt of subsidies from the Archdiocese of Agana and/or to fulfill the stipulation of the donor who desired to support an Archdiocesan seminary. 

 

NEOCAT HISTORY LESSONS CONTINUED

By Tim Rohr

Archbishop Jimenez, at least from his complete inaction on the Neocat problem, apparently believes in "can't we all just get along." So I'll be posting some history lessons for him so he knows what the Neocats have done and what they are still willing to do: lie, cheat, and steal. 

"…under Canon Law (canons 1290-1298) that in order for an archbishop to sell an archdiocesan property, he must first obtain the written consent of the Archdiocesan Finance Council, the College of Consulters, and the Vatican. Archbishop Apuron did not obtain our consent, let alone that of the College of Consulters and the Vatican, to transfer the Yona property to the RMS under a secretly recorded deed on November 22, 2011."

-FULL DOCUMENT from the former members of the Archdiocesan Finance Council who Apuron fired on Jan. 11, 2012.

BECAUSE JOHN'S CLAIMS WERE TRUE

By Tim Rohr

Readers of this blog will be seeing a lot of "old stuff," as I do the research for my upcoming book:

ORCHESTRATED

How a blog and the laity took down an archbishop and exposed the largest clergy sex abuse scandal, per capita, in the whole Catholic world. 

At least that's the working title for now.

A critical chapter in the book is devoted to John Toves, the first person to accuse Apuron of sexual abuse, not of himself, but of a relative, a close relative.

Why John chose to make his accusation in 2014 is a big part of the story, but you'll have to wait for the book to find out. Meanwhile, though, Toves never really had to prove his accusation. Apuron functionally admitted his guilt by doing the stupidest things in response. 

One of the "stupidest things" was hiring a law firm in California to threaten Toves:

The undersigned has been retained to represent the interests of Archbishop Anthony Apuron of Guam, particularly with respect to the defamatory conduct in which you have recently engaged. This letter serves as a demand to you to immediately cease and desist from making any further defamatory comments or publications against Archbishop Apuron's reputation and character. Your conduct has caused and continues to cause grave harm not only to Archbishop Apuron and the church in Guam but also to the universal Church. 

Your comments and published statements that Archbishop Apuron has engaged in unlawful conduct are patently false, and you have made these comments and published these statements with full knowledge of their falsity. Under California law, it is unlawful to engage in defamation of another's character and reputation, and your defamatory conduct subjects you to significant liability. 

Accordingly, we demand that you immediately cease and desist your unlawful defamation of Archbishop Apuron. If you do not comply with this demand, Archbishop Apuron will have to pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages for harm to his reputation and character, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and an order that you pay court costs and attorney's fees. Your liability and exposure under such legal action will be considerable. 

Sincerely, 

Michelle R Neal 

LINK to the PDF

The letterhead for Michelle R Neal's law firm read: "Employment Law Council," and her law firm was located in Sacramento, California. 

We have to wonder if Michelle R. Neal isn't a Neocat. What other reason would Apuron have to retain her to go after John? According to Neal's online bio, she is, in fact, an attorney specializing in employment law in California. 

Michelle R Neal, Lawyer in SACRAMENTO, California | Justia Lawyer Directory

Michelle R Neal is a legal professional specializing in employment law. She has been associated with Employment Law Counsel from 2013 to 2022 and is currently employed by Employment Law Counsel, LLP. Her practice includes areas such as wage and hour issues, independent contractor status, federal and state family leave laws, sexual and other prohibited harassment, personnel policies, preventative employment practices, and wage audits and claims. 

Not only did Neal have no qualifications to threaten John regarding his claims about Apuron, but she also lacked jurisdiction in Guam. Apuron had his own attorney, the late Edward Terlaje. Why didn't Apuron use Terlaje to threaten John? I know why. Terlaje knew John's claims were true. 

By the way, John did not "cease and desist." 

FROM 2013

Finding interesting stuff from a while ago:

TimNovember 21, 2013 at 5:59 AM

The "missing episode" is not missing. It will soon be released. This is why the Archbishop has tried to silence me. It is not because of what I have posted, but what I have not YET posted.

LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT HEARING OF DVR

By Tim Rohr

On Thursday, April 30, 2026, Senator Shelly V. Calvo held an Oversight hearing for the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR). 

Following is a copy of the Agenda:

1. How many Government Departments or Agencies has DVR enlisted for training of Clients?
2. How many Private Sector employers has DVR enlisted for training of Clients?
3. How many Clients has DVR interviewed and how many have been refereed for training with GovGuam Departments or Agencies?  Any suggestions to make this process more responsive to the needs of clients?
4. How many Clients has DVR interviewed and how many have been refereed for training with the Private sector?  Any suggestions to making this process more responsive to the needs of clients?
5. Does DVR need more Human Resources to assist with the delivery of service to their Clients?
6. Describe the purpose(s) for the Federal funds allotted to DVR?  How can DVR further meet the purpose for the use of funds so we could minimize the return of unused funds? 
7. Any suggestions to make DVR more responsive to their Client’s needs and to needs of GovGuam Departments or Agencies and Private sector employers? 

A recording of the full hearing can be found here: https://youtu.be/m2x5LfWy5_U

There were two parents at the hearing, myself and Katherine Duenas.

• Ms. Duenas' testimony is here: 
• https://youtu.be/m2x5LfWy5_U?si=2mo1F_rJ133RNWPf&t=9107
• My testimony is here: 
• https://youtu.be/m2x5LfWy5_U?si=Qt-nBFxuxtvB5k_h&t=9983

Written testimony may still be submitted up to 5 days after the date of the hearing (April 30) to officeofsenatorshellycalvo@guamlegislature.gov.  

MORE QUESTIONS FOR ARCHBISHOP JIMENEZ: IS HE OR ISN'T HE?

By Tim Rohr

Upon being found guilty by a Vatican Tribunal in March 2018 "of certain of the accusations," Apuron appealed the verdict. 

He lost. 

On April 4, 2019, then-Archbishop Michael Byrnes announced: "Rome upholds guilty finding against now Bishop Apuron."

And this time, the Vatican made it clear what Apuron had been found guilty of: 

"...the Tribunal of Second Instance upheld the sentence of First Instance, finding the Archbishop guilty of delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors."

The Sentence:

"...the privation of office; the perpetual prohibition from dwelling, even temporarily, in the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese ofAgaña; and the perpetual prohibition from using the insignia attached to the rank of Bishop."

However, Archbishop Byrnes had some questions for Rome, questions that are still unanswered:

"Byrnes said he would be seeking clarification from the Vatican, including whether Apuron can still lead Mass, ordain priests, or be buried on Guam when he dies."

Maybe Archbishop Byrnes did receive the clarification. If he did, he didn't tell us. So it's now on Archbishop Jimenez to tell us. 

And there is another thing, an important thing. The title of Archbishop Byrnes' April 5, 2019, press release was: 

"Rome upholds guilty finding against now Bishop Apuron."

At the ensuing press conference, the news reported:

The Vatican said the penalties imposed on Apuron are: "the privation of office; the perpetual prohibition from the dwelling, even temporarily, in the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Agana; and the perpetual prohibition from using the insignia attached to the rank of Bishop."

Byrnes said this means Apuron no longer holds the title of archbishop of Agana and, correspondingly, no longer has a title of archbishop. "Neither can he use the insignia of a bishop, including ring and mitre," Byrnes said.

Apuron, however, wasn’t defrocked or laicizied. Byrnes said as he understands it, Apuron went from being an archbishop to bishop, but is prohibited from doing certain bishop duties or wearing certain insignia of a bishop. -emphases added

However, at Catholic-Hierarchy.org, Apuron is shown as Archbishop Emeritus of Agana.

This is a problem. And we need Archbishop Jimenez to clarify. Is Apuron still an Archbishop? And, is he Archbishop Emeritus of Agana? 

Emeritus" is a title normally reserved for a person who has retired honorably from office. As we know, and as the above table shows, Apuron was REMOVED from office on April 4, 2019, and REMOVED in disgrace. 

I have seen this webpage many times over the years, and I do not recall seeing the last line indicating that Apuron is "Archbishop Emeritus of Agana." It appears to be a recent addition. And, as many others and I have learned over the years, when things are "fishy," the Neocats aren't far away.

So, how about it, Archbishop Jimenez? Is Apuron "Archbishop Emeritus of Agana," or not?

TESTIMONY OF TIM ROHR TO CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE

By Tim Rohr

In February 2017, Cardinal Raymond Burke was sent to Guam by Pope Francis to investigate the sexual abuse allegations against then-Archbishop Anthony Apuron. He did not ask to meet with me. There was no reason to. 

Being a good investigator and the top lawyer in the Vatican, Burke only scheduled meetings with primary witnesses, persons with firsthand experiences and knowledge, such as the men who had personally accused Apuron of sexually molesting them in their teens, and former members of the archdiocesan finance council who were fired by Apuron for questioning his transfer of the Yona Property to the Neocats.

Though I did not have firsthand knowledge of the matters Cardinal Burke was investigating, I had something no one else did: THE WHOLE STORY. Because I was the "blogger," I had documented, cataloged, and memorialized, in writing, for the whole world to read, all the events which led to Burke's being sent to Guam.

I don't know if my testimony helped, but in the end, the Vatican, on the basis of Burke's investigation, found Apuron guilty, and, upon Apuron's appeal, he was found guilty again by the Pope himself. 

My testimony to Cardinal Burke is a summary of all the events that led to the collapse of the Apuron regime. Forgive the necessary redactions.

LINK to PDF

EX-NEOCAT SPEAKS

By Tim Rohr

One good thing about writing this book (ORCHESTRATED) is that all the research is turning up some gems that are worth revisiting, including this testimony from an ex-Neocat.

 

LINK to PDF

DO YOU SEE THE PROBLEM?

By Tim Rohr

To date, my post HOW DOES A NEOCAT PRIEST PERSONALLY GUARANTEE AN $800,000 LOAN?, posted on April 19, 2026, has received 547 views and 8 comments, including this one from Rodney:

RodneyApril 20, 2026 at 3:12 PM

Under Canon 285 §4, a priest is strictly forbidden from acting as a financial guarantor for a loan, without his Ordinary’s consultation. The Bishop’s refusal to address this violation suggests one of two things: either he authorized this breach of clerical discipline, or he is complicit in it.

Let's take a look at Canon 285 in full:

Can. 285 §1. Clerics are to refrain completely from all those things which are unbecoming to their state, according to the prescripts of particular law.

§2. Clerics are to avoid those things which, although not unbecoming, are nevertheless foreign to the clerical state.

§3. Clerics are forbidden to assume public offices which entail a participation in the exercise of civil power.

§4. Without the permission of their ordinary, they are not to take on the management of goods belonging to lay persons or secular offices which entail an obligation of rendering accounts. They are prohibited from giving surety even with their own goods without consultation with their proper ordinary. They also are to refrain from signing promissory notes, namely, those through which they assume an obligation to make payment on demand. - emphasis added.

Pursuant to the documents I set forth in HOW DOES A NEOCAT PRIEST...?, which linked to the original questions in QUESTIONS FOR THE ARCHBISHOP (714 views), Fr. Jose Alberto Rodriguez Salamanca (his full name) is a member of the Board of Guarantors for the Neocat corporation Rainan I Langet Foundation, Inc., which, at the time in 2021, owed $800,000 on a mortgage:

Pursuant to Canon 285 §4, "Clerics...are prohibited from giving surety even with their own goods without consultation with their proper ordinary." No canon lawyer is needed to interpret this. Bottom line is: if the bishop says it's okay, then it's okay, but if not, then it's a violation of church law, and the Ordinary, the bishop, is required to do something about it.

To be fair, Jimenez wasn't the Ordinary in 2021. However, he is the Ordinary now. And, as far as I know, there is no documentation showing that Salamanca has been removed from the Board of Guarantors. If the Neocats have such a document, they are welcome to provide it, and I'll happily publish it.  

Meanwhile, it would only take a single sentence from Archbishop Jimenez, newly elevated to the Vatican Dicastery for Communications, to say whether or not Salamanca is still a Guarantor or not. And, it's not like he doesn't have time to address it. 

Just yesterday, there was news that Jimenez gave a speech in some far-off town in Australia, telling his audience that Sinlaku was evidence of climate change and that "we need to really reflect and find our own little ways to save our common home."

If Jimenez can find time to fly off to Australia and talk about climate change, then he can find time to tell us about Salamanca. My bet is that he won't. 

Meanwhile, this isn't the first time Salamanca's name has been found attached to the nefarious inner workings of surreptitious Neocat operations. Salamanca is one of two Archdiocese of Agana officials who signed the infamous DECLARATION OF DEED RESTRICTION, conveying the mega-million-dollar Yona Property into the control of the Neocats. The other signature was Archbishop Apuron's.

LINK to full document

Just to be clear that we are talking about the same Fr. Jose Alberto Rodriguez Salamanca. Here is his full name as it appears today on the archdiocesan website:

As you may recall, the aforesaid DECLARATION, which bears Salamanca's signature, once we discovered it, was one of the major things that brought down the House of Apuron. I say "once we discovered it, because Apuron secretly executed it and recorded it in violation of canon law, which required the transfer of this mega-asset to first have the approval of the archdiocesan finance council.

This amazing story will make up a large part of my upcoming book, Orchestrated. In fact, I am in the middle of writing the chapter on this mess, which is why I came across Salamanca's name on the DECLARATION just now. 

The story of this secret conveyance of our Church's largest material asset is amazing. In January 2012, Apuron fired 4 of the 5 members of the archdiocesan finance council. He fired them because they wanted to discuss the "proposed" transfer of the Yona Property to RMS. I will tell you why I put "proposed" in quotes after I copy a portion of the news story about the firing:

Former AFC members Benavente, Untalan, Joseph Rivera, and Sister Mary Stephen Torres replied to the archbishop on Jan. 16, 2012, after receiving letters of termination on Jan. 11 the same year. The letter said they believe their termination was not due to the expiration of their fixed term that Apuron alluded to.

Apuron’s termination letter said the member’s term of appointment had expired and “that it is time for me to engage new members in the council.” Apuron’s letter cited the five­ year fixed term that each member is allotted.

However, one member, Sister Mary Stephen Torres, was one of the founding members of the AFC over 26 years ago, and all other members served for over five years prior to their termination.

In a letter to Balvo, Untalan explained that the former members then agreed that their expired terms could not be the reason for their termination. Instead, they concluded that their unanimous decision to deny the transfer, conveyance, or assignment of the title of Yoña property to the Redemptoris Mater Seminary led Apuron to terminate them from the council.

“There was no transition to break in the new members and no continuity with the past. It was quick, unexpected, sharp, abrupt, and startling,” Untalan wrote.

The property in question is currently under the name of the Guam archbishop and will be under the name of Apuron’s successors.

- Stole, J. (2014, Aug. 02) Finance council axed years ago for questioning Apuron. Marianas Variety 

Notice the date of the Letter of Termination to each of the terminated members of the finance council: January 11, 2012. Now notice the date stamped on the DECLARATION OF DEED RESTRICTION, the date the DECLARATION was recorded with the Department of Land Management:

LINK to full document

The date of the recording of the DECLARATION is November 22, 2011. The date Apuron fired the finance council is January 11, 2012. The finance council, other than Msgr. David C. Quitugua, a Neocat and a member of the finance council, was attempting to set up a meeting to discuss what they thought was still a PROPOSAL by Apuron to assign the property to RMS. 

Instead of saying, "Sorry guys, I already dun it. Too bad, so sad," Apuron tries to hide what he did by firing the people who were canonically constituted to review and approve or disapprove such a proposal. 

Just amazing. 

Ancient history, you say? Nope. Salamanca is still showing up. And just like he showed up in 2011 on the infamous DEED, he showed up again in 2021 as described above. He also showed up at the Easter Vigil in Asan, his parish, standing behind Luis Camacho, who took the stage, front and center. 

Do you see the problem? 

BTW, wasn't he the guy who moved the altar that fell through the floor at the Agat church?

OUR DUTY OF DISCERNMENT, WAS NEVER AN EASY THING TO START, AND CERTAINLY TO ACHIEVE

 (BY FRENCHIE)        

Ever since I reached what is commonly known as the age of reason, I have been haunted by the concept of discernment. Something every Catholic is supposed to thrive for, but that few even attempt to face, or even understand.

Later in life, when I became uneasily conscious about the concept of evil, and how it is an essential determining factor in the saving of our own souls, I started devouring Catholic books on dogma, the concept of right and wrong, of justified wars and many other lofty concepts. I went through the writing of what we term the Doctors of the Church, only to come out of all these well-developed theories and doctrines even more confused and conflicted. 

As a teenager, I had, like most boys a crisis of identity, mixed with stages of rebellion and rejection of all what my system of education tried to help me with. Luckily my thirst for knowledge, and my love of history, gave me a window of opportunity, to overcome this early hurdle that is often a high mountain to climb for many young persons.

It is an accidental encounter with an aging missionary who spent most of his Sacerdote in Africa, evangelizing but also being an exorcist which gave me that opened window, which would eventually take years to fully open. 

The difficulty in developing a personal relationship with God, is accepting to surrender to his will, and accept that most of our lives are a struggle against evil and temptations that surround us on all sides. how many times have we heard or read " do not fear, I am with you" without really grasping its meaning, and of course the consequences on our lives.

I feel lucky to have been born pre-Vatican II, it gave me a different outlook of what happened post-Vatican II. By the time Vatican II ukases were disseminated, I was already a teenager.   My historical studies of the French Revolution, what preceded it and the role of British Masonic lodges in facilitating, organizing, and manipulating events, (not unlike the color revolutions put in place by our alphabet soup intelligence agencies) as so many trojan horses in Catholic French society, also gave me an insight about the constant attacks against the Catholic Church at large, since well before the Reformed movement. There is a constant, a thread, a how-to method to these attacks. They are all demonic in nature and spread through lies, innuendos and false benign alighting theories.

While the USA has not been witnessing, murder, imprisonment, religious cleansing, or genocide, it has been the scene of strong opposition from the White Anglo Saxon Protestant elites from the Northeast as well as violent and murderous actions by the Klan in the post-civil war era, against what they termed Papist followers. It was only over 60 years ago that a large campaign of whispers targeted the Kennedy Brothers, before they were both murdered.

Recently, at the occasion of the conflict between Israel and Iran, in which we foolishly decided to take side, we have witnessed a massive current of anti-Catholicism rearing its ugly head, once more. Key Senators like Cruz from Texas, or Gramm from South Carolina have resorted to the old Klan tactics of denigrating the Catholic faith. The President himself launched open attacks against Pope Leo for opposing what St Augustine of Hippo described as an unjust war. While the Vice President fell into a trap of having to defend his faith by attacking the messenger.

These Talmudic, Masonic old tactics go back centuries, and they target a division between the faithful. Good conservative Catholic who still have not made their mind on Pope Leo, as well as the usual opposition of Popes within the Church have taken that opportunity to deepen the divide, while anti-religious leftists have come to the defense of a Pope they perceive wrongly as a societal warrior. Both sides are wrong, and they demonstrate a lack of discernment that is obvious and very sad.

We should all pray, to get rid of our own respective prides, and surrender to Christ teachings, by trusting in him. While we are at it, we should also pray for the protection of the remaining Christians in the Levant, who are under coordinated attacks by evil forces, of the usual source.

MEEEELLION AND MEEEELLIONS

By Tim Rohr

I still smile whenever I think of the word "millions." At a meeting between then-Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Martin Krebs, and the clergy of this archdiocese in July 2014, one of the Neocat priests, in a thick European accent, I believe it was Italian, criticized the people of Guam for spending "meeeellions and meeeellions" on food. 

I received a copy of a secret recording of the meeting and published a summary of what was said. Here is the part about the "meeeellions and meeeellions."

Fr. Francesco (don't know his last name), a bona-fide Kiko, then lays into the people of Guam saying that our culture is the problem, that we spend too much on funerals, that we spend "meeeellions and meeellions" of dollars on food, that all our time is spent cooking, and that Guam has to change. 

(The crowd falls silent. This was bad. Fr. Francesco just spilled the beans. For this is what all the Kiko's think about everyone who is not a Neo. It is we who have to change. The do not have to change. They are truth and light. We are darkness and wrong. "Judases", they call us. And we spend all our time COOKING!!!!) 

My publishing of the summary of the meeting led to one of the first explosions to rock the Apuron-Neocat regime, the outing of Fr. John Wadeson, but that's another story, and a story I get quite deep into in my upcoming book: ORCHESTRATED. 

Today, the "meeeellions and meeeellions" thing came to mind when I saw that JungleWatch has passed 17 million views. I didn't recall being that close a few days ago, so I thought I'd take a look at the stats to see what was going on. 

We had been humming along for months at 150,000 to 250,000 views per month. However, in this month, which is not over yet, we have had more than half a million views: 574,687.

So, of course, I wondered what people are reading. Here are the top posts for the last 30 days:

All of those posts are from many years ago, a decade or more - except the last two. The last two are where "Lucio from Italy" decided to engage. So Lucio makes the list. 

I had another smile when I saw this because I had told Lucio, who was getting meaner and nastier in his defense of the Neo's and his attempt to discredit me, that we were grateful for people like him, because, like Diana, their nasty comments drove up our page views, giving the world a better look at who these people are. 

So thank you, Lucio, again, for helping us reach "meeeellions and meeeellions." Hope you come back soon. BTW, you suddenly went silent when Sinlaku hit Saipan.