Ten Things to Know About SOCHI RUSSIA:

1. Sochi is the largest resort region of the Russian Federation. It stretches for 147 km along the Black Sea coast of the Krasnodar region and includes the Krasnaya Polyana mountain resort area.

2. Sochi is divided into four administrative districts: Adler, Khosta, Central and Lazarevsky, and it borders the Georgian Republic in the south.

3. On the map, Sochi can be found on the same latitude with Toronto, Nice and the Gobi desert. As its charming landscapes and scenery are so reminiscent of the Mediterranean, Sochi is often referred to as the "Russian Riviera".

4. As Sochi is situated between the Caucasian Mountains and the Black Sea, it enjoys the most northern subtropical climate on earth. As a result, its Krasnaya Polyana mountains have great snow conditions and are largely protected from the wind. These unique conditions cannot be found anywhere else in Europe.

5. Mount Elbrus (5,642 m) in the Russian Caucasus is considered the highest mountain in Europe. Mont Blanc in comparison is 4,810 m. The average height of the Caucasus mountains around Sochi are 2,000m.

6. The climate in Sochi is subtropical and the city usually has 200 sunny days a year. The average summer temperature is +26° C and -3° C in the winter. You can swim in the sea from April until October, and go skiing from October through May.

7. There are no large industrial facilities in the Sochi area, so the air quality, especially in Sochi's Krasnaya Polyana area, is considered among the very best in the world.

8. Sochi is a city with more then 400,000 inhabitants representing over 100 nationalities. Over Two million tourists visit Sochi annually and with over 250 spa facilities in the area, health and leisure tourism are the city's leading sources of economy.

9. Sochi has over 200,000 hectares of forests, 4,000 of which are within Sochi Centre. Sochi encompasses several specially protected natural zones: the Caucasian National Biosphere Reserve, Sochi National Park, the Russian Federation National Wildlife Sanctuary, and over 30 botanical gardens and parks and nature sanctuaries housing over 30,000 wild-life plant species.

10. The Sochi tennis school became the launching pad for the careers of many Russian tennis stars, including Maria Sharapova and Yevgeny Kafelnikov. The snow depth in the mountains averages above two meters, with low levels of fog. The temperatures average below zero Centigrade, but it is never extremely cold. Sochi offers the unprecedented combination of alpine and Mediterranean climates within a 50 kilometre radius.

“Sochi 2014 is a technically excellent Bid that centres on the needs of athletes and would be a dream come true to compete in. I’ve already been extremely fortunate to enjoy incredible moments at the Olympics, but Sochi 2014 would be Russia’s first ever Winter Games, despite being the world’s largest winter sports nation. It will provide an incredible opportunity to showcase the 'new Russia' to the world and encourage further positive change, while also inspiring millions of youngsters to take up winter sports, for the good of the Olympic Movement.” Evgeny Dementiev, Ambassador to Sochi 2014

For more information on this beautiful city: http://sochi2014.com/

The Queen

“The Queen,” an intimate, revealing and often humorous portrait of the British royal family in crisis immediately following the death of Princess Diana, stars Helen Mirren as Queen Elizabeth II, James Cromwell as Prince Phillip and Michael Sheen as Tony Blair. The film is written by award-winner Peter Morgan and is produced by Andy Harries, Christine Langan and Tracey Seaward, and executive produced by Francois Ivernel, Cameron McCracken and Scott Rudin.

Everybody has a different "truth", colored by their own perception and experience. Almost everyone is a "legend" in their own mind. I encourage Mike Newson and others who either want to respond to Pallasart's (Bob Atchison) "Miz Thang" or are involved to keep on writing the truth as "they" know it or as "they" experienced it.

However, I believe that as a writer on any level-- professional, casual, occasional blogger, etc.-- the moment we write something about someone else we take on an enormous responsibility. From hurting others' feelings to hurting our own reputation because of how a reader perceives what we have written, we are obligated to deal with the consequences. Once the words are out there we cannot take them back, there are no "do-overs," and when I read snarky blogs like Oma Hamou Reality I think the authors didn't consider that.

This isn't about wanting people to like you. This is about talking shit-- true or not-- and standing behind what you've written. Are you man or woman enough to either do that or back down with grace, or will you just exist in your own bubble of superiority and say to hell with everyone else?

It's a dangerous dance, because you have to ask yourself if you're willing to live with the results, like destroying family Christmas, being ridiculed in public, or simply knowing you hurt someone else simply out of your necessity to be "right." Fabulous. Important. Famous. Are those things THAT vital? All of those ego-filled conditions? Because they are fleeting, trust me, and in a city like Los Angeles or even Austin, Texas it helps to be aware of that fact.

The Alexander Palace Obsession Blog

On AA Legends Mike Newson posted:

The Principle of Reversal.

What is Reversal? It is based on the fact that we see in others what we really are inside. (Excepting for those of us who are trained/educated in the ability to understand this principle which is something that I have strived to do in many of the articles that I have written of the war of words that exists between Oma Hamou and Bob/Pallasart. And even then when running under our autopilot -- sometimes called a knee-jerk-reaction -- we tend to revert back to this way of thinking of others.)

Lets say that you have three friends and see in your friend “John Doe” that he feels that he is caring and tender and concerned and he worries about another friend “Jane”, and is always trying to help her and is involved in her life in a friendly and loving way? What does that say about who John is inside? On the other hand given the same situation, you see that a friend “Jill” feels John a butt-in-ski who is interfering with your friend Jane’s life and a huge gossip because John constantly talk about Jane’s problems? And Jill makes fun of Jane’s situation and calls her names like “Totally Blonde” and makes up jokes about her? Same situation, but what does it “tell you” about the various persons (John and Jill) and who they are inside?

Now certainly we all have times that we deviate from this concept as our training and life experiences kick in or out, but when you look at the total pattern over time of what someone sees in others and how their behavior towards others will paint a picture of that person inside and who they really are, and how they might turn on you if you ever give them reason (if it is a negative trait you see in them) or how they might help you and offer you friendship and/or filial love.

Lets look at another model of seeing inside others:

Quoted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

The Big Five factors and their constituent traits can be summarized as follows

Openness to Experience - Appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas; imagination and curiosity.

Conscientiousness - A tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement (spontaneousness vs planned behaviour).

Extraversion - Energy, surgency, and the tendency to seek stimulation and the company of others.

Agreeableness - A tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others (individualism vs cooperative solutions).

Neuroticism - A tendency to easily experience unpleasant emotions such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability (emotional stability to stimuli).

Lets look at these in a bit more detail

Extraversion

Extraversion (also "extroversion") is marked by pronounced engagement with the external world. Extraverts enjoy being with people, are full of energy, and often experience positive emotions. They tend to be enthusiastic, action-oriented individuals who are likely to say "Yes!" or "Let's go!" to opportunities for excitement. In groups they like to talk, assert themselves, and draw attention to themselves.

Introverts lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extraverts. They tend to be quiet, low-key, deliberate, and less dependent on the social world. Their lack of social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression; the introvert simply needs less stimulation than an extravert and more time alone to re-charge their batteries.

Sample Extraversion Items

· I am the life of the party.
· I don't mind being the center of attention.
· I feel comfortable around people.
· I start conversations.
· I talk to a lot of different people at parties.
· I am quiet around strangers. (reversed)
· I don't like to draw attention to myself. (reversed)
· I don't talk a lot. (reversed)
· I have little to say. (reversed)
· I keep in the background. (reversed)

Agreeableness

Agreeableness reflects individual differences in concern with cooperation and social harmony. Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They are therefore considerate, friendly, generous, helpful, and willing to compromise their interests with others’. Agreeable people also have an optimistic view of human nature. They believe people are basically honest, decent, and trustworthy.

Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally unconcerned with others’ well-being, and therefore are unlikely to extend themselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others’ motives causes them to be suspicious, unfriendly, and uncooperative.

Agreeableness is obviously advantageous for attaining and maintaining popularity. Agreeable people are better liked than disagreeable people. On the other hand, agreeableness is not useful in situations that require tough or absolute objective decisions. Disagreeable people can make excellent scientists, critics, or soldiers.

There is some criticism on the use of the terms altruism-egoism in this context. Evolutionary Biology has extensively researched the mechanisms of altruism and concluded that agreeableness differs fundamentally from altruism.

Sample Agreeableness Items

· I am interested in people.
· I feel others’ emotions.
· I have a soft heart.
· I make people feel at ease.
· I sympathize with others’ feelings.
· I take time out for others.
· I am not interested in other people’s problems. (reversed)
· I am not really interested in others. (reversed)
· I feel little concern for others. (reversed)
· I insult people. (reversed)

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness concerns the way in which we control, regulate, and direct our impulses. Impulses are not inherently bad; occasionally time constraints require a snap decision, and acting on our first impulse can be an effective response. Also, in times of play rather than work, acting spontaneously and impulsively can be fun. Impulsive individuals can be seen by others as colorful, fun-to-be-with, and zany. Conscientiousness includes the factor known as Need for Achievement (NAch).

The benefits of high conscientiousness are obvious. Conscientious individuals avoid trouble and achieve high levels of success through purposeful planning and persistence. They are also positively regarded by others as intelligent and reliable. On the negative side, they can be compulsive perfectionists and workaholics. Furthermore, extremely conscientious individuals might be regarded as stuffy and boring. Unconscientious people may be criticized for their unreliability, lack of ambition, and failure to stay within the lines, but they will experience many short-lived pleasures and they will never be called stuffy (i.e. dull, boring, unimaginative).

Sample Conscientiousness Items

· I am always prepared.
· I am exacting in my work.
· I follow a schedule.
· I get chores done right away.
· I like order.
· I pay attention to details.
· I leave my belongings around. (reversed)
· I make a mess of things. (reversed)
· I often forget to put things back in their proper place. (reversed)
· I shirk my duties. (reversed)

Neuroticism or (inversely) Emotional Stability

Neuroticism refers to the tendency to experience negative feelings. Those who score high on Neuroticism may experience primarily one specific negative feeling such as anxiety, anger, or depression, but are likely to experience several of these emotions. People high in Neuroticism are emotionally reactive. They respond emotionally to events that would not affect most people, and their reactions tend to be more intense than normal. They are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening, and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. Their negative emotional reactions tend to persist for unusually long periods of time, which means they are often in a bad mood. These problems in emotional regulation can diminish a neurotic's ability to think clearly, make decisions, and cope effectively with stress.
At the other end of the scale, individuals who score low in Neuroticism are less easily upset and are less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionally stable, and free from persistent negative feelings. Freedom from negative feelings does not mean that low scorers experience a lot of positive feelings; frequency of positive emotions is a component of the Extraversion domain.

Sample Neuroticism Items

· I am easily disturbed.
· I change my mood a lot.
· I get irritated easily.
· I get stressed out easily.
· I get upset easily.
· I have frequent mood swings.
· I often feel blue.
· I worry about things.
· I am relaxed most of the time. (reversed)
· I seldom feel blue. (reversed)

Openness to Experience

Openness to Experience describes a dimension of personality that distinguishes imaginative, creative people from down-to-earth, conventional people. Open people are intellectually curious, appreciative of art, and sensitive to beauty. They tend to be, compared to closed people, more aware of their feelings. They therefore tend to hold unconventional and individualistic beliefs, although their actions may be conforming (see agreeableness). People with low scores on openness to experience tend to have narrow, common interests. They prefer the plain, straightforward, and obvious over the complex, ambiguous, and subtle. They may regard the arts and sciences with suspicion, regarding these endeavors as abstruse or of no practical use. Closed people prefer familiarity over novelty; they are conservative and resistant to change.

Sample Openness Items

· I am full of ideas.
· I am quick to understand things.
· I have a rich vocabulary.
· I have a vivid imagination.
· I have excellent ideas.
· I spend time reflecting on things.
· I use difficult words.
· I am not interested in abstract ideas. (reversed)
· I do not have a good imagination. (reversed)
· I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (reversed)

There are other models that allow one to see inside their personality such as the four factor D.I.S.C. model which in a nutshell evaluates personality based on these four areas:

Dominance: People who are high in the intensity of the 'D' styles factor are very active in dealing with problems and challenges, while low D’s are people who want to do more research before committing to a decision. High "D" people are described as demanding, forceful, egocentric, strong willed, driving, determined, ambitious, aggressive, and pioneering. Low D scores describe those who are conservative, low keyed, cooperative, calculating, undemanding, cautious, mild, agreeable, modest and peaceful.

Influence: People who are High in the “I” area influence others through talking and activity and tend to be emotional. They are described as convincing, magnetic, political, enthusiastic, persuasive, warm, demonstrative, trusting, and optimistic. Those with Low “I” are influenced more by data and facts, and not with feelings. They are described as reflective, factual, calculating, skeptical, logical, suspicious, matter of fact, pessimistic, and critical.

Steadiness: People with High “S” styles want a steady pace, security, and don't like sudden change. Low “S” intensity are those who like change and variety. High “S” persons are calm, relaxed, patient, possessive, predictable, deliberate, stable, consistent, and tend to be unemotional and poker faced. People with Low S scores are described as restless, demonstrative, impatient, eager, or even impulsive.

Conscientiousness: Persons with High “C” styles adhere to rules, regulations, and structure. They like to do quality work and do it right the first time. High “C” people are careful, cautious, exacting, neat, systematic, diplomatic, accurate, tactful. Those with Low “C” styles challenge the rules and want independence and are described as self-willed, stubborn, opinionated, unsystematic, arbitrary, and careless with details.

Why this Psychology lesson?

Because education is the only way we can go beyond our life experiences and modify the way we see the world and those around us. Remember the saying of “They see the world through Rose Colored glasses?“ Well this is because we do perceive things through the filter of our life experiences and we judge others because of what we see inside ourselves. In 90% of all cases when you read what someone else has to say about someone or thing you can reverse this to see inside the author.

The main points are that when someone says/writes that someone else “is” whatever --- then they are showing you the inside of their soul, but when someone says look at what so and so is “doing” then they are in the logical or analytical mode of thought and are showing you what their education is rather than what they are inside. When you see how someone “reacts” (typically short knee-jerk comments) to a situation you are seeing inside of their soul, when you see how they “respond” (typically more analytical and in depth explanations) to a situation you are seeing their education and experience.

There is always some crossing over, but if you have enough material you can use the long term patterns to see inside of the authors. Typically emotionally laden words are keys to look inside someone, when they continually point out things that they see in others then typically you are seeing what they themselves have done or would do in the same situation.

But the main reason I write what I do is to give you the knowledge and insight to understand the methods of propaganda and to properly evaluate what is being said by both sides in the Oma vs Bob War-of-Words. When you read/re-read what has been written by both sides look at what they say the other side “is.” Look at how they see the other side. Do they tell you “WHO” the other person/side IS? Or do they show you what the other side is “DOING?”

Which side typically uses emotionally laden speech, and which one logic? Which one tells you what to believe and which one leads to you question the whole situation and to ask yourself questions?

Simply put is easier to allow someone else to tell you how and what to think, than to become educated and decide for yourself. To follow the facts and make your own conclusions is much harder than accepting someone else’s conclusions…

That is I challenge you to think for yourself and evaluate what you see inside the different parties. It is time to ask yourself “why?”

Why do I post where my comments can be challenged? And when Sandman copies them to his blog, which he has almost always done, does he allow comments? Yet while the Hate-Oma blog ASKS questions they DENY the ability to answer them, and when the answers have been given and they do not match what the other wants them to be they ignore the answers?

Why do they attack the person and not the facts? Why do they tell you who I am, and who Oma IS? Yet on the other hand why do I tell you what they are “doing?” Which one respects you as a reader and allows you to form your own conclusions and asks you to think for your self?

Think it Through, and ask your self --- WHY?

Even more, ask your self what do I see inside the various authors in this war of words.

Which one is using propaganda and which one education?

Which one is believable and trust worthy and honestly wants you to know the facts, leaving the conclusions up to you and which one is trying to control your mind?

Today on AA Legends Mike Newson posted:

As I have said over and over again, the truth is found in the patterns…

If you do read the hate-Oma Hamou’s-group blog, notice the pattern of how horrible a person I am, (notice that hardly a paragraph goes by without them slandering me) as if by denigrating me as a person that they can change the facts that I point out. Instead what is accomplished in the eye of those whose mind is open and educated about propaganda techniques is a reversal, and one can use what they say to see into the heart and soul of the writer. Try it, take what was said about the “other” person, reverse it and use it to then see inside the person who wrote “whatever” about the “other” and see if you don’t see “that” (whatever “that” may be) inside the writer as a continuing pattern of who they really are inside.

Look at the patterns, I have used education and logic to point out the fallacies in the emotionally laden attacks against Oma Hamou and anyone associated with Oma. While on the other side they have used personal attacks, libel and slander to discredit. (Look up what constitutes a hate crime.) So which method sounds like the honorable approach? Which one respects the reader? Which approach do you feel is the most likely to be telling you the truth?

Now compare the new pattern of “look” Bob Atchison’s site is linked to in the “Official” Russian Ministry of Culture site, see they think “BOB” is wonderful, yet “their” own words say that it is an independent site? (So which is it? Is it the “official” ministry of culture site or is it an independent site? Is it saying that Bob personally is wonderful, or is it saying that Bob’s “site” is a great site…?) and then compare this with what happened when Oma Hamou published a very nice letter from the US state department to her?

Remember how “they” called and wrote to the State department and said that Oma was using the letter to scam the public? Now some people have written the Russian Ministry of Culture simply asking, is this an endorsement of Bob Atchison personally? Or just the logical linking in of a site that has very good material that relates to Russia?

The answer was plain, NO it was not a personal endorsement of Bob Atchison. That is a link from a site is not an endorsement of any person, nor is the lack of link a sign that any one person is not worth of endorsement. That Oma Hamou does not have links from sites such as this only says that her site is about Oma and Oma’s dreams and hopes for the future (i.e., her projects or rather hoped for projects that were destroyed by Bob’s actions), rather than a collection of history, and as such there is no competition --- other than in “their” minds.

Also notice the continuing and constant pattern of what Rob Moshein said about me on “Legends” and what that Blog says about me… Notice the resumption of the use of OMA-SLASH as in “Oma/Psycho Lover Mike” or “Nice try cheatin husband lover Oma Mouthpiece aka sandman Mike Newson” As in --- here we go again, everyone who supports Oma IS Oma! The truth is found in the continuing patterns…

After some rational thought, and remembering all that I have attempted to teach about the techniques of propaganda, what do you feel deep in your heart is the truth?

This morning on AA Legends Mike Newson published...
Update!

QUOTE OHR BLOG: "...So just WHY does the official website for the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation's Russian Museum Database LINK to Bob Atchison's "Alexander Palace" website (www.alexanderpalace.org/palace) as the "OFFICIAL" website for the Alexander Palace itself? ...Lest we be accused of lying about this by psycho Mike Newson, here is the exact link www.museum.ru/M119 so you can check it out yourself..."

Here is an excerpt of one of several letters received from "officials" there in Russia concerning Bob Atchison and His Alexander Palace Time Machine...

"...Bob Atchison's web site Alexander Palace Time Machine is not official web site for Alexander Palace nor does HE represent the palace in any official capacity. Bob has no relationship with the Alexander Palace... Ministry of culture is a huge organization… I think in real there is no relations between Bob and Ministry at all...I don't know why the editor (www.museum.ru) decide to add this website as additional information (Bob Atchison's Alexander Palace Time Machine) a notice has been sent... Official web site for Alexander Palace: www.tzar.ru..."

With all these lies, one understands it may be hard to keep track. So, let's recap: http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2006/12/why-doesnt-bob-atchison-just-cut-crap.html

Justin Edwards posted on OmaHamou.com:

BOB ATCHISON'S STATEMENT ON THE ALEXANDER PALACE TIME MACHINE:

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON February 09, 2004, 09:58:20 AM:

I first went in the palace in the 1970's - a Russian friend of mine and I just walked in the front door. There's a small vestibule there with a guard station. They seemed shocked to see me. My Russian friend said we wanted to see the rooms of the palace. We were taken upstairs and there was a small window in a wall, no bigger than a CD case, they looked at us and told us all the rooms were destroyed and nothing survived. They also told my Russian friend something that scared him because he grabbed me and we left the building as fast as we could. My first impressions were on that first entry that the vestibule (leading to the semi-circular hall) was very small. You could see carved cornices and there was a beautiful door leading into the hall. Someone had opened the door when we were there and I could barely see chairs and the curved apse in the far side of the hall facing the garden. The inside of the hallways were very dirty because it was winter and you could "smell the plumbing". I tried to take in everything I could since we were only there 10 minutes or so. I knew it wasn't true that all the interiors had been detroyed because of the cornice. That was my fisrt trip inside. Later I went back a number of times and was always thrown out - that seems to be the story of my life with the palace!

In the early 90's I was lucky to be one of the first two Americans to tour the palace - that's decribed in "The Boy Who Dreamed of the Palace". I went back five times after that. Maybe I'll write more about those trips later.

THE INCIDENT INVOLVING THE HISTORICAL ARTIFACT

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON April 26, 2004, 09:48:07 AM

Kuchumov didn't have any historic color photographs of the palace that I saw - all of them were back and white. In the early 90's I was shown color glass negatives of pictures taken of the Alexander and Catherine Palaces by Larissa Bardovskaya of the Catherine Palace. This were really amazing. There were incredible pictures of the rooms of Catherine the Great's wonderful suite at the CP and pictures of the Maple Room (in very bad condition), The Billiard Hall and the Pallisander Room. There were one of each. The private rooms were rather bare as everything had been put away when the pictures were taken. They told me that these were taken in 1917 during the inventory of the palace. I don't know if these were the same images you mentioned as I didn't see the exhibition or a catalog. Do you have pictures?

As a side note, this curator, Madame Bardovskaya, had new color transparency copies of these glass slides they had made. She asked me to take two of these copies to show a publisher she had met to ask him if she could do a book on the color pictures. Innocently I said yes and promised to return them to her on my next trip. She asked me not to tell anyone as 'her boss' didn't know yet about her book project.

When I came back a month later she wasn't there - she was out of the country so I couldn't return them to her personally as she had asked. I had one of my assistants there attempt to deliver them back a number of times, but she was never in the museum.

Later I was informed that she was telling 'her boss' that I had stolen them. It was a huge lie and obviously a cover-up of her own activities. This became a big controversy for me and I was dragged into a nasty situation. I learned a big lesson about trust and museum politics from this. I have to say I was very naive about what really goes on in museums. I always thought of these two palaces as shrines - I could never imagine anyone associated with the Alexander Palace could ever have anything but the purest motives. I was wrong.
Later I found out that this same curator had secretly attacked members of the WMF and American curators of touring Russian Museum shows I knew - any foreigner involved with the palace. This was the tip of an iceberg of controversies she was involved in. I don't know why she did these horrible things to me and others. The only thing I can figure is that she told me she wanted to be curator of the Alexander Palace and thought tearing other people apart would somehow help her get this position. It seems crazy doesn't it.

I think this can be a lesson for all of us who love the palace and the family. For many of us this is a 'pure and noble effort' that comes from our hearts. Not everyone else shares this view and many peiople might think us nuts. Whenever there is money or power involved it can bring out the worst in people. I have met a few people who have used the Alexander Palace from very bad motives - many people have been stung by them! So I just say, be careful. There are many kind and gracious people at the palaces - dedicated professionals who are paid almost nothing for their work. It is terrible that a couple of 'bad apples' can spoil so much good!
Bob always plays the victim role. It's never his fault always someone else's!

JUSTIN EDWARDS CLAIMS THIS STATEMENT IS IN RELATION TO WORK ENIGMA PAID BUT DIDN'T RECEIVE FROM ATCHISON'S COMPANY PALLASART WEB VENTURES, INC.

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON April 25, 2004, 05:16:20 PM

Here is a picture of a rosewood screen made for the Pallisander Room. In it are inserted watercolors of homes associated with Alix in Darmstadt. The bronze on the stand is by I. Peterson and shows Nicholas II.

I did a series of close-ups of the furniture in several of the rooms of the Empress for a possible restoration a few years ago. The numbers come from spreadsheet I did to come up with the cost of remaking these.

JUSTIN EDWARDS CLAIMS ATCHISON'S SNIDE REMARKS ARE ABOUT HAMOU

THE FEDORVSKY CATHEDRAL

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON April 29, 2004, 08:55:00 AM

I was lucky to see it when it was a total wreck. Seeing it in that condition helps one to appreciate how far the Russians have come in restoring the church.

In the 80's there was no floor in the church, holes in the roof, signs of fires, graffiti and garbage everywhere. It looked like a devils lair and made tears come to one's eyes. Here was one of the great monuments of Russian art and architecture lying in ruins before you. When you looked up into the dome and saw the rooks flying in and out of the shattered windows it was fair to wonder if the Cathedral's fate was to simply crumble into the ground through further neglect.

One of the advantages the building had is that is was constructed at the beginning of the 20th century and the foundations were solid and firm, otherwise it would probably had collapsed into dust long before.

This ruin was evidence of so much hate for art, religion, Russia, the Romanovs... the scarred remains of the cathedral were a monument to evil and destruction. When you drove from Leningrad to Pushkin the hulking black mass of the church loomed like a ghost on the right of the road - a reminder of the past and all the bad things that had happened here.

Back in the 80's nobody thought the Feodorovsky would be restored in our lifetime - if anything was done the facade might be renewed, but the dream that it might be a working church again - well that seemed impossible.

So much as changed since then.....

Thanks to God, the people of Tsarskoe Selo and the clergy of the church a 'resurrection' has happened. Little money has meant much has had to be done on a shoestring budget and volunteers did much of the work. In the midst of all this goodness unscrupulous people - even criminals - who wanted to defraud the church and use the sobor for their own venal purposes appeared. They descended upon the church like 'sheep in wolves clothing', but they were stopped! People sometimess laugh about the 'babushkas' of the sobor, but their eagle eyes could spot these people a mile off!

So the struggle and the resurrection continues - thanks to Antonio we will soon have some beautiful new pictures to see what the Russians have accomplished....

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON May 01, 2004, 10:27:29 AM

Isn't it true, Joanna? It really gives you hope to see what the people and clergy of the church have done. Imagine how they felt when they started the project - just look at what they had to begin with!

At the first there was a Russian Romanov organization involved - they were so brave to do it when communism was still in power. These people did a lot - they sponsored conferences, raised money, published articles and the like.

Now that the restoration is a success there are bound to be people who will try to take credit for it. In the days of the Internet anybody can claim to be anything they want, with Photoshop you can turn an ugly duckling into a swan. You can invent any history you want and publish it. You can create you own phony fan club and try and turn yourself into a star. So be careful, if anyone asks for money for the cathedral or the palace check them out completely before getting involved. Ask them if they are a real charity in good standing (ask them for many references), see if they have a criminal record, or legal judgments against them.

THE "KUCHUMOV PHOTOGRAPHS" HAMOU CLAIMS SHE PAID BUT NEVER RECEIVED

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON May 02, 2004, 07:15:57 PM

Thanks everyone for mentioning Kuchumov and talking about him. If he were here he would be so pleased to know he had friends like us around the world - maybe he knows that wherever he is now.

He never lived to see the reopening of the rooms of the palace, but he know the decision had been made.

I promised him he would see the Mauve Room restored in his lifetime the last time I saw him and he cried. It tore me up inside. He tried to hold on and worked even harder on the research we were doing. Maybe it was some consolation to him that some of his vast knowledge was passing on through me, Rifat and a few others of our core group around him. Had God given him two or three more years....

I know he died with hope for the future but he was also bitter about the helplessness of his body and how poor he was - he was so worried about who would pay for his funeral and have decent clothes to be buried in. He was also bitter because he had been ostracized by many of the museum people. He still had a great relationship with Pavlovsk and the Director, Yuri Mudrov and many of the curators from Pavlovsk would come and see him in his tiny apartment.

His last months were very hard, Rifat was with him - he stayed with him and took care of him.

Kuchumov wanted me to take his photo albums to America - he had around a hundred pictures of the AP that he had saved. No one wanted these - only he did and he preserved them with the hopes they would be used to restore the rooms of the AP. He was afarid that after he died people would come in and take the photos and destroy all of his research. There were rumors that he had treasures from the AP - even Faberge - in his rooms and there were thieves and greedy people who wanted to grab his things as soon as he took his last breath.

Kuchumov also asked me to take fragments of cloth and other things he had for safe keeping. I just could not do this, I thought all of these things should stay in Russia. I went to the Russian Museum and they agreed to scan all of the photographs so they would be saved. A copy of these scans were kept in safe-keeping by them and another set was given to me. In addition, Kuchumov had the pictures copied on slides and gave me a set. I had these duplicated and gave them back to him. Our agreement was that I could use these pictures anyway I wanted to help the restoration, Kuchumov and I were going to do a book on the AP and he gave me a complete outline of how were going to do it. We were well along on it when he passed on.

When the Internet happened I decided to put the pictures on the net so that as many people as possible could see them hoping that this wouold help promote the restoration.

Indeed, when Kuchumov died his things vanished for a while and then they resurfaced in a number of museums. If he hadn't given me the pictures none of this would have happened and only a small percentage of people would ever have seen them.

Kuchumov also gave me a small piece of fabric from the Mauve Room and two small ikons. One was of paper that he had been given in Pskov and the other was a brass ikon that he said had been with him for many, many years. I have no idea where it came from. It was of the Feodorovsky Mother of God. He told me that these ikons had been his spiritual support through many dark days, he then told me about the bad things that had happened in his life.

He lived for the Alexander Palace, it was what kept him going - trying to save the things he had and the pictures. I suppose he must have seen me as a God-send to help, Rifat as well.

When I think of how much he knew about the palace, I mean he was there practically everyday for years and years, I feel rather ashamed at how little I know. His passing is a horrible loss but we all have to do what we can to carry the torch for him.

Mike Newson wrote on AA Legends:

On January 21, 2006 on Pallasart’s “Alexander Palace Time Machine” Forum, the Forum Administrator posted this statement:

Dear Oscarwilde;

That scurrillous website (and frankly I'm sceptical about how you "found" it, since it does not appear in search engines) is essentially all slander and fiction, including a supposed memo which was faked. Mr. Atchison was hired as a historical consultant by someone who failed to live up to their contractual agreement (and who it turned out was a three time convicted felon for crimes of fraud and who owes almost $1 million in judgments to many other people). As a result he filed a lawsuit against them, which went to a jury trial, and he won the lawsuit. The defendant in the suit attempted to discredit Mr. Atchison by means of this same libel and slander to attempt somehow to force him to drop his lawsuit or perhaps as some sort of weird revenge. We ingore this garbage, as that is all it is - most especially considering the source...It appears that this new website is somehow linked to the loser of the lawsuit, as it is all the same old stuff, obviously just "sour grapes" from a poor loser who does not want to pay the judgement and who is now in contempt of court and now subject to jail time in Texas for failing to pay sactions levied by the Court for their abuse of the legal process in the lawsuit.Please rest assured that Anatoly Kotchumov considered Mr. Atchison as a second son. The set of photographs he gave Bob was a duplicate copy set of the originals which are still at the AP, and the duplicates were Kotchumov's personal property. He never took anything from the palace. Bob was single handedly responsible for the American Express dontation to the palace for the new roof. Many many people in Tsarskoe Selo consider Bob a close personal friend. Disregard that scurrilous website.

See: http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit072.pdf

While the number of items that this statement (above) that could be analyzed are many. It is most interesting to note that after finding and looking at the website in question http://www.bobatchison.co.uk/. (It seems that the European author hot linked his web site to Oma Hamou's personal web site a few main points come to mind. The memo that appears to bother Pallasart and its associate is one which was a document that Bob Atchison himself gave to the courts during the discovery process of Oma's lawsuit with him. So either the documents are legitimate as Bob represented them to be or he deliberately lied to the courts.

See: http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit072.pdf & http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit073.pdf & http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit074.pdf

The documents described in either Bob Atchison or Rob Moshein’s post on Pallasart’s, Alexander Palace Time Machine Forum concerns Oma's lawsuit with them and Bob Atchison’s Response. Example, the Memo to John Stubbs by Bob Atchison dated July 2, 1997 was a document Mr. Atchison produced in accordance to the request of line 1 of http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit098.pdf The same goes to the document concerning Mr. Kuchumov the former director of the Alexander Palace in Russia line 21 of http://www.omahamou.com/pdf/affidavit/exhibit098.pdf The documents featured on http://www.bobatchison.co.uk/ are the same documents described above. Both documents, the Bob Atchison Memo to a Mr. Stubbs and the Kuchumov document were documents that HE (and I do mean Robert {Bob} Atchison) through his attorney submitted in the discovery process. These two specific documents are BATE STAMPED or SEQUENTIAL PAGE NUMBER RANGE (Yes the word is Bate not Date, go ask Texas as I don’t know why, --- and look in the bottom right corner? Notice the P for Plaintiff? Meaning that Bob supplied this information to the courts?) if these documents are faked as the Forum Administrator of the Alexander Palace Time Machine states then Bob Atchison himself "faked" it or the statement that the FA made was simply an attempt to direct the focus elsewhere.

I think I have brought up the rules behind the “Big Lie” malaprop propaganda technique?

If you are unaware of this please read more about the method at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie

However, given the number of times that documents that were introduced on Legends were claimed by “Them” to be fakes or fraud, well it seems that such intent is a part of “their” mindset. It would seem that in the heart of Bob Atchison he never thought that the Police or anyone else would ever back Oma to the point of providing her with not only reports but notes and such on what was told to them. Or that he ever thought that various comments would ever be gathered in one location so that people could compare what was said at different times and places. Sure it was not simple to wade through all the exhibits to verify for yourself what was said in those court exhibits and that indeed at different times and places different things were said by Bob Atchison. One has to understand the fierce desire to keep the public from learning the truth and seeing with their own eyes the disparate statements. This is not in accordance with even the most rudimentary concepts behind the “Big Lie,” The Big Lie only works when people are denied the facts, and or are lead in such a manner that they never exert the effort to discover them for themselves.

BOB ATCHISON CLAIMS TO KNOW WITH CERTAINITY WHAT WORK WAS COMMISSONED BY ENIGMA

QUOTE BOB ATCHISON Semi-Circular Hall May 18, 2004, 09:53:45 AM

Despite claims that the walls between the Semi-circular Hall and the Portrait and Billiard Halls have been removed, it has been reported by someone who was recently in the hall that these walls are still there.

These barriers were erected when the palace was used by the Baltic Fleet. They really ruin the perspective of these halls, which, in any case, are still closed to the public. In the last few years I am told the only work done in the Semi-circular Hall has been to collect and cart away some scrap metal. The fabric of these rooms remain much as they were in 1917 - you can still see the hole cut into the back of the wall for the projector system put in for the Imperial Family. The beautiful red glass and gilt bronze chandeliers were saved. One is in the Roman Catholic Church of Tsarskoe Selo. These chandeliers are most likely original to the palace - but were expanded with more candles during the reign of Nicholas I.

I have pictures of these rooms from after the war - without any parquet floors, furnishings or chandeliers - they are quite impressive in their austerity.

QUOTE OHR BLOG: What specific contractual obligations did Oma Hamou make with the State Museum of Tsarskoe Selo and exactly which did she fulfill? Why did she make these contractual obligations if she was NOT in a postion to fulfill them when made?

No, it's not our duty to tell you what the contracts read, you made the statement so be prepared to provide "the" proof and “specific” information contained in Enigma’s (not Ms. Hamou) contract with the State Museum Preserve which would reflect Enigma has not honored it’s commitments to this organization. I do have access to some of Enigma's files via the ones that have been uploaded on the web ( a dedicated site) at one time or another for attorneys in Russia or here in the U.S.

Mike Newson wrote on AA Legends:

In previous posts I've said Bob/Rob have claimed from day one to law enforcement (Bob's statements to the police) Oma and her company Enigma failed to live up to its obligations in its contracts concerning the Alexander Palace. Who made them the LANDLORD of the Alexander Palace sitting inside the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation?


Certainly not the Government of the Russian Federation more precisely, it's President Vladimir Putin.

O.k. getting back to Pallasart's Oma Hamou Reality Blog, I've answered their question with a question. Tell all, specifically which "obligation" that's mentioned (and there are several) in those different contracts (Moscow and Pushkin) has Enigma not lived up too?

The obvious answer is they don't know because NO ONE who is a party to those contracts you know like the government of Russia or Dr. Ivan Petrovich Sautov, himself has spoken to ANYONE, period.

At the very least people know that NO ENIGMA HAS NOT FILMED INSIDE OF THE ALEXANDER PALACE but it did contribute money, money that it can produce in the form of a receipt that shows it paid for works it commissioned inside of that palace.

So the million dollar question is why didn't Enigma film "As A Matter of Honour" inside of the Alexander Palace and do the things speifically outlined in those different contracts?

QUOTE OHR BLOG: What specific contractual obligations did Oma Hamou make with the State Museum of Tsarskoe Selo and exactly which did she fulfill? Why did she make these contractual obligations if she was NOT in a postion to fulfill them when made?

Mike Newson wrote: Could it be because of what Bob Atchison and Pallasart did against Oma, Enigma and Sarskaia because they were consumed with jealously?

Could those telephone calls, faxes, emails and such that Bob Atchison sent out to government people, financial institutions and everyone else and via Pallasart's web site, the "Alexander Palace Time Machine" saying Oma had no projects in Russia, was a fugitive on the run, scammed a priest, is a con artist, don't believe her and so on - could any of this impacted or impeded Enigma's projects?

Here are 2 pages from a contract that has Dr. Sautov's signature on it (remember there are several contracts regarding the Alexander Palace and Enigma so I don't know which one "They" are talking about.) Notice the term used "Force Majeure" I wonder if what Bob Atchison/Pallasart did to Enigma if "It" falls under that category?

NOTE: I am posting these images without permission from Enigma or Oma Hamou...

QUOTE OHR BLOG: WHY does Dr. Sautov's office at the State Museum of Tsarskoe Selo trash all of Oma Hamou's correspondence unread and officially disavow any relationship with her?

Mike Newson: That's funny, as I heard Oma talked with Dr. Sautov via his cell phone *laughing*

www.EkspoMusic.com

Update

For the record I'm not Mike Newson or Oma Hamou. Penny Wilson was not Oma Hamou. Anastasia Davis was not Oma Hamou. And the countless others who have been vilified as being Oma Hamou are not. The only persons who've been proven in court documentation that frequently uses aliases are Bob Atchison and Rob Moshein. Some of us believe in the past, Rob & Bob have used aliases on the ATR site such as “Susan” and other names when they wanted to bash Penny & Greg’s work on "Fate of the Romanovs." And "rumor" has some individuals who are well known “authors/historians" and such have already spoken to law enforcement about Bob Atchison and Rob Moshein because most believe Bob Atchison and friends committed real crimes against Oma Hamou. We are real people who got together a long time ago when Rob and other members of the Alexander Palace Time Machine Forum decided to hi-jack our "nice" history forum (AA Legends).

ATTENTION: The APO BLOG's "Legal" Disclaimer says:

"...The Alexander Palace Obsession site publishes both rumors and conjecture, in addition to accurately reported information. Information on this site may contain errors or inaccuracies; the sites' proprietor does not make any warranty as to the correctness or reliability of the sites' content. Links to content on and quotation of material from other sites are not the responsibility of the Alexander Palace Obsession...

Those who want to send a nice little letter to the Russian Ministry of Culture asking whether it endorses Bob Atchison the "man" or his web site on Russian history, the Alexander Palace Time Machine can do so at:

Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation

Address: 7, Kitaigorodsky proyezd, 103074, Moscow, Russia
Tel.: (095) 925-1195
Fax: (095) 921-62-72, 925-09-66

e-mail: root@mincult.msk.ru & mcult.libinf@ru.net

QUOTE OHR BLOG: "...claims that this Bob Atchison fellow is not welcome by Dr. Sautov and is hated by the entire museum as an alleged "criminal"..."

APO BLOG: If you read the trial transcripts and other court related documents which have been uploaded onto Hamou’s web site you would walk away with the same impression, Bob Atchison admits he is not welcomed inside of the Alexander Palace. This information comes as nothing new as Bob himself has mentioned it on his Alexander Palace Time Machine Forum, the ATR site and numerous correspondences which "all in all" makes what Mike Newson wrote true.

According to Mike Newson the below Memo was made part of Hamou’s previous lawsuit with Pallasart/Atchison clearly shows the Director of the Alexander Palace disdain for Bob Atchison. There is no reason for any of us to doubt Mike Newson.

QUOTE OHR BLOG: "...So just WHY does the official website for the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation's Russian Museum Database LINK to Bob Atchison's "Alexander Palace" ..."

APO BLOG: This is entirely a play on words, WatchTower is no longer talking about the Alexander Palace and the museum staff/director of this "palace" but does a switch-a-roo and boldly proclaims the Russian Ministry of Culture endorses Bob Atchison’s Alexander Palace Time Machine. I'm sure neither the Russian Network of Cultural Heritage or the Russian Ministry of Culture endorses Bob Atchison as an individual but merely provide a link to his site because of its educational value.

The Alexander Palace Obsession Blog

Today on AA Legends Mike Newson wrote:

QUOTE OHR BLOG: “...thru her cheatin' boyfriend lover psycho Mike Newson claims that this Bob Atchison fellow is not welcome by Dr. Sautov and is hated by the entire museum as an alleged "criminal", according to them. So just WHY does the official website for the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation's Russian Museum Database LINK to Bob Atchison's "Alexander Palace" website (www.alexanderpalace.org/palace) as the "OFFICIAL" website for the Alexander Palace itself? Further, if Oma Hamou is "so close" to the museum and Russian Government, why are there NO LINKS AT ALL to any of her websites? Lest we be accused of lying about this by psycho Mike Newson, here is the exact link http://omahamoureality.blogspot.com/www.museum.ru/M119 so you can check it out yourself..."

I had a good laugh when I read this insert to the December Blog…

The official website for the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation is: http://www.russianculture.ru/defengl.asp

The statement about the website that is quoted on the OHR Blog as serving as some sort of official database to the Russian government is false and misleading (anyone surprised???) At the bottom of the page of the link provided it says: "...At full or partial use of materials the active reference to " Museums of Russia " is obligatory. Write to us mail@museum.ru Copyright (c) 1996-2007 Russian network of a cultural heritage. The electronic edition "Cultural heritage". It is registered in the Ministry of Press on July, 6th 2001г. Эл. N77-4675. ISSN 1684-9574..>"

So much for “official” Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation recognition of Bob Atchison, as to Bob not being welcome in the palace? Bob Atchison admitted himself (in the court transcripts) that he is not welcomed inside of the Alexander Palace so what is “your” point other than your repeated attempts to discredit Oma Hamou? (Remember the prime definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.)

The link which OHR Blog provides does have a link to the Alexander Palace dot org site, Bob Atchison’s site, because of its online information concerning the “Tsarist Village (Fedorovsky Gorodok) and the Alexander Palace” lots of other web sites have links – so what?

Besides we have long said that the Alexander Palace dot org site is an excellent source of information. One just has to be aware of the propensities of the authors and the sites commercial purposes, and as such “Buyer Beware.” But the massive source of information itself is excellent. I have never said otherwise. I mean even the Encyclopedia Britannica has links to that site. So again what is the point?

A link does not mean much of anything, let alone prove that Bob Atchison personally is in good graces with the Alexander Palace, while his own sworn statement to the court says that he is not.

The government of the Russia Federation has NOT linked Bob Atchison’s site to theirs. It is as if to say to unsuspecting readers who do believe that the site link provided by OMA HAMOU REALITY BLOG is really an official government site that “if” the government of Russia considers Bob Atchison legitimate by doing something such as providing a link to Atchison’s Alexander Palace Time Machine then the rest of us should just overlook what Bob’s done to Oma and to the staff over at the Alexander Palace. You know things like telling everyone that Dr. Sautov actually skimmed $100,000 from the American Express donation to the Palace’s roof or stealing a historical artifact and taking it back to the US and when you get caught blame it on a staff member who you claim is a lying bitch --- words similar to what “they” have called Oma or published on the web. That “they” and their internet club (the Alexander Palace Association) sent untold fortunes to the Alexander Palace during the 10 year interim only in court, in the face of written documentation from the Russian government, admitted that “they” didn’t do all that they’ve claimed they did all these years.

But I did “like” the recent updates on Oma Hamou Reality Blog because it goes to prove what we’ve always said, and that is that Bob Atchison is so jealous, JEALOUS of Oma Hamou. The latest question is posed as if the two were competitors, yet there is no competition, AlexanderPalace.org is about Russian History, Oma Hamou’s is about Oma and her dreams to make a movie, the only competition is in the minds of those who attack her. Again look at the continuing pattern, that is where you will find the truth, notice who attacks and who defends, notice the form of the response, who is logical and refutes the so called “facts” that “prove” how bad Oma Hamouis, and who attacks the “person” --- as if the use of libel to attack with destroys the facts present by the person who presented the facts, kind of like killing the messenger…

Oma Hamou's company, Enigma was asked to participate in a historical Summit --- no one asked Bob Atchison or his Internet Web Club the Alexander Palace Association (in court transcripts he claims doesn’t exist) to attend. Enigma and Sarskaia had real projects while on the other hand, Bob Atchison made statements on the web that if one sends him money he would be certain that it would go to the Alexander Palace --- but did it? (Check what Bob said in court about this…) Oma was on the Russian television, newspapers etc about her projects in Russia and had the support of the Russian government. I should also point out “again” Bob Atchison is the one who inserted himself into Oma’s company’s projects by claiming in court documents for one that she had slandered him in the Russian press yet he couldn’t produce one shred of document that backed this claim up furthermore he laid claim that he knew just exactly what ENIGMA was doing and had done when in fact he knew nothing. Another interesting note, Bob sent a letter (many) to the one of these Government officials for some rural city there in Russia and claimed that Oma was a con artist had no projects etc, but when the official learned from his higher up’s that Bob was considered a genuine “kook” they tossed what Bob sent them by fax to the garbage.

Bob Atchison and friends have literally destroyed Oma’s and Enigma’s project. As to her friendship with Dr. Sautov or any other government official or Church official that really is none of Bob’s business or anyone else’s, period. Oh and speaking of patterns, notice that no attempt was made to refute what was shown to exist as contradictions between what “they” have said and written as provided to the courts and sworn to be true, instead we see a steady attempt to target myself and denigrate the author with libel, not attacking the facts, but the author. (a point that I will keep making over and over again.)

Since I know that Sandman transfers my post onto his Blog where millions of people across the world could view it I think it’s worthwhile to mention this: The Oma Hamou Reality Blog seems to act in a childish manner --- as in their taking note that there is no links provided by a governmental official to Oma’s site or vice versus. A couple of years ago Oma had a link on Sarskaia’s site to (one of several examples) the AmCham in Russia. Bob sent a dozen letters to this organization not to mention someone using the psyeudo name LABloodhound demanding in essence (like they attempted to do with the City of Pushkin) that they reject Oma’s membership based on what THEY (Bob/Rob and Friends) said about Oma.

Oma received letters from the AmCham people who claimed that Bob told them that Oma had sought a loan using their organization as a front but it wasn’t true just like the information Bob provided to the police and others about Oma getting Father Markell to sign for a loan with JP Morgan it just didn’t happen. But Bob and his friends (including Rob) said it did and Bob would use the Alexander Palace Time Machine as a way to say to people that they could believe him because of his web site.

Bob also claimed to AmCham and its then President that he had spoken to the US State Department about Oma and her scams surrounding Father Markell and the Alexander Palace and they (the US State Department) were going to alert the US Embassy in Moscow about it. But the US State Department denied ever making this statement to Bob Atchison. So why make the statement that they had? Because he thought it would lend him credibility?

From what I have heard Bob Atchison is no longer respected in circles concerning Russian History. He is not welcomed inside of the Alexander Palace. There is official documentation that says this. Bob Atchison did remove a historical artifact from the Alexander Palace. When Bob Atchison worked 10 years ago as a Historian on the World Monuments Fund Alexander Palace Roof restoration he caused dissension amongst representatives of the World Monuments Fund and the Staff of the State Museum Preserve, this is also in writing. Bob Atchison is considered a person devoid of credibility when it comes to Oma Hamou, this is alleged in law enforcement reports – reports that he himself lodged against Oma. Such as Homeland Security, US Marshall, US State Department, FBI, the Austin Police Department and the Los Angeles Police Department

Make your own choice, who is who in this war of words?

http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2006/11/cult-surrounding-alexander-palace-in.html & AA Legends & http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sssulliv/calframe.htm

The documents posted below were found on OmaHamou.com. Correction

Bob Atchison's Excuse Why Hamou wanted to murder him to put an end to his lawsuit so he claims...

Note: Both Mike Newson and Justin Edwards's posts on AA Legends indicate the "alleged" hit man never signed an affidavit.

Atchion's Pallasart Web Ventures, Inc's Answer to

Hamou, Enigma & Sarskaia's Lawsuit:

(http://www.omahamou.com/News/CounterClaims.pdf)

Key points: Pallasart's attorney alleges "on or about June 17, 2004" Ms. Hamou solicited 'someone' to murder/harm Bob Atchison (Page 3 of the above pleading) yet the below email sent by the 'alleged' hitman's wife doesn't say anything about a 'murder for hire plot'.

Two. Under the penalty of perjury Bob Atchison "again" swears the information submitted to the courts in the above referenced document concerning Ms. Hamou solicitation to hire someone to murder/harm him (June 17, 2004) and accuses her of "stalking" him!

Excerpts from Oma Hamou's Affidavit:

63) Upon examination of Mr. Atchison’s phone records, to the L…’s, it is apparent that from June 17, 2004 at 10:16 AM until 11:25 AM Mr. Atchison attempted to call Patricia … on 12 separate occasions. As the phone logs show on the 13th attempt, at 11:25 AM, Mr. Atchison was successful in making a connection and spoke with either Patricia or John … for approximately 17 minutes. Mr. Atchison appeared to have lost the connection to his call with the L…’s and at 11:43 AM reestablished that connection which lasted approximately 27 minutes longer. From the time of the first call with the L…’s it took one hour (1) and four (4) minutes until Mr. Atchison contacted the Austin Police Department to report that his life was in danger – “The Murder for Hire Plot...”

Considering the time from the first email to the point at which the police were first called one has to wonder, if this was really a true plot to murder Mr. Atchison, why did it take so long? Mr. Atchison’s phone records reflect that on June 17, 2004 at 12:29 PM he contacted the Austin Police Department who sent out a patrol car to his home. Officer Alfredo Delvalle took Mr. Atchison’s statement at 12:36 PM.

More information about the murder for hire scheme see: http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2006/12/bob-atchisons-plots-against-oma-hamou.html

An Interesting Letter between the Attorneys

According to Mike Newson this document represents the final proposed Settlement Agreement which both Rob Moshein and Bob Atchison were willing to execute but in the end didn't.

It's all about credibility....

MS. HAMOU'S ATTORNEY COMPLAINS ABOUT BOB ATCHISON'S DISHONESTY

It looks like the attorney was right however by the time trial came along Hamou found herself solo and Bob Atchison swooped in for the kill ...

The definition of "Forgery", in criminal law is the willful fabrication or alteration of a written document with the intent to injure the interests of another in a fraudulent manner. Typical examples of forgery are making insertions or alterations in otherwise valid documents and appending another's signature to a document without permission. In the United States forgery ordinarily is a state crime; but to send forged documents through the post office may constitute the federal crime of mail fraud.

Bob Atchison represented to the court and law enforcement the above document represented a true copy of the invoice sent to Enigma Films, it was not. Oma Hamou testified at trial that the e-mails which appear underneath the “alleged” invoice were altered and/or she did not create.

This is a true representation of the the document sent to Enigma by Pallasart on July 13, 2000

ONE YEAR LATER

Excerpt from Oma Hamou's affidavit (6):

"...Prior to, and after being in the hospital, per the instructions by the treating physician at the local hospital, I spent a majority of my time in bed. (See Exhibit A) When the court denied both my then counsel, Mr. Boyce Brown Reid of the law firm of George & Brothers, LLP and my Motion for a continuance filed in pro se I was suddenly forced in one day to attempt to prepare an adequate defense. To better illustrate the sense of panic I felt on the morning of the 27th, not only was I ill with a high temperature but we had Voir Dire, which is creating the jury, and by noon we were ready to start trial. I had less than one hour to ‘literally’ run back to my hotel, pull exhibits together and have exhibit boards prepared all by the time court resumed that afternoon..."

At trial both Bob Atchison and his attorney testified the above invoices identified as "Pallasart" were invoices for a previous debt belonging to Ms. Hamou's company, Enigma which resulted in a lawsuit.

Quote Bob Atchison’s Attorney Matthews: "...There was a prior suit between these two people in California and then there was another prior suit in Texas. The one in California that Ms. Hamou filed was dismissed. The prior lawsuit here in Texas was settled, and that had to do with Mr. Atchison’s former business partner and the web design company that they own together. That matter was resolved and that suit was dismissed..."

According to the State of Texas other than the then present lawsuit case No. GN303141 between Atchison and Hamou no other lawsuit existed between the two.

STALKING HABITS

This has nothing to do with Bob Atchison's "Murder for Hire Scheme" but I did find this on Ms. Hamou's website concerning "Gilbert MacDuff" a/k/a/ Rob Moshein (or could it be Bob Atchison) the person responsible for the publication of Ms. Hamou's U.S. social security number on the Internet.

Hamou's attorney pretty much sums up our feelings on Bob Atchison's 'murder for hire scheme' which he used in an attempt to put Oma Hamou in jail....