Generally of the case of loose ends of Media i.e. safe decision making without interference with basic opportunity decisions on spending power, giving rise to such behaviour as means that positions of power change hands and jobs are lost after review, also leading to the general sense that bullying the feminine population makes sense, while it is just stupidity put up as some exclusive disposition that male population can rally to which can also be made sensible via the use of income reserves to make sense to as many people as possible. This we know feeds into the Media disposition that the result of income and Public place vandalism is always meant to be acquisition of access to household earnings and thereby predictable income sources for advertisement. For me personally, it has at this stage developed into ageist bullying, concerning which there is always a crowd raised - this means most of my private actions at this Firm are aimed at making sure the matter to settled at a position where crafted workplace insanity does not actually permeate mainstream living, so as to avoid outcomes where jobs are denied people because they belong to a certain faith persuasion or are of a certain race type etc. - Parameters: ageist insults and abuses laced with media appearances on one hand and an understanding there is enough space to dispose of time frame in other chosen ways, meaning this matter has been settled, if it does not develop into direct threats and intimidation that develops more expense as a result.


So far we have support and structures mainly at a loosely linked Office Orientated Court system based Public image security since most intellectual property Administration needs lacking at present happen to involve celebrities and generally Industry manufactured Public image figures. This this cannot be completely described here but should be clearer through our site based equities and above all Admin Mobility that are facilitated by Book contents for the Customer. The most important aspect of the declaration of these results being of course that it is always possible for insecurities to exist when media ascribe what is not due to its friends and associates who are usually work place ageist rascals i.e. to say that one person’s image is secure is a disposition which can change in an instant of a celebrity figure appears on Television for the day – it is plagiarism but clearly since it is not a plagiarizing of the entire planet so to speak it is perfectly okay considering other human beings do not actually matter, hence a high security risk. My point is that we may have watched the Oscars in the last 24 Hours but if not, then those of us that have not will have by this stage in the day obtained an experience of how intellectual property has become important to these celebrity figures for whom none of it is actually necessary, bearing in mind it is simply a predatory behaviour that they enjoy pleasurably.

I. Uno I

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland