Perfection? No one that I know of has reached that stage, well excepting one person, the Messiah of Christian belief --- Jesus. And look at how his contemporaries treated him, let alone believed him! If the Internet had existed back then what would his enemy’s have done to him? When he was crucified they did not just figuratively do it like Oma has been crucified by her stalkers, and her ex husband lending his own distinct flavor to the mix. In any case, there are skeletons buried in everyone’s closet. Not one of us can say that we are lily white, that we have never done something that we are not proud of. Does Oma have a checkered past? Well according to the documentation dealing with her past she sure does, at the very least I think we can call her past colorful. Does that mean that there are not extenuating circumstances, or could she have been manipulated and placed in situations by outside forces? Or indeed that she was human and made human mistakes from basic needs? (Love and the need to be loved, love that she was denied. Also look up Battered Wives Syndrome.) No, that is, it is indeed possible and when you get down and dirty and study the events it becomes highly probable that it is true that she made plenty of her own mistakes as well as was “framed” and manipulated into situations that were caused by outside forces beyond her control. I don’t see anywhere where she attempts to say that she is some goody two shoes girl from next door that is as pure as the driven snow. If anything she has been outspoken that she has made mistakes, stood up once more, attempted to rectify them and move on and up.

If one looks at the life of many of the “greats” in history one finds all kinds of feet of clay and this continues right up to present times as in President Clinton’s Monica situation. What does all this have to do with Oma and her stalkers/vigilantes? Well the odds are, in that they are human, that they are not without “sin” either, and yet they have thrown many stones at Oma. So how should we judge them? What do we find in the way of motivation behind their actions toward Oma, not just Bob/Rob/Pallasart and the rest of that cult like group, but in the actions of her ex husband who recently said that he was in contact with Oma’s stalkers and then we find within minutes that the current Hate-Oma Blog - that has nothing to do with Rob/Bob, et. al. and is not in communication with them at all - knows all about it. I think if one examines the timing of the events you would have to conclude that the circumstances are such that one is forced to doubt the claims of non-involvement with Oma’s stalkers. (Do you not just love how myopic they are focusing on “Google tells us that they have not disclosed any information, yet they ignore totally that IP packet sniffers can trace packets over the open Internet, or Rob's PMs, and Marcus's statements that “they” are involved in that Blog... Why is it that every hate-Oma so far has denied Rob and Bob's involvement, yet in every case that we have been able to definitively identify they were involved? )

Looking at all the recent events one has to wonder, what would life have been like for Oma if she had never met her Ex Husband Marcus Demian (Herman Schloss and many other aliases) , and even more so — Rob Moshein and Bob Aitcheson? One thing for sure, she would have a lot “duller” past and I doubt that everyone who is following the soap opera of her life would be doing so now.

Anyway where am I going with this? Well it seems that when one looks at a crime one first looks for motivation and opportunity. As to opportunity? Well if one is attempting to ruin someone’s reputation then we all have the opportunity now that the Internet sends our words to millions of people in an instant. So lets turn to motivation, firstly the Hate-Oma site on BlogSpot that has “nothing” to do with Rob/Bob/Pallasart - what is their motivation? What drives them to keep up the attack? Why is it their job to rid the world of Oma Hamou? Answers to these questions are vital to understanding why they say what they say about Oma. Or - What drove Oma’s ex husband to do what he did way back when, and why the hostility today, why does he still need to discredit Oma? Given the number of women that he married, one can gather some reason for his initial interest in her, especially if you have seen photos from her early years (a wolf whistle would be appropriate here,) and even more so if you had inside knowledge of her monetary situation back then. Knowing somewhat of Oma’s early years I can see how someone who had enticed ten women to marry him and who knows how many others may have been invited to his bed - before, during and after his marriage to Oma, well it is possible to understand how he added one more wife (who had money) to the notches on his gun. Then having read the Montana State Register and the Montana Supreme Court ruling published there about Marcus and the kids - well it is of no surprise that Marcus attempted to destroy her reputation as well (and almost her life.) As if she were discredited - then one more witness to his actions was eliminated. Rob/Bob’s motivation in regard to the Alexander Palace and their obvious desire to control all that deals with it to a large extent allows us to understand some of their actions and this subject has been covered in vast detail in other writtings. For the balance one has to dig deep into the psychology of the mind to understand what makes them do what they do.

The secret to understanding a person is in the motivation behind the actions. Sex, Greed and Power (control) seem to be the motivations behind Marcus and to a degree somewhat the same motivations could be said to apply to Rob/Bob albeit from a different direction. As to my motivation which I have stated many times in the past – well the story goes like this: I had met and photographed this woman named Oma and was in a situation such that I had some worries about another job she was asking me to do with regard to eventual recompense. I then discovered seeming evidence to justify my worries, but on further examination not being willing to accept a fact with out verification, I discovered inaccurate information being said about her and questioned it and instead was attacked myself as being Oma. One thing leads to another and instead of my leaving a situation where I was just doing a web design job, I was driven to find out why she was attacked such as she was, let lone why the vehement reaction to my simple comment of inaccuracy. The net result is a close friendship with a woman that I now admire for how she has stood up to the fires that have threatened to consume her, and in fact I have to admit that I have come I love her as much as any of my close friends, something I tell her all the time. Bottom line - Bob/Rob turned me into her White Knight, forced me to discover the other side of the story and to defend Oma. And in turn I find the same weapons of libel and distortions of truth being wielded against my own person with as much devastation in emotional and physical well being, not to mention financial distress, as Oma has suffered, leaving me standing at the edge of personal ruin. I am not defending her in terms of what she has done, as she has made as many mistakes as anyone I have ever heard of, if not more, but maybe because of those mistakes and the way she keeps standing back up and trying again and again with dogged determination to succeed. So the motivations behind me are love, and the desire that right prevail, and an abhorrence of a bully attacking a woman - contrast that to what the other side’s motivations appear to be.

Next comes evidence. Notice that the evidence against Oma is constantly misinterpreted, not to mention that some of it was created to discredit her value as a witness. I’ve spent many, many, pages elsewhere picking apart the errors in interpretation, the outright lies, and the false conclusions. For instance notice that the Hate-Oma Blog along with “Herman” say that Oma was only married to him for three month, yet there has been published on the web the divorce decree that says that statement is a lie. (Who does that discredit? IS Herman/Marcus’s veracity immediately discredited? And in all honesty is not the report on that Hate-Oma Blog also discredited? Simply because they insist on maintaining as fact something which has been proven to be false.) Still, most of what is claimed against Oma is in terms of having debt, and the majority of that happened because of events that can be directly traced back to the actions of Bob/Rob/Pallasart. Try reading up on most of the self made millionaires, and notice that on the average they declared bankruptcy eight times before “making it.” They, like Oma, just kept picking themselves back up “just one more time.” One interesting thing is that on the Hate-Oma site they wonder about Oma’s usage of name in the divorce decree and yet a few lines latter show that she had not even married again and thus acquired the last name of Hamou. Is it not customary for a wife to take on the last name of her husband? So why is it that Oma having followed this custom is attacked as having done so? As if this was one more reason to not believe her, to hate her.

Claims were made elsewhere and on other sites of having links to Oma in porn shots, and shudder (heaven forbid) “nude poses!” Yet just as in the past when Bob went to the police to report her they asked him if he had the evidence and he was forced to say no, but he was “working” on it, ---but it just had to be true. Well how hard is it to cut and paste a URL? Either you have the URL or you don’t. If you don’t then you have never seen the evidence and are reporting a lie. As to nude, well yes she has posed such that one can see her breasts, not to mention bare back and her cute bubble butt behind. In fact I doubt that there is much of her body which has not been seen by the camera - just as in any of the top models in this world. It is intriguing to notice the usage of Oma posed nude coupled with Oma did “whatever” to show that some how because of this she IS a horrible person whom you should hate and not believe, and yet when one looks at Rob/Bob’s history one finds many of the same things that they decry about her in their past, (well I don’t think they ever posed nude, but as to the rest of it…) does this not mean that we should judge them by the same standard that they claim Oma should be judged? Could part of their motivation be that they have to destroy Oma’s creditability in order to protect their house of cards? Their grasp of ownership of control of all things Romanov?

No matter what I write or have written, those whose mind is closed to the possibilities that Rob/Bob, et. al. are not telling the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth will not comprehend what I have said, and those who believe Oma already and are her friends will just agree, but for those sitting on the fence, to you I suggest that there is reason to doubt the conclusions of those who would have you hate Oma, who have tried to discredit myself because I have championed her. Notice the motivation and emotional content of what “they” write about myself and Oma. Notice that they claim things that do not match up with reality, as in the words that Bob said in court that we have shown conflicted with his own sworn testimony. Let alone that the courts themselves show that what was claimed by Bob in court was true is not the truth. Does not that alone provide an element of doubt as to their basic believability? Notice how the courts have sided with Oma in regards to what “they” have said about her being potentially libelous. Notice how “They will” show you how Oma is a porn star, (as if this destroys her/our credibility) but have no proof, either they saw it and have the URL or they have not and are attempting to control your mind to induce hate and discredit her. Notice how they just say believe us. Yet when you look at the past words that have been written by myself and others, in Oma’s defense, we quoted documents that had been sworn to be true to the courts and then posted the entire document so you could tell if the quote had been taken out of context.

Truth is the best weapon in a battle such as this, it may not be a fast weapon, just as the truth did not keep Jesus from being crucified, but now look at it from a historical perspective… Truth will eventually win out, but in the mean time the power of a lie can kill.