You are here:   Forums
Register   |  Login
etter_Future_Ahead_01

Welcome to the Crimes Against Fathers Forums

Minimize
 
ForumForumLinks to BooksLinks to BooksLinks to Books Parent ForumLinks to Books Parent ForumLiving Free in ...Living Free in ...Chapter 9 - What is the Solution?Chapter 9 - What is the Solution?
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post
 11/16/2011 3:16 AM
 

 

1.              What is the Solution?

 

Now. I have made it clear that Jennifer Toal committed the crimes of perjury, kidnapping, extortion and theft. I have also made it clear that the split of money was 5% vs 95% and that my overall take from 25 years of work after ‘legal fees’ was MINUS EUR40,000. This is all called ‘legal’ today. I have posted the source documents proving all this to my web site at www.peternolan.com and I have also posted the you-tube video of my ‘court-meeting’ with David Dunkley.

 

It is obviously clear that the courts are totally bogus. It is just as clear by Kevin Rudds refusal to discipline his employees that the guvment is just a bogus.

 

So. What is the solution? Well? I’m glad you asked me that because I spent a bloody long time learning how to create one and then testing it. You are the beneficiary of this. You are welcome.

 

I said up front there was four things to be done.

 

  1. Learn where do your rights come from.
  2. Learn how to claim your rights.
  3. Learn how to exercise your rights.
  4. Learn how to defend your rights.

 

This is going to be so simple you are not going to believe it. But it’s the truth.

 

  1. Learn where do rights come from.

    They come from YOU. YOU define what YOUR rights are going to be. Now. You may believe in God or some form of ‘Creator’ and you can declare your rights according to your beliefs from your creator. The only thing you need to keep in mind is that your rights end where another mans rights start.

    Most men think their rights come from ‘the state’. This is a big mistake. If you think your rights come from the state then you are a slave. The state is nothing but a bunch of MEN who are trying to enslave you and rob you and live off you as parasites. They do this by offering you ‘help’ and then sucking you dry to give you this ‘help’ once the ‘help’ has become ‘obligatory’. Virtually every piece of the control grid was initially sold as ‘helpful’. Money? Government? Religion? Medicine? Law? Police? Newspapers? TV? All sold as ‘helpful’ or ‘beneficial’ from the Illuminati which now rule the lives of billions.

  2. Learn how to claim your rights.

    You just state them. That’s it. You SAY what your rights are and BINGO they are your rights. To communicate your claimed rights and to make sure that no-one else who presumes jurisdiction over you have a problem with your rights. The only thing you need to remember is that if you claim to be able to do something that involves someone else you are required to have their agreement. So YOUR ‘rights’ can only apply to YOU. You could say “I have the right to kill” but you might find that those you wish to kill might have something to say about that.


  3. Learn how to exercise your rights.

    You just use them. When you have claimed a right then you exercise it by using it. If you claim the freedom of speech you go out and you speak freely. If you claim right of travel then you go out and travel freely. When you are impeded you explain your rights and your claim and you ask the other person for a signed affidavit under penalty of perjury and full commercial liability for the law that they say gives them any right to infringe your rights.

    Without said affidavit? They have no right to interfere with you. If they do then it is time to:







  4. Learn how to defend your rights.

    The primary mechanism to defending rights is for the accuser to complete an Affidavit and present it to the accused. You will see many examples of this linked in the appendices of this book. The mechanism I have used is to create an affidavit with a Proposed Remedy and a Notice of Intent that goes with it. I outline that I reserve the right to convene a de jour jury and a de jour court and try any dispute under common law.

    Of course, the problem comes when the PTB simply run roughshod over you.  My own personal opinion is that I am not at all adverse to defending my rights with force up to and including deadly force. I played plenty of football when I was a kid and I rather enjoyed the ‘violence’ of full contact sports. A little bit of violence towards people who infringe my rights? No problem. People who attempt to condemn me for that? Thanks for sharing. You can stop reading now.

    Those people who are shrieking about ‘non-violence’ are the ‘women and guvment’. And how many women have called the cops to use force against a man? MILLIONS. Those who are responsible for the
    VAST majority of violence against men by ‘authorities’ are the same people shrieking about how the people they are committing violence against should be ‘non-violent’. All men should denounce anyone who has EVER used violence of themselves, any convenient mangina, or of the state who is now claiming non-violence, as hypocrites.

    I have never had to use violence off the football field since I was a boy. However, I reserve the right to use violence, and I mean ANY level of violence against ANY HUMAN who might cause me injury, harm or loss. And those who deal with me know this.

    I was in
    Bucharest a while ago and three men attempted to rob me of my laptop. Once I realised what the were doing I stepped back and told them I knew they were trying to rob me and if they did I would chase one of them down and I would beat him to death. And they could see I meant it.

    Of course, the three of them could over-power me to take the laptop. But if I chased one of them it was obvious I could catch any individual one of them. So they, very sensibly, decided a 33% chance of being dead was not good odds for a laptop. If I had been ‘non-violent’ I would be out one laptop. Later, still in
    Bucharest I was attacked by 6 wild dogs. I ‘barked’ them out of the idea of attacking me without a single tool/weapon at my command. If I was not able to communicate to those dogs that they were not wise to attack me I might be dead. In Bucharest the odd tourist does get attacked by dogs and killed.

    So yes. I am perfectly capable of violence and I have no problem being so if some person or animal is attempting to injure me.

    I rebut the ‘non-violence claims’ of the ‘tree huggers’. They say they wish non-violence yet they are using violence against tens of thousands of men daily.

    It is not until men make it clear to women that a woman being violent to a man is no longer acceptable that men will be free of the enslavement visited on them by women.

    My position now is that if an ‘equal woman’ hits me? I WILL hit her back. If any mangina then comes to ‘defend’ the aggressor? He will be hit as well.

    It’s about time the manginas also learned that their ‘white-knighting’ behaviour is also not acceptable to men.

 

Previous Previous
 
Next Next
ForumForumLinks to BooksLinks to BooksLinks to Books Parent ForumLinks to Books Parent ForumLiving Free in ...Living Free in ...Chapter 9 - What is the Solution?Chapter 9 - What is the Solution?