Urgent, urgent, urgent, we men have a little bit of time left.

Amy Adams is about to get even tougher on men.  Type in NZ police, protection orders and just like that a women can get a protection order.  And this can include a property order.  Which means the man is kicked out of his own home.  But the wording is the registered proprietor.  Registers were created to record the government having patial ownership.  So after doing plenty of research their is a way for us men to fight.  If you know anyone who is not married, or doesn’t own real estate. They can fight, if they will just take the time to read this, and say this isn’t in my interest, you change the rules or I won’t participate.  And that means they will have less money to function.  So EAD, this is especially for your people.  This will sell the gold more than anything.  Ok, so here it is, this is the email I gave Amy, everything in here can be verified with NZ legislation and law dictionaries.  And black’s law dictionary is online and has most of the definitions as contained.  And AA stands for Amy Adams.  So here it is:

To the Honourable Amy Adams,

According to my MP Simon O’Connor the public would have time to have their say in regards to domestic violence.  I was informed when looking at the site that I had till the 18th to have my say.  Furthermore with my points to Simon, and my documentation Simon couldn’t find fault with the facts I presented him.
First of all I know that the National Party has had a lot of pressure to make changes to please mothers with so called violent men.  Having said this, I am here to inform you of a number of things.  First I understand exactly how family court operates, and if things continue to be getting worse and worse for men, I have my ways of being rational about it.  If something is not in my favour, than avoid it.
So first of all, as in the care of children’s act the person providing the day to day care of the child is the guardian.  This means if the guardian gets a golf club and smashes the provider of the child, the person providing the day to day care is the guardian.  What’s more in an assault claim I had against somebody, even holding someone is violence.  So if the guardian attacks the provider with a golf club, just holding the guardian back is violence.
In the Child, Young People and their Families Act, it makes a social contract of the parents the government and the child (or as my law dictionary says) public policy, and that is the government will provide for the child’s needs, provided the government is happy with the way parents are bringing up their children.  Therefore by having gay marriage, and having the antismacking law, this simply means a family is wherever the government sees people as fit raise children the way they want to be raised.  Ronald Reagan said a government that can give you anything, can take away anything as well.
We had a great depression, and the way out of it is the government would provide services, on condition that an income tax would be imposed on the people.  So by people accepting this new deal, the people have accepted the social contract that the government will provide, provided the people will pay it back with income tax.
So what this means is the government has a claim in the family.  What’s more a marriage license is a license.  To cook burgers for commercial gain requires a license.  To give financial advice for commercial gain requires a license.  To be a tax agent requires a license, and so does being a lawyer, and even to drive.  In law, to drive means to be paid to carry passengers and cargo.  That’s what happens when you have law dictionaries.  So how is a marriage license connected to commerce.  The people will pay an income tax in return for services.  And a child being fed is developing the child socially.
So with what I’ve said so far, in Barron’s and Butterworth’s law dictionary, a child is a ward of the court.  In Barron’s a child is a ward of the court, full stop.  In Butterworth’s, an abandoned child is a ward of the court.  But under the care of children’s act a child can be taken away.  Therefore a child is a ward of the court.  And gay marriage and the antismacking bill, and telling parents how to feed their children in regards to school lunch is a reminder, that after registering your child, they are a word of the court.  How does black’s define register:

rights which a king has by virtue of his prerogative. Hence owners of counties palatine were formerly said to have “jura regalia” in their counties as fully as the king in his palace. 1 Bl. Comm. 117. The term is sometimes used in the same sense In the Spanish law. See Hart v. Burnett, 15 Cal. 506. Some writers divide the royal prerogative into majora and minora regalia, the former including the regal dignity and power, the latter the revenue or fiscal prerogatives of the crown.

So registering a car or a child means you no longer have total control.  That’s why a working for families form has the provider vertically above the child.  Vertically above means the creditor, below means the debtor.  So the child is the debtor, and will pay out of future earnings.  They will pay back the administrator with income tax.  And the administrator is giving support to the parent.
What’s more a marriage license is a license, and the conditions can change at any time the government feels like it.  Public policy/social contract are statutory law.  Statutory law can change at whatever time the government wants.  What does stay the same though is the person looking after the child is the guardian.  So if she wants to bash her husband, she is the guardian of the child, in the family courts eyes, therefore he must have been at fault.  In my law dictionary if their are juries, they are their to make sure that the accussed is at fault.  If not, the judge is the one who supplies the remedy.  So by family court having no cross checks or juries, family court operates as defined in my law dictionary as lex fori under the laws of commerce.
So for this first part, my rationalism is saying in America, as defined in Barron’s law dictionary under guardian and custodian, no parent is automatically the guardian.  The child can go to either, and the judge will make a decision based on the merits of the parents.  If the child ends up with the mother who thinks its cool to attack her husband with a golf club as that is what is encouraged here in New Zealand’s family court system, which defines holding her back as violence, well no that won’t work in the USA.  And in the case where she looks after the child, the judge will give her reduced alimony.  And in Holland, in the case of an unsafe environment for the children, both parents lose, and furtermore their will be regular checks, with a few mistakes allowed.
So what I’m saying, is I had a good paying job, excellent skills and wanted a family, I would save up my money and move elsewhere.  Which is what someone related to me by blood did.  He creates websites for banks in England and makes plenty of money.  So what I’m saying, is you are investing in the ward of the court protecting it.  But as soon as it is no longer a ward, its now an adult, it is unfavourable for this adult to raise a family in New Zealand uneless it is a low income earner.  So the big earners will simply leave New Zealand.  Which is what that someone did.  Your protecting your investment but not your returns.  By the way in your discussion document the only statistical violence against men that stated was death.  Lex fori means that death was a tort, meaning unchanging laws which the Queen swore to uphold.  Unchanging laws are murder, theft, lieing etc.  So this proves that domestic violence against men doesn’t exist unless it is Lex fori under the domain of torts.
2ndly, you know perfectly well, that we can only own land tenurially, meaning possess as this table shows.

Fact #: (if not a conclusion)

Referred to:




Ownership in Barron’s is defined as:  under tenurial ownership:  ‘the holding of land subject to specific services or obligations owed to another’.  It defines allodial ownership as:  ‘Free ownership not subject to the restrictions or obligations associated with feudal tenures’



Tenant is defined as renting or 2ndly possessing the right to use land, subject to the queen or another holder as in the past.



If you are a tenant you have possession of the land.  If you rent you pay a bigger fee, if you don’t rent you pay a lower fee.  You own in the same way that people owned in the feudal age, which was subject to the feudal lord or the queen.  So real estate, is having property passed on with the same conditions as in the feudal age.



The land transfer act, says the person paying for the real estate, gets a certificate of title as in section 12.  Section 15 says:  Every certificate of title to be issued or computer register created as aforesaid shall be made subject to all encumbrances, estates, and interests appearing on the provisional register as affecting the land at the date of the issue of the certificate.  Section 7 which was Applicable up to 1999 says only solicitors and barristers may participate.



Encumberance by definition is: ‘A charge or mortgage upon real or personal estate.’



Whenever you participate in the purchase of land or houses by you getting a certificate of title, this meant someone else has a claim on whatever it is you own.  So the estate part of real estate means, it is passed on to you with the same conditions as in the feudal age, under a feudal lord or queen.



A solicitor will get you to sign a deed.



In law we were taught that when you sign a contract if both sides get something out of it, it is legally enforceable.  By signing a deed you give it away in a legally enforceable way.



In 1841 the Deeds Registration Ordinance was set up where lawyers get you to write up deeds



Up until 1999, only lawyers could participate as they understood how the system operated, and when you sign a deed you give something away.



Certificate of Title is defined as:  going to the registered proprietor, the tenant of the land.



Registration in Black’s is defined as:  rights which a king has by virtue of his prerogative. Hence owners of counties palatine were formerly said to have “jura regalia” in their counties as fully as the king in his palace… Some writers divide the royal prerogative into majora and minora regalia, the former including the regal dignity and power, the latter the revenue or fiscal prerogatives of the crown.



Therefore if something is registered the government keeps the ownership of something.  So the registered proprietor is not the owner, they are the possessor.



By definition a legal title means to totally own the title.



Allodial is defined as owning land absolutely, and only the crown has allodial rights to land.



An aboriginal title is defined as being owned before the colonists.



Aboriginal is used in numerous law dictionaries, as belonging to the native people.  This is why the maori have special rights.  As they are happy to keep their land, the crown can’t do a thing to them, in regards to land.  So the Maori have the allodial title, but if sold, and the person signs a deed, when you deed something you give it away.



Section 6, of the relationship property act says Maori land cannot be divided.
So in essence with the protection order being immediately granted to the guardian of the child, and the man losing it even if he is the registered proprietor that says rationally it is stupid to buy a family home.  By definition in that table means according to Butterworths law dictionary.  If I own silver I own it completely.  Its a hedge against inflation.  If I own bricks and mortar that is also a hedge against inflation, but if those bricks and mortar are on land with the crown owning the allodial title, a family home is a family home tenurially.  Which means one malicious lie, and you have to sell, giving more to real estate agents, bankers and family lawyers.
So I am here to inform you, that after knowing this, silver is the only sure thing.  Over any ten year period, it will go up, and no tax is on it except a one off GST.  The City Council makes money off of appreciation of property.  They have the allodial title.  And now through being able to change the conditions of a marriage license, just the way we handle money under section 3 of the domestic violence Act means the house gets sold, and someone else wins.
But with silver only GST is gained.  With any other investment you collect tax on the gains, and any losses are imposed on us.  So what I’m saying is if you want to continue to do this.  Where in the case of a woman using a golf club on a man and him holding her back is domestic violence on the man’s part, and then he loses half of his house and pays lawyers fees and alimony, you know how bout I don’t bother buying a house.  And section 6 of the relationship property act says Maori land doesn’t get divided.  And when people ask me, I will tell them.  And the financial advisers act only applies if you give financial advice for commercial purposes.
So what I’m informing you of, is if you don’t make changes in our favour, you ain’t going to profit.  Our high earners are going to go overseas.  And people will just put their money in silver.
Now, I would like to see something better than people putting money in silver, and going overseas, but that means fairness, which I’m not sure that you even the know the meaning of.  So here’s what I’ve worked out merit based pension.  In the great depression your social security account was created.  When you paid income tax, that counted as a positive in your social security account.  When you were in need that counted as a negative.  And your pension was the balance.  So how bout instead of demonising men, as deserving to lose everything, by making the way you use your money as violence.  How bout if their is a split, the man does his best to pay for the guardian.  But every year the guardian of the child is looking after the child by herself, that financial support means less pension.
One way would be to have it that every year her man has worked full time for a year, whatever merit points he gets, she gets exactly the same.  And every year she isn’t with him, no merit points.  I would have it that if you’ve collected 40 merit points, working full time for 40 years, you get a bigger pension than what people are getting.  If for 30 years slightly less.  And have those born disabled exempted, on condition that they have visited 5 charities who can’t help.
Or how bout, the provider of the child has the clear option of saying to the court I want a different guardian, like in Holland.  So if she’s saying malicious lies to have it comfortable, he has the clear option for things to be different.
Finally, what I want to see is unchangable property rights, and unchangable parenting rights.  As long as marriage is a license, that can be changed at any time by the state, it would make sense for the man to be ready to move location at any time.  It would make sense to have a website stating the terms of the marriage license in every nation, and have men do the rational thing.  It means people would save what they could, which would mean money wouldn’t circulate.
So that is my piece, I’ve told you what I think, and I certainly wouldn’t want to have a child here in New Zealand.  I see the possibility of being with another woman, but not with children thank you very much.  And I have a good mind to give a notice to the real estate agents around me, that I do not wish to receive their mail.  In fact I am giving you 10 days notice, that I just might do that, with a copy of the table, and tell them they are wasting paper and the environment, and as a global citizen concerned about the environment, this is what I should be doing.
So I’m giving you notice that in 10 days, I will look to see what you are doing differently, and if it still is a good idea to invest in silver, and to raise a family elsewhere if you are a man, you can expect the real estate agent’s to know.  If you have any news of changes let me know within 10 days.  And if any of the facts are wrong or out of date a notice is only valid if unrebuffed, according to my law dictionaries.  By your silence we have a tacit agreement that this is correct.  Furthermore I also reserve the right to tell any bank that advertises buying a house is a good idea, why its not a good idea to do here in New Zealand.
Warren Tooley
P.S.  If I do have silver, I would put it in a safe place like where people store gold for a fee.

Watch out for those third plank marxist/communists

For those who aren’t aware of what right wing and left wing is, the best way to explain it is read the US constitution and compare that to the communist manifesto.  The US constitution only allowed (until some people changed it) three taxes, a tax on imports, a tax on domestic made goods, and a tax on property.  What’s more, while their were only these three taxes the US had a surplus in every year, except war years.

Before things changed, the communist manifesto was written.  A marxist /communist is someone who wants to implement all ten planks of the communist manifesto slowly by slowly, to change society.  The 2nd and 5th plank state income tax and a central bank.  Why do I state these together.  When a country borrows from overseas, the IMF demands that the people will pay an income tax.  An income tax, means those who are citizens will pay it back, in return for the privileges the state gives.

But the biggest defining factor of what right and left is, is family.  The US constitution assumes the family will take care of itself, with the state protecting the family by the courts, police and the military.  But the communist manifesto puts the state as the benefactor.  For those who say what about the poor?  If we only had three taxes, people would have plenty to give to charity.

One of the key statements is the third plank of the communist manifesto, which states an end to inheritances.  This means the state is ultimately responsible for the child’s wellbeing, with the parents as simply the custodians of the child.  A father’s traditional role is to take care of the family by earnings, and the mother’s to provide emotional support.  And this socialist movement is what we are seeing come to pass.  Two people become married, they split and they go to family court.

99.9% of the time, the woman gets the child, the house, and financial support.  The man, pays alimony, and the taxpayer pays the rest of the DPB.  This can only continue, with domestic violence being exaggerated.

If domestic violence awareness was not pushed, people would slowly get the idea, that as far as the courts are concerned in the case of a divorce someone will look after the child, and the other person will pay for the child.  Now about domestic violence being exaggerated, the White Ribbon Society says 33% of woman end up in a violent relationship.  If the average woman went on 20 dates, this means that at least 1.67% of the dates are violent towards woman (33%/20 = 1.67%).  1.67% doesn’t sound that bad.

The police’s own definition of domestic violence includes, psychological abuse, and mind games.  So, are men really that bad after all?  The white ribbon society’s month of their awareness is November.  They want society to feel sorry for women on the DPB.  And this means things will continually be in the woman’s favour in the case of a marriage split.

Higher DPB payments, easier divorce, no one asking questions, just take things at face value.

I’m not saying their aren’t genuine cases, what I am saying, is we should keep things factual and genuine, and not give anybody an incentive to split.  My idea, is we have a performance pension.  If you’ve worked 40 years plus, you get a fantastic pension.  And if you stay married to someone who’s earning on your behalf, this counts as a year of working.  If you haven’t, you don’t get a fantastic pension.  It means welfare is their for those who need it, and people will have an incentive to only need it when absolutely necessary, as taking more now, means less later on.

I cannot see any other solution, then for men to be suspicious of women, because when you have one group of society backing up one gender, the other gender feels like an endangered species.

Any other solutions?  The path we’re going down is not good, it is an attack on the family unit, it was thought up in the 1800s if not before, and it is happening now, its called the third plank of the communist manifesto.  So what are you going to do the next time White Ribbon comes to a town near you.