Peter of England: A REal guru.

[rumpelstilzchen]

This is something to read. this guy only made an offhand comment about peter and his video and they have ripped into him something fierce.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... VOKcjTF98E

There is one comment in that thread I find incredible.
Freeman 16 writes:

Why would Peter be writing cheques of his own? And if he did, what business is it of anyone else?

This clearly displays the ignorance and gullibility of Peter's followers. It does not enter Freeman 16's pea brain that normally when you bring a product to market, before its launch you test it thoroughly to make sure it does work. Peter should have tested the scheme himself many times over to ensure it works before offering it for sale. Especially when you consider he is selling the scheme and telling people it does work. If he hadn't tried it himself before selling the first cheque book how could he guarantee it would work? Freeman 16 like the rest of Peter's suckers overlooks that. Because Peter says it will work, it will work.
Freeman 16 also appears to accept Peter's explanation that he can clear cheques over the phone and he has done so. Freeman 16's brain does not ask...but how is the money transferred? He just accepts it as gospel. I mean...how nutty can you get?

[NYGman]

So Mr. Smith has his bank account disappeared, PayPal Frozen, Website taken away. Credits are reversing, and the checks seem to be widely recognized as duds, by the banks where they are deposited. He then tells people the next steps when a check is returned, at the end of a three hour meeting that is posted to youtube under someone else account, because this is the way legitimate banks communicate, and never by direct mail or email to their customers. This next step is basically to give the returning bank a magic letter that will compel them to provide details of how they attempted to clear the check, and that magic step will make the debt go away.

The logic of this is even better. You ask the establishment bank to provide a sworn statement on how they attempted to clear the WeRe check, which I will tell you now, they will not do. Of course, with feigned surprise, you will then claim they can't dishonor the check if they never attempted to clear it. Their failure to even attempt to clear will be sited as evidence of a fraud by the establishment bank, and acceptance of the check is now required as it is after the 6 days, at which point they will claim victory, and consider the matter closed. How could this fail???

It amazes me people are still lining up for check books to become part of this plan. Even assuming a quasi-real parallel world where laws are bent and stretched beyond their real intent, and this was a valid theory, which it most certainly isn't, follow it through. Establishment bank then follows the made up WeRe rules, and send an email to WeRe asking for the check to be cleared and for a transfer of the funds in Sterling. Peter fails to pay, they sue him for the money, he has no assets, oh wait, he has the PN's. Are these not made out to WeRe? So if peter gives the banks WeRe as part of a settlement, the banks take the PN's and sue to collect on them.

SO, even ignoring all the laws actual meaning, you still loose, eventually. I want in on that action... Are the PN's the escape hatch?

[littleFred]

I know almost nothing about civil law, but I think the chances of a sucker successfully suing Peter for damages are slim (unless Peter is first convicted of a criminal offence).

If a sucker did successfully sue WeRe (aka Peter) for £35 plus, say, £1000 damages, the sucker would now owe merely £150,000 - 1035 = £148,965 to WeRe.

[arayder]

I think Peter's fantasy is that when his clients sue him the court will be forced to admit that there is no basis for the suits since, according to the fantasy, the WeRe bank system is perfectly proper and lawful.

The pipe dream is useful to Peter since it gives the WeRe bank client/dupes a bright shinny object to look at so as to ignore the reality that they are out Peter's fee and even more in debt than when they started.

It's the same three card monte trick every freeman guru pulls.

[wanglepin]

This is something to read. this guy only made an offhand comment about peter and his video and they have ripped into him something fierce.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... VOKcjTF98E

There is one comment in that thread I find incredible.
Freeman 16 writes:

Why would Peter be writing cheques of his own? And if he did, what business is it of anyone else?

This clearly displays the ignorance and gullibility of Peter's followers. It does not enter Freeman 16's pea brain that normally when you bring a product to market, before its launch you test it thoroughly to make sure it does work. Peter should have tested the scheme himself many times over to ensure it works before offering it for sale.

I think the guy says something similar rumple. He is holding his corner but I fear it won't be long before he is banned but he has shown a couple of those goofers up for what they are.

[Hercule Parrot]

There is one comment in that thread I find incredible.
Freeman 16 writes:

Why would Peter be writing cheques of his own? And if he did, what business is it of anyone else?

And :

"I did not hear Peter say he had any WeRe bank returned to him for clearing"
"Then I suggest you get your ears checked because he made perfectly clear that banks and clearing houses have phoned him to clear cheques and that he had personally done so in every single instance. He explained at great length that it can be done over the phone or by fax etc and doesn't necessitate the actual cheque to be returned to him."

In other words, Freeman 16 thinks that if someone rings Peter and tells him they're holding a cheque for a certain amount, then Peter will 'clear' the cheque and somehow send payment for it. Peter won't need to see the cheque, to verify the signature or confirm the numbers written on it, he'll just pay out whatever amount the debtor says they want.

[PeanutGallery]

On the one hand while I welcome and support the idea of some bravely sallying forth to rage against the general idiocy on GOODF I can't help but feel that in a way by doing so, it is pandering to their existing delusions.

Take the accusation that one member believes people trolling on GOODF are paid 25p per post. I'm not paid any money for my posts, my posts are worthless (then again some of you already knew that), but it reinforces this belief that they are onto something because otherwise their imagined powers that be wouldn't be trying to knock it down. It leads to views being entrenched and while, I imagine, some dissenting opinion might lead to an unconvinced potential Goof from succumbing to full on Gooferieness it does rather reinforce the paranoia most Goofs feel when it comes to someone giving an alternative view on their forum.

Of course this paranoia does express itself when two goofs have a difference of opinion about the latest mooted woo and I also believe a lot of members over their simply tow the line and do as they are told in order to remain a part of a community they think benefits them. But on the other hand I'm not so sure that we should further it's growth, even though I do understand the concept of doing it for the lulz (which I was once guilty of back in the days of the goatse) so personally I'm on the fence about people trying to educate the Goofs, or point out the flaws in the various scams they want to try, they won't listen because they've closed their minds to us.

So I'm in two minds about going onto GOODF, I've decided not to do it, I'll look but I won't touch.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Hercule Parrot wrote:

In other words, Freeman 16 thinks that if someone rings Peter and tells him they're holding a cheque for a certain amount, then Peter will 'clear' the cheque and somehow send payment for it. Peter won't need to see the cheque, to verify the signature or confirm the numbers written on it, he'll just pay out whatever amount the debtor says they want.

Good point!
Sucker sends a WeRe cheque to his mortgage company for £500 monthly payment.
Corrupt mortgage company, 'cos let's face it all mortgage companies are corrupt, phones our Peter and says "We've got one of your cheques here for £1000. Peter shrieks "It's cleared! It's cleared!"

[grixit]

Shall we print a few of these off, send them out and see what happens? I could do without that pesky mortgage.

http://i.imgur.com/u56eefe.jpg

Is that a Companion Cube at the top?

[littleFred]

On the one hand while I welcome and support the idea of some bravely sallying forth to rage against the general idiocy on GOODF I can't help but feel that in a way by doing so, it is pandering to their existing delusions.

True, although the same argument applies to posting about the scam on Quatloos: it reinforces the delusion that they must be onto something. As if pointing out flaws in a scheme is evidence that the scheme is flawless.

Corrupt mortgage company, 'cos let's face it all mortgage companies are corrupt, phones our Peter and says "We've got one of your cheques here for £1000. Peter shrieks "It's cleared! It's cleared!" :haha:

Yes, that's how Peter thinks it works. First, he thought that a credit amounted to the cheque being cleared. Now he thinks that merely saying it has cleared makes it so. But Peter says he won't pay sterling for the cheques. The payee wants sterling. The person who wrote the cheque asked Peter to pay in sterling. But Peter says clearly that he won't do what either the payer or payee want.

[PeanutGallery]

I believe I've found a post on GOODF that perfectly sums up the sites attitude towards the truth. It's located here and was posted by the new moderator Sallinae, because of it's mind watering level of stupidity I've decided to reproduce it here in case someone with a brain tells Sallinae that the purpose of an internet forum like GOODF is for people to ask questions and debate the techniques being promoted on GOODF.

Sallinae doesn't think so. This is what she had to say about members with questions, I've added some emphasis and red text is my response:

Any members with lots of questions,

IF you want questions answered then you need to either go to the WeRe Bank Site or patiently await information on this site along with the other members who have invested.
So you need to go to a website that no longer exists or just wait until someone posts something you want to know, you aren't allowed to ask because that's wrong? You do know that part of debate is actually asking and answering questions, the only reason you wouldn't want questions to be asked is if you weren't confident that you had the right answer.
These threads are for information purposes. IF the information you require is not posted, then it is not available. If you wish to raise a question for the attention of Peter there is also a specific Questions for Peter thread in this forum which you can freely use to post a specific question which will be forward to Peter in due course.
How do we know it's not available, someone might know, surely asking a question isn't forbidden. Peter doesn't answer all the questions, he doesn't seem to post on GOODF and seems to be taking you shmucks for a ride.
IF the updates on this site are not to your satisfaction, then that is not the fault of the members.

IF your posts can be construed as negative i.e.: "all we got is three hours of whinging", you are posting on the wrong topic and possibly the wrong site.Over here at "squat loos" as you call it, which isn't really that imaginative and shows you've no knowledge of the classics from the 60's we don't consider posts positive or negative, we also don't need things to always be positive because we are confident in what we know.

IF there are any reports about threads being disrupted with persistent questions or any disrespect to those members who have invested in this remedy and just want to follow the threads without clutter, then they will be dealt with.So no questioning the new world order, we have always been at war with Eurasia right Sallie that's doubleplus good application of newthink.

I do not think any of the above is unreasonable. Members here tend to support all remedies whether it is their own path or not and they expect others to behave accordingly. If this is not the path for you, you should not be posting and should be researching for something that resonates. You've just threatened to take action against people on your site for asking questions, that's power tripping, makes me really glad I don't post there, the stupid it might spread.

Nobody is holding a gun to your head. If you want to sit back and see what happens, feel free. If you decide to go for it, good for you. If you decide it is not for you, move on - there are plenty of remedies to research on thisBut you can't research this one because we have a strict rule of NO QUESTIONS.

GOODF isn't interested in promoting any truth that doesn't fellate the ego's of it's core crazies. It doesn't want debate or communication, it wants blind obedience, it is nothing more than a depressingly oppressive forum.

[PeanutGallery]

Shall we print a few of these off, send them out and see what happens? I could do without that pesky mortgage.

http://i.imgur.com/u56eefe.jpg

Is that a Companion Cube at the top?

If it is, is there going to be cake?

[wanglepin]

I'm on the fence about people trying to educate the Goofs, or point out the flaws in the various scams they want to try, they won't listen because they've closed their minds to us.

That is how I feel Peanut. They don't understand diplomacy, the fairness of debate or discussion. And although I feel sorry for some of the victims of this particular scam of Peter's, I have nothing but loathing for those that promote it and support it and the qicker Peter gets a tug the better, no matter that these idiot think it was all a plot to "bring him down".

[mufc1959]

I know Peter's complained that PayPal won't tell him why his account was frozen. If he was a real banker he'd know all about 'tipping off' under the POCA.

[Hyrion]

There is one comment in that thread I find incredible.
Freeman 16 writes:

Why would Peter be writing cheques of his own? And if he did, what business is it of anyone else?

And :

"I did not hear Peter say he had any WeRe bank returned to him for clearing"
"Then I suggest you get your ears checked because he made perfectly clear that banks and clearing houses have phoned him to clear cheques and that he had personally done so in every single instance. He explained at great length that it can be done over the phone or by fax etc and doesn't necessitate the actual cheque to be returned to him."

I'd love to see PoE's customers send PoE the £35 through the phone.

[Hercule Parrot]

GOODF isn't interested in promoting any truth that doesn't fellate the ego's of it's core crazies. It doesn't want debate or communication, it wants blind obedience, it is nothing more than a depressingly oppressive forum.

Sadly that's true. The way that they attack each other is hilarious. Supposed to be a forum for people who question the status quo, but if anyone dares to question a GOOFy sacred cow then it's like feeding time for the piranhas. One poor fool tried to defend internet wifi the other day, and they fell on him like wolves.

The only thing they have in common is a childlike hatred of hard work, honesty and personal responsibility.

[PeanutGallery]

The only thing they have in common is a childlike hatred of hard work, honesty and personal responsibility.

I would also say that they also share a peculiar delusion which manifests itself by their thinking themselves above even the most educated of folk, when in truth they barely grasp the bottom rung of any intellectual ladder.

[arayder]

The only thing they have in common is a childlike hatred of hard work, honesty and personal responsibility.

Like I always say, the only four letter words they don't use are "work" and "soap".

[littleFred]

Peter's "Out of the Bag" radio interview is at http://outofthebagradio.weebly.com/podcasts1

The interview with Peter starts at Part 2, from 25 minutes. The line with Peter keeps dropping out, and they haven't edited these out. Peter gives more or less the same speech as the recent video, but with added spirituality and some listener's questions. I didn't make extensive notes, but here are some highlights.


In March 2007, Peter presented Fenton Magistrates Court with 13 arrest warrants for Blair, Bush etc.

Peter starts mouthing off about how dreadful the Roman Catholic Church is. The interviewer (in the Republic of Eire) firmly steers him away from this.

"If you need to be wealthy, you need to control the money supply."

Interviewer: I know that banks commit fraud. So, isn't your bank also a fraud?

Peter: No, because we take promissory notes, which are far better than banknotes.

Peter: a cheque is a promissory note. [No it isn't.]

UCC is private commercial law from the Holy Roman Empire. [Oh, really?]

Presenter plugs MPE, Mathematically Perfected Economy, as better than any bank.

Q: Would the WeRe Bank accept cheques from other banks?

A: No. We wouldn't deal with the enemy that we want to destroy.

Peter has issued a fee schedule to Nationwide for seizing his bank account. [I wonder if he would accept a cheque? In Re units, or that horrible toxic sterling?]

[exiledscouser]

Little Fred many thanks for your forensic dissection of a totalitarian mindset.

Woodenhead hits right back asking Sali whether any of HER WeRe cheques have cleared

Wooden head wrote:
I don't have the equipment for that . I don't particularly care what it is you believe I am . The point here is Peter didn't update nothing and there was nothing new only complaints about others, which anyone following this f***ing drama knows already.
Where do the promissory notes end up? No information.
Has peter tried one of his own cheques? No information.
Has WeRe Bank ever received a cheque for clearing? No information.(a telephone call does not clear a cheque)
Has WeRe Bank paid any sterling or Re for a cheque? No information.
What is Peter's intention for the promissory notes, will he sell them on or ride them on the stock market? No information.
These questions have now only arose because the ground has moved sudden and fast. I was simply hoping this update would be just that, "and update of new information". Is all we got in nearly three hours was whinging from Peter stating the bleeding obvious.
and if you believe these queries are not relevant to the current state of WeRe bank, then you are a idiot.

This elicits the duplicitous response

In answer to your final question.....not my path but that does not deter me from supporting other paths.

So even Sali recognises that blindly following the WeRe path will result in disaster.