Bona fide pisanje žalbi // Bona fide complaint writing

Bona fide pisanje žalbi // Bona fide complaint writing

February 1, 2020 0 By Sebastian Fry


Hello my dears, Dejan here. Today I’d like to tell you something regarding authority, how to recognize who wants to help you when he positions himself as an authority and how to recognize the person that wants to abuse that position, how to deal with those people who are trying to command you even though they have no right to do that. So, what can be done about it and in between that I’ll add some advice on police and how to deal with the police and accusations. So, this is something I was mulling over for a long time and I was just waiting for the right manner to express it with words. I’ll add in some of my own experiences, especially that with the police, to give a few advice that I think will come in handy for everyone, no matter where you are because I noticed that’s something universal for all of them. It goes like this: first, let’s define some things. What is authority? So, parents will usually, when they have a child, they will try to place themselves in a position of authority. The way that works, I think we’ve all had such an experience the parent says: “I’m older, therefore I am right; or I am stronger, therefore I am right; or I have a house and you live in my house, therefore I am right; or I have a job and you don’t, therefore I am right; or I have a car and you don’t…” So, it reduces to, say, material possessions. So, that person older than you that’s been alive for 30 years more than you says I earned more money than you and therefore I am right which is no extraordinary feat or unusual or unexpected but again that’s no basis for authority. So, we can say that there exists that authority is a position from which commands can be issued. So, there’s really no clear-cut definition but let’s take for example the military and a general that’s an authority because his troops respect, love and listen to him and the general says: “I’ve been through this, follow my lead and we’ll deal with it.” So, there are some elements of faith. It has to be that the one in the subordinate position has a certain amount of faith positive faith in the person that’s the authority. So, the general comes and says: “We’re surrounded but I have a plan, follow me and we’ll survive and win.” So, that’s authority and if it’s confirmed that the general really knows what he’s doing and that his plan works, the soldiers can say “this is an authority for us, it’s been confirmed”. That could approximately be said to be true authority. So, true authority is something the person accepts willingly, and that authority should prove itself. Someone can’t simply say, “My name is Mark Markusson and therefore I am the worldwide authority.” Mark Markusson can say that but it’s not provable. We don’t have to believe it, in that situation we can’t prove anything, neither can Mark. Every faith in something like that would be futile, ultimately it would end up being a manipulation of some sort without exception, I think. So, authority is someone who wants to give us commands for any reason, but he first has to have evidence of his authority and must have some basis for it and not just “because I said so”. What I mentioned earlier about parents who say “I am older” “I am” “I gave birth to you”, this and that, those are logical fallacies you can check yourself, there are fallacies based on authority, circular reasoning and so on. I was so fascinated by this in high school, I attended logic for only two years but I wish I could have attended it throughout my education, that’s how incredible I found it since it showed how most people, when they’re talking with us, and when they’re trying to convince us of something, most people actually have no clue what they’re doing, they have no clue what they’re saying, they just spout nonsense that worked before and that they think will work now. So, we should find such people, such generals that know what they’re doing and then follow them. There’s nothing wrong in that, in following a man who knows what he’s doing. So, So, there’s a job coordinator and you’re the employee, the coordinator says: “I have a plan, do this” and you say OK, I trust you, let’s see what we end up with. You don’t have to know everything about everything, all it matters is that you find a man you believe, it could be a man or a woman, it’s not limited. so find a person you trust and that has proven itself to know what it’s doing. So, a person who knows, who knows where it’s headed. That’s about it. So, that’s authority, I said one has to have faith, that’s a legal term too and is called “bona fide”. In Latin, bona fide means, translated as “good faith”, let’s put it that way. What probably no one ever told you and what will probably shock you when you hear it is that all laws and all structures presume that all people are bona fide. So, this means that when you appear in court, for you the court presumes that you are the best person in the world until you prove otherwise with your words and actions. This is why that’s so special. The person that acts in a bona fide way, he who truly acts like that, who has good faith in his fellow man, he is protected at the expense of everyone else. So, if you appear in front of the court, if someone sues you for whatever reason, the court will only observe behavior and actions of one and the other side, and if the court determines for you that you are bona fide, that you are the one who has been trying the entire time to offer an olive branch, who tried to fix the problem, who tried to establish peach, to establish communication, if the court establishes that you are bona fide you are protected at the expense of the other party Then we look how to punish the other party. You don’t have to prove anything there, your role is done. So, there is this way of acting that involves good will towards all people around us, no matter what we’re doing. Actually, when you look at companies, when you look at for example, telecom operaters, I just recently signed up for an internet connection, I opened a contract with them, I signed the contract, and they gave me access to 30 days of internet and only then billed me. That sounds like something completely normal, completely OK, but that is actually one proof of bona fide. So, if I refuse to pay, they could take me to court and say: “Look at this, we showed good faith and look at how he’s paying us back.” I have zero chance to win in that case. Therefore, Therefore, if you observe how companies or just successful businesses act, they always have an element of good will, though they will never say it out loud, because as I said that’s not, that sounds like a cheat in the video game of life. Nobody tells us this but it’s really true, if we look around us, we see it everywhere. We see that there can’t be a long-term successful relationship without an element of good will, and if the element of good will is mutual, then the relationship can last to infinity. I think that, if you look at interpersonal relationships, and also if you look at, if there were assumptions and if so, where they positive or negative, and then if you see they were negative, then that kind of relationship was doomed from the start. So, bona fide really is a legal concept, I did butcher it a bit here, but I think I explained it well. So, bona fide in law, it actually means that a man who acts with good faith who enters all contracts and all relationships with good will is actually always innocent. So, the court only wants to know who is and who isn’t bona fide, So, when you are working with someone, you always want to give a bit, to make a compromise and to be the first to do it, and then you wait to see what the other party will do. Here’s an example that I just did in my life, I was at a homeowner’s place, I was renting an apartment, and when I decide to move out, I told the owner, since I heard that, there are some bills, this and that, it drags on, even after I move out, some 15-20 days after there will be bills arriving, I told the homeowner this: “I’ll pay you for the whole month, I will move out midway through the month, and then from the remaining money you pay the bills and then I will come later at the very end of the month and you can give me back the change. That’s what I did. So, then I really did visit him later, and he said: “Here, the change is this and this”, he returned the change, I said thanks. I agreed with that amount, that’s how much I was expecting it matches up from my side too, so I was the one who showed good faith in that case, now let’s suppose, we went our separate ways, now let’s say that after a month, the homeowner realizes there’s another bill left, he can’t do anything to collect. He can’t do anything to me, because I showed good will, I gave my best to fix the matter, I gave him the option to choose, he gave me my money back, That’s that. Case closed. The best way to react in any situation is to presume the other side has good intentions and to behave that way, up until that other side proves you otherwise. So, when you meet a new person, presume it has good intentions, that it means you no harm, that, if there were are misunderstandings, those were just that that there is no evil intent, and actually, when we act like that, we avoid to activate what I mentioned previously, the limbic system. So, the limbic system is activated when we feel like everyone wants to hurt us, everyone wants to attack us, that’s when the limbic system is activated. So, bona fide is a legal concept, we could say psychological, physiological, in all possible ways it helps us lead a better life, more relaxed, lighter life, a more efficient life. So, there are no misunderstandings, no arguments. If everyone were to act like that towards one another, are there any limits? We’d be able to do everything. So, those were authority and bona fide. Now, I want to say what’s “legal” and what’s “legitimate”. We could say that any rule that’s in accordance with the bona fide concept is legitimate, meaning it is fair, and then we can say there are rules that are legal, meaning they are in accordance with laws, and they’re legal. We already see here that there exists, a discrepancy. So, you can be stopped by the police and be punished based on a law that is legal but not legitimate, so a law that’s been through the official procedure, I don’t know, through the parliament, that’s been voted for by an overwhelming majority, but the law isn’t legitimate. So, the law isn’t fair and then it’s down to you to complain and to fight to set things right. However, if you don’t complain and think for yourself that is how it’s meant to be, that you are constantly being punished, then that’s it, that’s the end of that story. So, stupid laws existed throughout history all the time and they’ll keep being made. People who sit in those parliaments and vote on laws, they make some changes, look at one another and say: “Now what? We have to justify the paycheck we’re being given. Let’s do some busywork.” Then they introduce some changes, laws, this and that. Here’s an example: here in Banja Luka, where I live, some 10 years ago perhaps, there was a law, that cyclists must wear a helmet. Everyone who didn’t wear a helmet was stopped by the police and write up a fine equaling 50 BAM, 40-50, so 20-25 euros. OK now, where’s the catch? The catch is that even though the police fined people left and right, nobody wanted to wear a helmet at all. You can’t force people and that’s that. In the end, the police gave up on it. What happened then with those who had already paid the fine? Nothing. They didn’t complain, they should have complained straight away. They should have complained, fought against it and said, and said in writing, I’m talking about written complaints, not protests with signs, or in a tent, for one to sleep in a tent in front of the parliament building, but to write formal complaints and not to give up. So, there was this stupid law on cycling, then there was a law on drunken walking, I suppose drunkards walked down the street and the police simply wanted an excuse to punish them, and since they weren’t driving, if they were driving, the police could arrest them for drunken driving, since they aren’t driving, the police could arrest them for drunken walking. Makes no sense, but the law is legal, but isn’t legitimate, because what’s the definition of drunken walking? Who defines this? There’s no definition, it’s not fair at all. So, you only have to ask yourself if something is fair and if it’s not fair, it can be a law, it can be in effect for a thousand years, but if you appeal to it, you will bring it down sooner or later. Then, there was also here in Banja Luka, the police supposedly, I read about it in the newspapers, I didn’t have it happen to me but it really seems incredible, apparently the police entered bars and performed sobriety tests inside bars, on seated people. So, what’s the explanation given for this? Well, the explanation is, “We have nothing to do, let’s just harass people.” So, now we’re already going over to the police. The police is the element that should enforce laws, the police should in every action include a bit of common sense, to have bona fide, to presume the very best for you when you’re stopped. unless the opposite is proven. However, the police doesn’t work like that, the police behaves contrary to that. So, I don’t know if you’re aware of how the police has its training and schooling, in essence, the police is told, that everyone they see out in the street is a potential mass murderer, drug dealer, this and that, and so they should act accordingly. Over time, we again come back to the limbic system, over time, this in police officers creates total paranoia, they see me and think: “Here he is, this is Pablo Escobar’s accountant. Let’s stop, question, frisk him, see what’s he doing and so on.” But they have no proof of anything. But they will still stop me and spend half an hour of my life to ask me some stupid questions. So, as you can conclude, that justifiably annoys me, however, the real solution isn’t to act out of limbic system but neocortex, which among other things deals with writing. So, when the police stops you, the conversation will usually go like this, the police officer will say: “Hey you!” “ID!” “Who you! Where headed! What doing!” So, this on its own shows a certain, how should I put it, overstimulation of the limbic system, shows hyper-aggression, paranoia, and all the other assorted things. It happened to me once when I was a teenager, I was waiting for a bus, we stayed at the cyber caffe the entire night, we were meant to stay in until 6 a.m. but at 4 the owner closed shop and kicked us out, I mean he first kicked us out and then closed. So, I stood with a friend at the bus stop, we were waiting for the bus, at 4 a.m., what are we supposed to be doing? We were eating potato chips and I couldn’t find a trash can so I put the wrapper in my pocket and then roll in two, at that time I had no idea how serious of a problem it was, the way the police behaved, so two of them roll in an unmarked car, two of them in plain clothes come out and one of them grabs a gun, saying: “What’s that in your pocket?” I say: “It’s a potato chips wrapper.” Only later I understood the level of criminality involved, so it’s really, I have no idea who the two guys were. They could have been anyone, they could have been garbage men, criminals, mobsters. They didn’t introduce themselves, they didn’t say what they want, they didn’t say, let’s see your ID. So, when you’re talking with the police, you have no idea who you’re talking with. And that’s said to THEM, those are their own rules. Their own rules that police officers get during training are that when they talk to someone, they have no idea who they’re talking to until they see some ID, so when you stop someone, look for an ID immediately. Does it make sense? So, they’re told, when you stop this guy, he could be Pablo Escobar’s accountant. Ask for ID. Check identity, cross-check for warrants, check INTERPOL’s outstanding orders. You have no idea who it is. If you see a pleasant face, it doesn’t mean anything, if you’re dealing with a suited-up man, doesn’t mean he’s proper. So, you can see the problem, which is that the police has an attitude that has nothing to do with bona fide, the attitude is completely paranoid and everyone who’s ever had contact with the police knows that this is true, knows that this is correct, knows that they are paranoid, that they are hysterical, knows that they overreact, and that the person has to remain calm in such a position. What a police officer should do with you, when you’re stopped, is to say the following: “Good evening” courtesy, so good evening is courtesy, “my name is Markus Markusson or Darkus Darkusson” so introduction number three, to show ID because you have no idea who it is and number four to say the reason for stopping you. Police officers that I dealt with, none of them did this. None! And they don’t care about it. They neither introduce themselves, nor are they courteous, nor do they state the reason nor show their ID. I actually have no idea who it is. I have no idea who it is. It could be a police officer from Belgium who knows Serbian who came here to harass me. Maybe, maybe he’s from Norway or Antarctica, I have no idea who he is, but he expects me to trust him because he’s wearing a uniform. So, you can already see a discrepancy here. When it comes to the police, we’re talking about people who have a position of authority and their authority comes down to “we wear a uniform and drive a car of a certain color”. If I were to try to wear a uniform and to paint my vehicle, my bicycle, into a certain color, and if I were to say that this gives me authority to carry weapons and stop people, do you think anyone would believe me? Of course not. So, it’s an incredible thing what we allow the police to get away with. To do as it pleases, to treat us as it pleases and nobody can squeak a peep, right? Well, there is a solution to it and it’s so incredible, once you hear it, I think you’ll laugh a bit and cry a bit, that’s how simple it is. So, it happened to me in 2016, I had this, as I said, during the night I didn’t sleep, I was working the entire night and I say to myself, I should go for a walk, so it was in 2016, I get out of the house, get dressed in a thick coat. Oh! Right in front of the house, a cop car. They stop me and say: “Where going!” “Hey you boy! Where going!” I say: “I’m out for a walk.” Then he’s checking me for 15 minutes, when he returned my ID, I say: “Would you be so kind to introduce yourself to me?” and he says: “Introduce to you! Who you! Who you think are! My name Mr. Cop! Mr. Cop my name!” I say: “I’ll go write a formal complaint in your name.” He says: “Write, me untouchable!” I thought, this is criminal par excellence this is truly a criminal gem, he’s wearing a cop uniform, he’s carrying a gun and he’s financed by taxpayers to go around and do as he pleases. Because I knew that arrogance of that sort doesn’t appear overnight, it appears over years and years, I mean, absolute authority that isn’t earned by anything. That man, he was in such a position of power and domination that he is untouchable. That’s what he thinks. Tomorrow, as soon as it dawned, the event was around 2 a.m., I didn’t sleep at all, at dawn break I went to the police station in the city and said: “I want to write a complaint.” So, I entered, the reception desk is manned by a police officer who asks me: “What want!” I say: “I want to write a complaint, last night I was stopped and insulted by a police officer.” He says: “Your complaint will not produce anything. Better give up.” I said: “That is none of my concern. Your opinion does not interest me. Tell me where to write a complaint.” He says: “OK, OK.” He says to go to the ministry of internal affairs, there is a building blah blah, OK, that’s where I went, as I’m entering the building, I’m directed upstairs to the office of the public relations spokesman. It’s a retired journalist, and it’s clearly seen it’s just a ‘pro forma’ position, when I entered and said what I’m after, he said that nothing will come of it, “It’s a futile affair” and I said: “Your opinion does not interest me. I came to write a complaint and I will do so, end of discussion. Tell me how to do it.” He said: “OK, OK. Here’s some paper, take a pen, write it out and turn it in. There is a scriptorium at ground floor. Write out your information and be brief.” I take the paper, take the pen, sit in the restaurant downstairs, order a drink and write so: “On this day, in this time, on this place, I was stopped by police officers who showed bad behavior, when I asked one of them to introduce himself, he said his name was Mr. Cop, I think this was unprofessional, I think said officer shouldn’t be in any position of authority,” for the same reason I said here, I mean, that’s total corruption, that’s the definition of corruption, it’s not when a man does something for money, it’s not JUST that, corruption is when a man has some public function and does as he wills through it. He’s not responsible to anyone and feels untouchable, at least that’s how these people see it. The sheer arrogance is incredible. That’s what I wrote and said, I am worried, that worries me, is this man supposed to defend me? He’s supposed to defend me? From who? From himself? Nasty all the way. So, after some days I receive, first, here’s how it goes, after some time there’s a receipt because on every complaint sent by a citizen at police officers, this internal control must immediately issue a receipt, to state “we have received your complaint and we will investigate it within 30 days”. I got that receipt, it’s a letter, all right then, after some 30 days, I get the letter and it turned out right that I was told by police officers, it turned out that they were right, the letter actually states, “by examining the facts it was determined that police officers A and B” and their names are plainly stated, so if you ask a police officer for his name and he says, like his name is a secret, it’s no secret at all, when you write a complaint you’ll get their full names, it’s no secret at all, they are capable of introducing themselves, they should do it, they simply don’t want to do it because they are in a position of authority and do as they please until you write a formal complaint. Now, why is that so important? Because I know how the other side thinks. I got two responses, I got two letters in response to my complaint that I wrote with my hand on a piece of paper. So, I got two responses done on a typewriter. What does this tell us? This tells us that those complaints are taken extremely seriously. If we actually say there’s a problem with the police, the problem lies at the level of these officers out on the streets, because they do as they please and citizens never dare write a formal complaint and so their superiors have no clue what’s happening. Then the only recourse you have is to complain on Facebook how the police harassed you. So, there does exist a mechanism, it involves complaining, and of course, the police will defend its own, they will always indemnify their own, rally to each other’s aid, however this is none of your concern, you only have to care about this, when you have a bad experience, you want to complain on it right away and you want to say to everyone around you “write a complaint”. So, if something happens, write a complaint. There is no alternative. Here’s another reason why that’s the most potent mechanism. So, let’s say that you’re stopped by a police officer and he starts threatening you: “I will kill you, I will slit your throat”, if you were to record that, you actually get in trouble, you’re not supposed to record a police officer, you may not record audio or video, you may not take pictures, you can’t do anything! And there’s always two of them, the two of them defend each other, always testify on each other’s behalf, and say, here, we had to beat him up, we had to stop this paraplegic and beat him up because he threatened us. So, their word is believed, and what is left for you to do? You can write formal complaints. That should be our sacred duty. So, we are here as chief arbiters of what the police does. If the police has some bad habits, if they are impolite, if they don’t know what they’re doing, ultimately it’s our fault. We are the ones who should complain about it. We are the ones should say, OK, on this day, I was stopped by A and B, or, I don’t know the name, why won’t he introduce himself? I don’t know who he is. How am I supposed to trust him? And, so, if you stop trusting police officers, their entire job is dead in its tracks, their job depends on people trusting them, and if you say: “I don’t trust you until you show some ID, that’s that, now arrest me, do as you please.” So, that’s a very interesting thing, we live in a world where there’s a layer of servants who are meant to serve us but they set themselves as an authority, they become our masters, and do as they please, but they do that up until we complain to that and do at least something. So, I said, you’re not meant to record a police officer, so what’s the recourse? You can write a complaint, it’s a right nobody can veto or dispute and it’s even better because on audio you can incriminate yourself, you can jump in your own throat but when you write a complaint you have the chance to tell your side of the story as it suits you and say, I was worried, so when you’re writing a complaint, you write like a news report on day X, in time Y, on place Z these events occurred. If you don’t know the name of the police officer, so it’s even better if you show your ID, once you show your ID and they write it down, there is a trace, they indeed stopped you. Then you say, why did they stop me? For example, I was once stopped and held for 15 minutes while my ID was checked. What are they doing for so long? Are they functional at all? Back then I didn’t know that, I hadn’t dared to write a complaint, but the next time I write down: “Are you literate?” I think that guy that stopped me wasn’t even literate, maybe he wasn’t a real police officer, I have no idea. It’s an incredible thing. Once you understand how the police sees us, common citizens who just want to live their lives, how their job in this consists of seeing everyone as potential criminals until it’s proven otherwise, but you consider them an authority, as honorable, decent people, but they actually have no proof for it, so if we take on their attitude, their job is dead in its tracks. We don’t have to do it, we can simply say, we can be just as petty as they are, to say, OK, you’re writing me up for driving 1 kilometer over the limit, I’ll write you up for stopping me and not saying hi, you weren’t courteous, I have absolute right and then we’ll see, you stop me and I’ll write you up too, we both write up each other, is it fair? Perfectly fair. And so, then you have to spread this among those you know and tell them, your right is to write complaints and your duty is to write complaints, if you won’t do it, then there’s chaos, each of them does as he pleases, every police officer and politician, that applies to politicians too. Wow. So, I’d like to say what happened, that event was in 2016, as I said, I knew what happened on their side, because I got two replies to my report, from their point of view, they have a controller, who receives complaints. Now imagine this, the controller receives one complaint in two years and it happens to be my complaint! When he sees it, he says, what in the world is this, it’s a disaster, of course, he knows who it is, he has a record of who stopped who that night, he rings in that officer and asks, did you stop this Dejan, he says, I did, so what happened, well nothing happened, why does he say you mocked him, please no, I didn’t want to, don’t believe him, we’ll call up the professional standards board to investigate this. And he gets dragged through the process for a month, until it’s determined he did something. That was my entire goal! I didn’t want him to get fired, I didn’t want him to be affected negatively, only for someone to approach him from a position of authority and tell him, what are you doing with yourself, look at your behavior, but I can’t tell him this when I see him but I can convey it through a complaint that bypasses him and his friends and buddies and goes up to a higher institution. In this way, I protect myself too, there’s no discussion, no shouting, no tension, I make a report, send it in and that’s that. Now, what would happen, I heard my neighbors who said they also had trouble with the police, don’t know if it’s the same one, but they said they had problems, the police would barge in, like, for no reason would cause a hubbub, I have no idea what they were doing, just like with me, they set up an ambush and say, oh boy, we have to stop someone tonight. Oh boy, we have to barge into someone’s backyard tonight, we’re bored, we have to fill out our daily report that something happened, so, I told to that neighbor, go write a complaint, take the entire family, bring the entire tribe, sit down, write a complaint each and turn them in. There is no alternative. Because when 20 of us complains about the behavior of the same police officer, that’s already some evidence, it means there’s something there. So, for me it’s a topic, I felt back then that it’s important and here’s what transpired after, it’s like I knew what will happen, in 2018 there was in Banja Luka, this case of a young man, David, being found dead. So, he was found dead in some creek, in a drainage ditch that leads to Vrbas, to the river, found cold dead. The police arrived, and ultimately we only know that he is dead. Who killed him? How? With what? What are the injuries? None of this is known because the police screwed up the investigation so much, the evidence was completely ruined, the autopsy was mangled to the point people from Belgrade came, the international legal team, just to see what’s happening, a major circus happened, the young man died but the police hasn’t got a clue about anything. The police knows nothing. And so, there were rumors that there’s a mafia inside the police force, but I knew, I had a more realistic explanation and that is the police is truly incompetent. These people that gather evidence are so incompetent, uneducated, arrogant, never ask about anything, don’t follow any procedure, do as they please, what do you think will happen with evidence? And also, I had it happen to me, two or three times in my life I called the police, I did it, to write a report on something. So, every time they arrived I was stunned because of how consistent they were, all three times the police would arrive, took statements from both sides and then write a report the way they felt things happened. It never happened that they wrote a report of what truly happened. Police officers always had their own version of events and said: “Oh boy, I can’t be hassled with all the paperwork, we’ll write in something insignificant.” And that’s that. And that’s that! Who are you supposed to call? Who can you complain to? You write a complaint. It’s an incredible amateurism, everyone does as he pleases, they don’t follow any rules, so it’s a true chaos, nothing more. Just incredible. And this happened when I called them, when they were meant to benefit me, it’s so incredible, there are illiterate police officers, they are illiterate, it’s so incredible. But when you see it, you’ll say, let it blow over, what do I care about others? But this guy will at some point write a report on a third party, on your cousin, on you. He’ll write a report and get it all wrong. Incredible. So, that David thing happened, and for some 8 months there were protests, gatherings at city square, it was so nauseous, but in the end the protests did nothing. The police arrived in their riot gear, equipment for dispersing gatherings, they threw tear gas, arrested, cracked heads, and instead of those 5,000 people that attended, if someone had told them: “Hey people, write complaints, sit down and each day write a complaint per person. To whom? It doesn’t matter. Write to the high representative, just inform others about what’s going on. Institutions have no clue what’s going on. You have to get active.” Now what would happen if each of those 5,000 people wrote a complaint? The minister of police comes in, who said it’s all OK, that there’s no problem, that it’s all political, what would happen if 5,000 letters landed in a single morning on his desk? And he has to issue a receipt and respond to each within 30 days. He will resign straight away, just to avoid writing all those letters. In the end, protests amounted to nothing. Protests only led to chaos, gridlock, you couldn’t go through even with a bike in the city center, police officers checked IDs of everyone nearby, as they are wont to do, they cracked heads, and recently that happened again, some dude had his head split open. So, protests solve nothing. When you’re out in the street, the only thing that happens is that you’re exposing yourself to the danger that someone splits your head open with pleasure. I’m reading about those yellow, what’s their name, yellow vests, in Paris, even to this day they are holding protests, and police officers aim for the eyes, that’s sadism I guess, with satisfaction to use rubber bullets to shoot for the eyes to knock an eye out. So, when you’re protesting, when you’re out in the streets, you’re putting yourself in danger, you won’t change a thing, you will only cause yourself a problem, and a problem for the society, instead you can sit at home, take 10 sheets of paper and write 10 complaints. Say, I feel worried, I feel scared, on this day I saw this event, if you don’t know the names of police officers who did it, you can say he was about 170cm high, he appeared as if 40 years old, one of his front teeth was black, that’s exactly how the police does it. So, the police should be objective, to have bona fide, to have goodwill towards people and to write reports, but as I’ve proven so far, all of these were my experiences, I wouldn’t have believed it. So, the police does none of that. It neither writes reports properly, nor does it have courtesy, nor does it show bona fide, goodwill towards people. All completely backwards. And then it’s down to us to be the ones who will correct the problem. There’s nobody else. So, sit down, write complaints, take kids and let them write complaints, let the first thing they ever write be: “On this day, I was stopped by Mr. Cop and started yelling at me, he has no right to yell at me, why is he yelling? I felt scared. Signed, Peter Petersson.” So, this should be such a strong reflex, that when you’re stopped by a police officer, it happened to me once, it was, I believe, in 2012, sometime at the start of the year, there was Copa del Rey, Spanish football cup between Barcelona and Real, reverse leg, if I recall correctly. And I got stopped by a police officer. Ambush from behind the shrub! I was crossing the street, the light was red for me but it was late at night and there was nobody in sight. He jumped out and said: “What do here! My city!” And I said: “Can you introduce yourself?” And when I asked him that, he turned around and sprinted away, It’s an incredible thing. When it happened to me, I thought, what kind of criminal is this, what crimes did he commit that day that the very idea of being asked for a name caused such fear, such panic to the point he turned around and ran like his life depended on it, saying: “This time I forgive you.” I realized just how incredible it is, that we’re being pestered, we’re being stopped for the stupidest of reasons but they’re the ones who enforce this tyranny, who enforce this unfair authority. I mentioned tyranny, let’s define tyranny, it’s defined as “arbitrary use of authority”. So, I mentioned that authority is a person who knows what he’s doing, who is in a position to be able to see better than we can, and we willingly follow authority, to lead a better life. However, when someone has placed himself in such a position, without having earned it and uses this position for no reason, without any rules, that’s tyranny. So, the word “tyranny” in Latin means “master”, or tyrannus, tyrant, tyrannus, meaning master and actually the idea comes from ancient Greece where citizens believed that everyone who tried to command others is a tyrant, regardless of his intentions. So, they regarded as tyrant anyone, good or bad or neutral or passive or aggressive, it doesn’t matter who you are, it doesn’t matter how you behave, if you try to put yourself as being the ruler, you’re a tyrant. Today, we only have the negative connotation, we consider a tyrant the person that uses authority in a negative manner. However, we see that the original meaning of the word was much broader and much richer. So, in ages past, people would say, it doesn’t matter who you are, if you’re an Emissary of God, you can’t command me, you can only give me an advice or some such. Now that’s that true mentality, where one says, I don’t tolerate tyranny. You can’t command me and I won’t allow it. So, in general, when you’re stopped by the police, you should know that the police is the master of the streets. The police does as it pleases and if you have an issue with that, don’t tell them, because as I experienced, they neither consider it, they despise it, they see us, I mean, I can’t say for all, but the one I dealt with, that’s proof that there is at least one police officer who considers people as cattle. That’s how he sees us and he despises every attempt to correct him. So, don’t argue with them, don’t try proving anything to them, just listen to their commands and ask for their names. They won’t say, no problem, I’ll write you a complaint and have a nice day and that’s that. So, be vigilant, when you’re stopped by the police don’t admit to anything because, here’s their ingenious system, so the system is completely contrary to bona fide principle I mentioned, it’s an incredible thing, here’s how it goes, in logic it is said that negative statements can’t be proven, so if I say, if I say: “I didn’t do it I’m not guilty” it’s a statement that’s the worst possible one for me because I can’t prove it, and your first reflex when you’re stopped by the police and when it asks: “Are you drunk?” your first instinct is to say: “No, I didn’t drink, I’m not drunk, I didn’t” but all of those are statements you can’t substatiante in any way. You think you’re mounting a defense but the police straight out ignores it, they aren’t interested in that, they only want to hear something positive, for yourself. Because it’s sort of a rule in law that no person will incriminate himself, and then if you incriminate yourself, you’ve saved you actually saved the police thousands of man hours in effort needed to prove it. To prove something, it takes an incredible amount of work and effort, for example to prove that you’re alive. There are people who had those issues, by some bureaucratic fluke, they get wiped out from the birth registry, for example, and they can’t prove they’re alive, and they say: “I am here, I exist” and the bureau says, well then, but can you prove you exist and that you are here? “I can’t.” So, when you’re stopped by the police, you should know that the police ought to stop only those people for whom there’s grounds to do so and that there’s some evidence for it, so if you’re really involved in something illegal, I didn’t say illegitimate but illegal, meaning if you drive 1 kilometer over the speed limit, the police should record it, and say: “We stopped you, good evening, my name is Jan Jansson, these are my documents, I am from the police station blah blah, I stopped you because during transition in this bend my apparatus recorded that you were driving at 1 kilometer above the speed limit.” So, if someone were to stop you and tell you this treatise, you’d think “oh no, the apparatus says I drove too fast it’s all over”, but that’s not even remotely true. Because, that one case can be disputed in a thousand ways, the person only has to be open and unbiased, and to say, OK, the apparatus in question, when was the last time you tested it and the police officer says: “Tested? They are meant to be test- I’m sorry, sir, you’re free to go.” So, this really is true, the evidence, the police presents the case, as if it’s all known, and all the evidence is here, and you only have to confess, but that’s not true at all, they in most cases have no evidence at all, they have nothing on you, and they push for confession, and then punish you on the basis of confession, and then the lack of evidence is irrelevant, and the ruse has served its purpose. So, the police also behaves in a way that is too hysterical and paranoid, which I don’t get at all. When one signs up to be a police officer, he has health insurance paid by the taxpayers, if someone comes and cuts his arm off, first, he can shoot him, he’ll get a medal for courage, he’ll get a disability pension, he’ll get a prosthetic and he’ll be taken care of for the rest of his life alongside his family. So, why is he so afraid then? Every expense is covered. Why is he afraid? And he meets me but he’s afraid to turn his back to me. I should be afraid, not he. It’s all backwards. So, you can pretty much see that the problem is complex and layered and festers for decades. In the end, it comes down to citizen inertia. It comes down to citizens saying “nothing will come of it”, when I said to people write a complaint, dude, if you are stopped by the police and they won’t introduce themselves, you have no idea who they are, it could be John Peterson from the CIA, from the Pentagon, that he arrived there, speaks fluent Serbian, where did he get the uniform? You have no idea. But he won’t say his name. And still nobody believes me. Let me be, it’s better if I just let things slide, when in fact, the problem keeps piling up. Someone has to stand up. Someone has to say, I’ll write complaints, heaven may fall, when you’re talking with the police, don’t admit to anything, don’t justify yourself, the instinct is that the person justifies himself, don’t do that ever, don’t say I didn’t do it, because they don’t consider it anyway, it means nothing to them. So, all you have to ask is this, have an open mind, no assumptions and to say: “Do you have any proof of this? What’s your name? Mind showing me your ID?” In most cases, this is enough for the police officer to think that you’re some sort of a lawyer, sorry sir, until next time, unless he really has some proof. So, don’t be intimidated, don’t let yourself by psychologically pressured, to tell you this and that, whatever they do to you, just write up complaints. No introduction? Complaint. No greeting? Complaint. No stated reason? Complaint. No ID? Complaint. Complain all the time, you have to be so petty because they are too. No mercy. Keep complaining. I can say, this hurts them more than a stab right through the heart. A piece of paper with those words, which don’t have to be caustic, don’t have to be rough, don’t have to be how should I put it, pessimistic, you don’t have to be sarcastic, you simply say: “I am worried. Why are they doing this?” Now that’s bona fide. When you have that kind of attitude, you win in everything. Here’s another example of how bona fide could be used, so everything I said about the police stems from my experiences, however, as I said, I believe things can be improved, and that there’s a simple way of doing it, meaning when you spot a problem, write up a report. And then, your complaint means nothing on its own but if there’s 50 of you and you’re all complaining, if you’re stopped by the police and you complain because they didn’t wear a seat belt. “How come he isn’t wearing a seat belt?” That’s already something. For example, if you’re stopped and asked to do a breathalyzer, to supposedly test your blood alcohol level, again those devices have to be calibrated. So if you ask them, when was the last time you tested those devices, they will say, never. There’s a lot of irregularities there, a huge number of them, but we gloss over them, we think for ourselves that we’re finished, that they have proof, no they don’t, unless they can show them, where are they? They don’t exist. It means nothing. So, don’t confess to anything, don’t put yourself in trouble. Just ask questions, have an open mind, have the bona fide attitude, and here’s another example of how bona fide can be used, for example, in theory, someone sues you to collect a bill, let’s say the power company, as I said, the power company or telecom, they know exactly what they’re doing, they set themselves as bona fide, and then in court you automatically lose. Now imagine this scenario – you receive a notice of failure for the power bill in the amount of 6 million euros, whether you really did accrue it or it’s a glitch in the system or something, your reaction doesn’t have to be “yes” or “no”, reaction doesn’t have to be “I will pay today” or “I won’t pay at all”, the reaction can be that you visit them and inquire about the debt, about how it came to be on a monthly basis, and promise to give your best effort to pay, even if it’s only 1 euro a day: “I will fight, I won’t give up”, now that’s bona fide, when you set yourself in this manner, there’s no harm that can come to you. It really does work because people who want to fix problems, people who want to help, they are exceedingly rare. Those kinds of people don’t exist in courts, you won’t see these people in courts and if they do appear there, they say, there seems to be a debt, let’s find a solution, the court says, OK, for you the rules can be bent, for you concessions can be made, because you’re giving your best to fix it. That’s bona fide. So, when we adopt that attitude, in private and professional relationships, things get solved. We’re shielded from all harm. So much for that, see you next time.