You must be logged in.
You must be logged in.
Publiv vs Private
What are some of the differences between “Public” and “Private”. If you are writing for the public or the private don’t you use the same (corrupt) Language. Is there any difference between Public Law and Private Law if you use the same Language for the writing of both? Is there a “different” Language for writing the Laws, Rules, and Contracts in either domain?
The above video is the “subjective” interpretation of the question. “Public Law” is the product of the writing of the “Statutes”, “Codes”, and “Regulations” made for the Operation of the “Government” and the Creations of the Government. “Private Law” is CONTRACT between PRIVATE-PARTIES. BOTH use the SAME FICTION-LANGUAGE for the expression of the rules or terms. So far ALL have missed the point. LANGUAGE IS the express Presentation of the thinking. IF the LANGUAGE is corrupt HOW can there ever be an Honorable-Expression of any thinking. Private-Thinking is just as corrupt as Public-Thinking because the LANGUAGE IS CORRUPT. Slavery is evil PERIOD. If anything “Private” Slavery is worse because an individual can have a “Moral” Code that a “Government” doesn’t necessarily have.
You need to understand that when a term is defined in law, you are to ignore the common meanings of the word, and only use it in the defined sense. This is the “legalese” most people can’t understand.
It also helps to understand that the word “includes” in law is a term of limitation, not a term of enlargement. Whatever is listed right after the “includes” are the only things included, and everything else is excluded.
The part about “legalese” has some meaning because Lawyers and Attorneys are taught to write in in a “style” which makes EVERYTHING they write a FICTION. In the “legal” system the rule for construction is: “interpretation precedes construction”. If you go to a Black’s Law Dictionary you will find that “Adjective” Law is “Practiced” in the Courts. When you put the two together the result is: if you or an Attorney present a Court with strings of words which have adjectives, adverbs, or pronouns you will have NO CONTROL over the outcome of your “case”. Anyone who has looked at or studied Law is likely familiar with the phrase “the rule of Law” = FICTION. The syntax of this four word phrase is adverb, verb, adverb, verb. If you add the prepositions to the phrases you have: for the rule of the Law = FACT, because only NOUNS are facts and each phrase is preposition. article, and NOUN. When you write using prepositional phrases in the construction of a sentence you have a form that cam be PROVED with a set or RULES. If you write any other way all that you have is fiction illusion, or opinion. The publishing of this form of Language disqualified every Treaty, Trust, Constitution, Law, Statute, Code, and Contract over the entire Planet.
Do you even understand what a legal fiction is? A legal fiction is a specific lie that is accepted as true – for example, a corporation is a legal fiction. A corporation exists only in the minds of men and on paper. A corporation has no form nor function, and can only act through its agents. But if you steal from the corporation, you can be prosecuted for theft because the corporation is treated as a real entity with legal rights of ownership.
Do you understand what Adjective law is? Yes, it is practiced by the courts, as opposed to being practiced by those people who enter the courts. Laws against theft, murder, etc. are Substantive law. Adjective law are the rules of procedure, such as rules governing discovery, interrogatories, briefs, deadlines, etc.
The phrase “Rule of Law” does not equal fiction, and I have no idea where you are coming up with this argument. It appears you are trying to create an argument out of thin air, with nothing to support it.
Rule of law simply means that laws are to be applied to everyone equally, and is not a situation where leaders can arbitrarily make decisions, such as in a dictatorship.
Your arguments are NONSENSE, and only lead to the path of destruction. You may have the best of intentions, but you are full of nonsense.
If you have the courage to even take a look a something look up Quantum Language. You are like I was before I learned something. You probably have a lot of time vested in a “study”, but without any knowledge of the RULES for Correct-Sentence-Structure-Language. Just as an example what is the difference between Negligence and Gross Negligence or between a Crime and a Hate Crime, or even between a Hunting rifle and an Assault rifle, or between Gun powder and Cannon powder. You put the same “gun” powder in a cannon, but if you want to prejudice a jury against an accused you can taint the evidence with colorful ADJECTIVES to make the accused look like a real bad guy. You put quotation marks around the phrase Rule of Law as if that is what I stated in the post. That claim is incorrect, the example I stated is: the rule of Law. I have the set of the rules for the proof of the claim. You may not like or agree with the set of the rules, but without rules for the correct-presentation of the Language all that you have is OPINION. Corrupt as they are (by the incorrect language) what would a trial be like if there were no rules of if no one followed the rules. Just because you are used to the present Language, it “sounds” right, or it is what you were taught doesn’t make it Correct. I may be in the minority with the knowledge that I have, and I may not live long enough to see a critical mass choose a correct form of communication, but I do know one thing we have been “trying” the present system for 8500 years and it still isn’t working.
