A
AllYou!
In
try to be a little bit more clear........
You're the one who bases your assertion that corporations are
fictional *specifically because* they are not tangible.
[snip where the professor made a different case for a different
assertion]
as you know, the law was codified by the very governments which you
claim are fiction. And so, if the government is just as fictional
as a cartoon, or the Boogie Man under your bed, then so is the law.
Either everything in Fred Flinstones world is fictional, or it is
not. Make your choice.
rely upon it as an argument.
[snip more of what you admit is just fiction]
you're being held by this society against your will?
revelation that governments, and corporations, and the law, and
math, and science, and even languge are all inventions of the mind
that we use as tools in order to facilitate our interactions with
other people. Of course they are. so what is really your point?
Or are you so obsessed with trying to argue something that everyone
else knows that you've actually lost sight of the reason that you're
making these arguments?
a government which you claim is a fiction means that you, probably
more than most, are acting out a fiction every time you argue about
what the law says. That makes you the most prolific actor I'v
witnessed in Usenet.
aware knows that they can withdraw from this society, and are all
reasonably aware of the terms and conditions which will apply to
them if they continue to participate in this society. They all know
about the taxes they'll have to pay, and about the laws that will
apply to them, and about how they'll be held to their commitments to
others.
Then why do you keep quoting from that with was produced by that
fiction?
there aren't all that many places to go which are not yet other
societies doesn't mean that there aren't places to go. It just
means that most people choose to join societies.
completely different than that. In my experience, people are fully
aware that love, and family, and math, and language, and government,
and rights, and a whole host of other such things are concepts, and
products of the human intellect, and that they use all of those in
order to guide their conduct as it relates to others. In fact, it's
been my experience that there aren't too many people who make the
kinds of mistakes in logic that you do.
You've proven by your posts here that you believe that just because
all widgets are gadgets, that all gadgets must therefore be widgets.
You've also proven that you have little to no ability to grasp the
notion of how the same word can have different meanings when used in
different contexts.
suing a corporation, or of being sued by a corporation? All the
people of whom I'm aware know the affects of that.
though it's not tangible, and even though it's an invention of the
human mind, corporations exist in the same way. They are inventions
of the human mind, but the fact that people recognize their
existence (just as they do math), and conduct their affairs
accordingly, means that they are very real (just as math is), yet,
intangible.
And if the law (which you claim is fictitious too) really did say
that corporations are just fiction, then any and all court cases to
which any corporation was a party would be dismissed on that basis.
Do you know of any such cases? Even one?
That should tell you that people who study what the words used in
the law mean from a *legal* perspective do not mean what you think
they mean. The use of so-called "plain English" is not enough when
trying to interpret the law.
recognized as meaning what you claim it means, so that the effects
end up being whatever it is that you're arguing they should be. If
this society wanted to abolish what they believe about the existence
of government or corporations, then it would do so.
your argument notwithstanding (nor your obsession with someone else
in your exchanges with me), I find it interesting that you actually
belive that any of this is a huge revelation.
Your reading comprehension skills are worse than I thought. I'llLex Quadruplator said:Me and Patrick Healy, professor of law at McGill University.
try to be a little bit more clear........
You're the one who bases your assertion that corporations are
fictional *specifically because* they are not tangible.
[snip where the professor made a different case for a different
assertion]
You can't validly base your argument on what the law says because,WRONG.
The main characteristic of a corporation and the basis behind
"limited
liability" is that a corporation denotes an "entity" that is
said to
have a "separate existence" from that of its members, an
"entity" said
to having "its own rights, privileges, and liabilities". A
"cult" does
not denote such an "entity" in law.
as you know, the law was codified by the very governments which you
claim are fiction. And so, if the government is just as fictional
as a cartoon, or the Boogie Man under your bed, then so is the law.
Either everything in Fred Flinstones world is fictional, or it is
not. Make your choice.
[snip quotes from works of fiction]LMAO NO, it is not just according to me!!!
But that's all fiction according to you, and so you so can't validlyNO. A "cult" does not represent a SEPARATE ENTITY from that of
its
members. (Unless of course they were INCORPORATED)
rely upon it as an argument.
[snip more of what you admit is just fiction]
Thanks for proving my point about your last refuge.Sorry, that's from hanging around your mentor Abbot the Retard
for too
long. But I still say that you're about as bright as a bag of
rocks.
I guess you missed the 'voluntary' part. Are you suggesting thatRight. A legal system that has brought us fascist governments,
police
states, private banking cartels, lost of unalienable rights,
unending
taxation, discontent, degradation and unending wars, a legal
system
that has served tyrants since its inception and continues to do
so
today.
you're being held by this society against your will?
So what's your beef? No one, except you, thinks it's a hugeRight.
revelation that governments, and corporations, and the law, and
math, and science, and even languge are all inventions of the mind
that we use as tools in order to facilitate our interactions with
other people. Of course they are. so what is really your point?
Or are you so obsessed with trying to argue something that everyone
else knows that you've actually lost sight of the reason that you're
making these arguments?
As you are. For you to constantly quote a law which was created byOne VERY significant fact.
People become ACTORS acting out a FICTION.
a government which you claim is a fiction means that you, probably
more than most, are acting out a fiction every time you argue about
what the law says. That makes you the most prolific actor I'v
witnessed in Usenet.
I don't know of any unsuspecting victims. Everyone of whom I'mYOU HAVE NO RIGHT to exercise this FRAUD on unsuspecting VICTIMS.
aware knows that they can withdraw from this society, and are all
reasonably aware of the terms and conditions which will apply to
them if they continue to participate in this society. They all know
about the taxes they'll have to pay, and about the laws that will
apply to them, and about how they'll be held to their commitments to
others.
Then why do you keep quoting from that with was produced by that
fiction?
People can withdraw from this society by leaving it. The fact thatIS THAT RIGHT!!!!!!!
Please do explain to us how people can "withdraw" from the
"contract
of incorporation" incorporating themselves into a roman style
corporation where they are to become ACTORS on behalf of a
FICTITIOUS
ENTITY and be subjected to the dictatorial enslaving roman law of
persons where the ONLY rights to be had are those of a RANK you
hold
within this corporation.
there aren't all that many places to go which are not yet other
societies doesn't mean that there aren't places to go. It just
means that most people choose to join societies.
My experience with what people know, and of what they are aware isTherein lies the FRAUD. People are NOT fully "aware" of the
"terms"
and "conditions" of the "contract of incorporation" incorporating
themselves into a roman style corporation where they are to
become
ACTORS on behalf of a FICTITIOUS ENTITY and be subjected to the
dictatorial enslaving roman law of persons where the ONLY rights
to be
had are those of a RANK you hold within this corporation.
completely different than that. In my experience, people are fully
aware that love, and family, and math, and language, and government,
and rights, and a whole host of other such things are concepts, and
products of the human intellect, and that they use all of those in
order to guide their conduct as it relates to others. In fact, it's
been my experience that there aren't too many people who make the
kinds of mistakes in logic that you do.
You've proven by your posts here that you believe that just because
all widgets are gadgets, that all gadgets must therefore be widgets.
You've also proven that you have little to no ability to grasp the
notion of how the same word can have different meanings when used in
different contexts.
No, that's not what I mean at all. Sheeeesh!Their "commitments"??? You mean, the LIABILITY to PERFORM
according to
their "persons" as is mandated by the dictatorial enslaving
ROMAN law
of "persons" that is, the "dictates" of a FICTITIOUS ENTITY, the
MUNICIPAL LAW of a CORPORATION. These people have no idea of the
true
nature of their "commitments". It is a FRAUD of great proportions
perpetrated by the legal industry on behalf of a "den of vipers".
What makes you think that people do not understand the effects ofAnd if people understood the "source" of those "effects"
suing a corporation, or of being sued by a corporation? All the
people of whom I'm aware know the affects of that.
The answer is that it isn't tangible, but just as math exists evenIt is not a question of being able to touch but rather "do they
exist?". To be more SPECIFIC, the QUESTION is... does the ENTITY
created by the act of incorporation, said to have a separate
existence
from that of the members that is, a separate entity in, and of,
itself
having a distinct existence apart from its membership, having
its own
rights, its own privileges, and its own liabilities... REAL or
FICTION
that is, does the "entity" ACTUALLY EXIST??? LOL the ANSWER is
NO.
though it's not tangible, and even though it's an invention of the
human mind, corporations exist in the same way. They are inventions
of the human mind, but the fact that people recognize their
existence (just as they do math), and conduct their affairs
accordingly, means that they are very real (just as math is), yet,
intangible.
And if the law (which you claim is fictitious too) really did say
that corporations are just fiction, then any and all court cases to
which any corporation was a party would be dismissed on that basis.
Do you know of any such cases? Even one?
That should tell you that people who study what the words used in
the law mean from a *legal* perspective do not mean what you think
they mean. The use of so-called "plain English" is not enough when
trying to interpret the law.
And society is not demanding that the law either be changed, or beThe "effects" of the FRAUD are real enough, I will not argue
with you
there.
recognized as meaning what you claim it means, so that the effects
end up being whatever it is that you're arguing they should be. If
this society wanted to abolish what they believe about the existence
of government or corporations, then it would do so.
Insults which only serve to mask your fear about the weakness ofBRAVO!!! Abbot the Retard, are you paying attention you old
fool???
LMFAO
My we've come a long way!!
Now let's see what we've been able to establish so far...
All states/governments are corporations which are FICTITIOUS
ENTITIES.
These FICTITIOUS ENTITIES do not have authority over a real man.
People are ACTING as if they were the FICTITIOUS ENTITY.
This is great, but it sure took a long time. Now that we've come
this
far however, we can as Abbot the Retard says "move forward".
your argument notwithstanding (nor your obsession with someone else
in your exchanges with me), I find it interesting that you actually
belive that any of this is a huge revelation.
We're not friends.Sloppy use of words??? No my friend,