confused capacities & agreements

If a word salad post claims that we need not pay taxes, it goes in the appropriate TP forum. If its author claims that laws don't apply to him/her, it goes in the appropriate Sov forum. Only otherwise unclassifiable word salad goes here.
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

noblepa wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:26 pm
Dnatural wrote: Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:16 pm Sorry not following your train of thought here. What is the subject matter of the 18th amendment whereby the 21st repealed.
As I stated in my post, the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution prohibited virtually all alcoholic beverages in the US. You may have heard of "prohibition". It was in all the newspapers and it featured in a lot of American gangster movies.

Prohibition proved extremely unpopular and the 21st Amendment was passed to repeal prohibition.

My point was to refute your claim that a repealed law is still active if the replacement does not address the subject matter.

The 25th said simply that the 18th was repealed and little more. It did not address the subject matter in any substantive way, other than that.

According to your claim, since the 25th didn't "address the subject matter", then prohibition must still be the law of the land in the US. Tell that to all the liquor stores, brewers and distilleries that are thriving.

I realize that this is not British or Canadian law, but, as American law is based on basically the same fundamental principles as British law, your claim should be equally applicable to both.

I still haven't found any discernable point in your long, unreadable and unattributed posts.

If you are going quote a source, whether a person, statute or publication, it is customary and intellectually necessary to provide proper attribution.
what is subject matter?

what is the subject matter of the citizen?

what is the subject matter of common law?

what is the subject matter to equity?

keep dodging the main aspects to english law, I sure hope this is playing stupid, otherwise you all should loose your bar license....
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

notorial dissent wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:05 pm That is the point, the ENTIRE discussion is pointless and without point, form, or value, just wasted, useless words signifying nothing.
your all proving the point, by being lawyers and totally dodging the main aspect and subject matter to the issue, then saying you dont understand the law as written,,, hmmm... :naughty:

ignorance of the law is no excuse :shock:

the facts are present and can be judged by all now.....
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

so far there has been no jurisprudence coming from the lawyers of members of this website, yet that is all I post, so once again, these ARE NOT MY WORDS OR LAW, this is the WORDS AND LAW as written by the top scholars of THE LAW, the law being based ON PROPERTY :brickwall:

the property you hold and what right you claim to that property is the subject matter!!!

the subject matter of a citizen is within LAW OF PROPERTY.....

the subject matter of a free agent IS HIS DOMICILE, and the agreements the free agent makes, yet not as life tenant :shock:

for a bunch of lawyers sure ignore subject matter and the foundation to your law...

when are we going to deal with the subject matter of these different issues....

since what makes an issue vexatious,

a citizen trying to claim rights they dont have granted by the ENGLISH COMMON LAW...

the ignorance of the 2 levels of property is massive....

since we want to dodge subject matter, then lets move to the next issue....

FRAUD.... what is fraud within the law?
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6138
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:34 pm
notorial dissent wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:05 pm That is the point, the ENTIRE discussion is pointless and without point, form, or value, just wasted, useless words signifying nothing.
your all proving the point, by being lawyers and totally dodging the main aspect and subject matter to the issue, then saying you dont understand the law as written,,, hmmm... :naughty:

ignorance of the law is no excuse :shock:

the facts are present and can be judged by all now.....
Not quite, Pal. In all of your scribblings, you have yet to utter ONE coherent "main aspect" or "subject matter". Nor have you proffered any usable "facts".

The fact that you believe that American courts are bound by ancient precepts of English law proves that your ignorance of the law is the ignorance which cannot be excused; and the fact that you have yet to write a concise and literate paragraph further proves that you are incapable of ascertaining what the law is, be it in the UK, Canada or the US.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

wserra wrote: Tue Aug 20, 2019 10:50 pm
Dnatural wrote: Tue Aug 20, 2019 10:14 pmSo why is a lawyer never trained either in absolute ownership (droit, droit) vs. assumed ownership and one's right to chose.
For the same reason that a chemist isn't trained in alchemy.
Enjoy your retirement and would entertain the day to pick your brain. Best wishes. I mean this sincerely.
Thank you.
not trained in common law, only equity and only the equity created by the government, yet claim you been trained :whistle:
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6138
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:42 pm so far there has been no jurisprudence coming from the lawyers of members of this website, yet that is all I post, so once again, these ARE NOT MY WORDS OR LAW, this is the WORDS AND LAW as written by the top scholars of THE LAW, the law being based ON PROPERTY :brickwall:

the property you hold and what right you claim to that property is the subject matter!!!

the subject matter of a citizen is within LAW OF PROPERTY.....

the subject matter of a free agent IS HIS DOMICILE, and the agreements the free agent makes, yet not as life tenant :shock:

for a bunch of lawyers sure ignore subject matter and the foundation to your law...

when are we going to deal with the subject matter of these different issues....

since what makes an issue vexatious,

a citizen trying to claim rights they dont have granted by the ENGLISH COMMON LAW...

the ignorance of the 2 levels of property is massive....

since we want to dodge subject matter, then lets move to the next issue....

FRAUD.... what is fraud within the law?
To quote from the famous case of Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984):

"We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit."

By the way, Wes has forgotten more about the law, including equity, than you will ever learn.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

Pottapaug1938 wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:46 pm
parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:34 pm
notorial dissent wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:05 pm That is the point, the ENTIRE discussion is pointless and without point, form, or value, just wasted, useless words signifying nothing.
your all proving the point, by being lawyers and totally dodging the main aspect and subject matter to the issue, then saying you dont understand the law as written,,, hmmm... :naughty:

ignorance of the law is no excuse :shock:

the facts are present and can be judged by all now.....
Not quite, Pal. In all of your scribblings, you have yet to utter ONE coherent "main aspect" or "subject matter". Nor have you proffered any usable "facts".

The fact that you believe that American courts are bound by ancient precepts of English law proves that your ignorance of the law is the ignorance which cannot be excused; and the fact that you have yet to write a concise and literate paragraph further proves that you are incapable of ascertaining what the law is, be it in the UK, Canada or the US.
well why not file a requisition and ask the courts in your USA jurisdiction, since "your" obviously confused, I have already been to the courts to deal with this aspect,

so the issue is USA subjects use english law by prescription, yet do not understand how it applies to all that use English property law, due to the land tenure.....

SO GO APPLY TO THE COURT......

for a bunch of lawyers that understand how the system works is sure oblivious on how to get determinations.......
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

Pottapaug1938 wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:50 pm
parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:42 pm so far there has been no jurisprudence coming from the lawyers of members of this website, yet that is all I post, so once again, these ARE NOT MY WORDS OR LAW, this is the WORDS AND LAW as written by the top scholars of THE LAW, the law being based ON PROPERTY :brickwall:

the property you hold and what right you claim to that property is the subject matter!!!

the subject matter of a citizen is within LAW OF PROPERTY.....

the subject matter of a free agent IS HIS DOMICILE, and the agreements the free agent makes, yet not as life tenant :shock:

for a bunch of lawyers sure ignore subject matter and the foundation to your law...

when are we going to deal with the subject matter of these different issues....

since what makes an issue vexatious,

a citizen trying to claim rights they dont have granted by the ENGLISH COMMON LAW...

the ignorance of the 2 levels of property is massive....

since we want to dodge subject matter, then lets move to the next issue....

FRAUD.... what is fraud within the law?
To quote from the famous case of Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984):

"We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit."

By the way, Wes has forgotten more about the law, including equity, than you will ever learn.
so what was given to join the group?

can one leave the group?
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

who does citizen get property from?

who does the govt get property from?

who is the original owner of the lands?

part 2

who is govt?

who created govt?

who gave govt the power to act as owner?
Dark Optimist
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:34 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Dark Optimist »

Do we collectively have so much spare time on our hands that we keep feeding the troll?

I will give them credit for perseverance. Usually there would be the declaration of victory and then the sound of crickets before hitting over 100 total posts.
Dnatural
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2019 7:59 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Dnatural »

It is time to drop the mic, and no longer pick it up, as everything has already been said when any one of the respondents become capable of letting go of their preconceived ideas, as this is the only way to arrive at truth... until then they are right and thus prove they are exactly in the mind [trap] they have built for themselves.

I know from personal experience that it is extremely hard to let go of everything one thinks they know and are, in order to arrive at the foundations of one's true self and origins.

Two parties exist, divided, whereby one party when asked who they are they may say "I am a lawyer or doctor [or whatever]" whereas the other party will then say "I asked who you are not what you do."

Best wishes to those who have remained silent and are beginning to assimilate the pieces to the intention of the law and equity, its jurisprudence & subsequent capacities, for it is only though seeing one of them can one then begin to see the other.

And I also extend these same wishes to those who have interacted with me, as in the end (its design and everything you will continue to experience) is to always arrive at a true reflection of who one has wittingly or unwittingly become, when they are conscious and fearless to see.
User avatar
NYGman
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:01 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by NYGman »

It is true we have a common law system, but that is as opposed to a Civil law system. However, this is really just a distinction between statute driven law, and the use of precedent. Look at the way the legal system works in Quebec, versus Ontario. In common law, past legal precedents or judicial rulings are used to decide cases at hand. Under civil law, codified statutes and ordinances rule the land. Some countries use a combination of civil and common law.

However, a common law country will have laws, and they may supersede past legal precedents or judicial rulings. Congress will often pass laws in response to a judicial ruling that they believe does not reflect their intent.

As for you questions, I am sure you don't know what you are asking, but I will try to answer:

what is subject matter?

This is really just the specific subject matter a court can hear. For instance, bankruptcy court only has the authority to hear bankruptcy cases. Nothing magical about that.

what is the subject matter of the citizen?
I am not aware of this, it isn't a legal concept. Courts have Subject matter jurisdiction. People do not. Courts may have subject matter jurisdiction over some persons, but being a Citizen isn't necessarily relevant. For example, I can sue a non citizen in state court, if the court has subject matter jurisdiction.

what is the subject matter of common law?

There isn't any, this is another made up thing. See first answer. I guess you can say that courts are part of our common law system, so in that case, it would depend of the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

what is the subject matter to equity?


Again , see directly above.

who does citizen get property from?

If you are talking real property, it comes from the prior title holder. Other forms of property (Intelectual, personal, etc) my be acquired from their creator. However Citizenship is irrelevant. A non citizen can acquire property. As long as the seller accepts what a buyer is offering, property can transfer.

who does the govt get property from?

in eminent domain, the government buys it back from the title holder at market value, although this amount may be litigated. The US also purchased land from other government, and acquired land via treaties with the native american indians, or traded for it. Some land came via wars with other countries. The government may grant land to settlers, or lease it, or hold it for the countries enjoyment (like national parks).

who is the original owner of the lands?
I would say the Native american indians, but I believe they didn't have the concept of land ownership. That came over with the european colonists, and spread from there. They would be the first to "Own" land.

who is govt?

In the US at least, I think we can say that the government is made up of elected officials, political appointments, and all those in their employment.

who created govt?

Our current system, and not our first, comes from the constitutional congress ratification of the US Constitution, and the amendments created under it. There was a ratification process attached to that too, which I am not going in to here.

who gave govt the power to act as owner?
The US government can not take my property without due process, under the aforementioned constitution and its amendments. The government can acquire land, through purchase, treaties, or gift. Heck aren't we trying to buy Greenland?

What your questions tell me is that you have no understanding what subject matter means in law, and have a warped view of land ownership. You seem to want to contort legal words into something they are not, to fit this strange legal theory you have. YOu are just plain wrong on all accounts, and are not trying to understand what we are telling you.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein

Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
User avatar
AnOwlCalledSage
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2456
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:56 pm
Location: M3/S Hubble Road, Cheltenham GL51 0EX

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by AnOwlCalledSage »

parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:34 pm your all proving the point, by being lawyers and totally dodging the main aspect and subject matter to the issue, then saying you dont understand the law as written,,, hmmm... :naughty:
I'm not a lawyer but, even with my lay knowledge, I have read enough of your drivel to counsel that you're an idiot. :haha:
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity - Hanlon's Razor
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7624
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by wserra »

parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:52 pmcan one leave the group?
Sure.

Just slip out the back, Jack.
Make a new plan, Stan.
You don't need to be coy, Roy,
Just get yourself free.
Hop on the bus, Gus.
You don't need to discuss much.
Just drop off the key, Lee,
And get yourself free.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
Chaos
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 993
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 8:53 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Chaos »

AnOwlCalledSage wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:38 am
parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:30 am how would you describe equity then?
Is it someone who looks after a gentleman's horses?
sssssssssssso close.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7624
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by wserra »

parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:30 amhow would you describe equity then?
Sir Maxim of Equity? One of the original Law Lords.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
morrand
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 401
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:42 pm
Location: Illinois, USA

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by morrand »

Dark Optimist wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:02 pm Do we collectively have so much spare time on our hands that we keep feeding the troll?
Eh. Some of us do, and this—a side board, out of the way of the more serious boards—is probably the best place to do it if you're going to do it at all.
notorial dissent wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:05 pm That is the point, the ENTIRE discussion is pointless and without point, form, or value, just wasted, useless words signifying nothing.
It should be possible to trace back through all this gabber to find out what its genealogy is. There's clearly a lot of old FOTL theory in there (the oblique reference to the Cestui Que Vie act clinches that) but the obsession with life tenancies is new to me, and I am genuinely curious to see what glue is being used to graft that on to the rest of it. It's interesting to see how these things evolve.

It would be more interesting if it were not so cocooned in gibberish as it is, but you take what you can get.
parzival wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:50 pm well why not file a requisition ...
"Requisition"?
... and ask the courts in your USA jurisdiction, since "your" obviously confused, I have already been to the courts to deal with this aspect, ... .
Aaand, how'd that work out? Did you get a recorded decision in your favor? Or did the judge abandon the field of battle, leaving you the winner by default?
---
Morrand
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by notorial dissent »

Since none of what the two verbiage generators have spewed is based on fact or reality, any discussion is pointless.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6138
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

notorial dissent wrote: Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:05 am Since none of what the two verbiage generators have spewed is based on fact or reality, any discussion is pointless.
At least our old "friend", DMVP, was reasonably literate when he proffered his delusions to us.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
parzival
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 11:22 pm

Re: confused capacities & agreements

Post by parzival »

NYGman wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:17 pm It is true we have a common law system, but that is as opposed to a Civil law system. However, this is really just a distinction between statute driven law, and the use of precedent. Look at the way the legal system works in Quebec, versus Ontario. In common law, past legal precedents or judicial rulings are used to decide cases at hand. Under civil law, codified statutes and ordinances rule the land. Some countries use a combination of civil and common law.

However, a common law country will have laws, and they may supersede past legal precedents or judicial rulings. Congress will often pass laws in response to a judicial ruling that they believe does not reflect their intent.

As for you questions, I am sure you don't know what you are asking, but I will try to answer:

what is subject matter?

This is really just the specific subject matter a court can hear. For instance, bankruptcy court only has the authority to hear bankruptcy cases. Nothing magical about that.

what is the subject matter of the citizen?
I am not aware of this, it isn't a legal concept. Courts have Subject matter jurisdiction. People do not. Courts may have subject matter jurisdiction over some persons, but being a Citizen isn't necessarily relevant. For example, I can sue a non citizen in state court, if the court has subject matter jurisdiction.

what is the subject matter of common law?

There isn't any, this is another made up thing. See first answer. I guess you can say that courts are part of our common law system, so in that case, it would depend of the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

what is the subject matter to equity?


Again , see directly above.

who does citizen get property from?

If you are talking real property, it comes from the prior title holder. Other forms of property (Intelectual, personal, etc) my be acquired from their creator. However Citizenship is irrelevant. A non citizen can acquire property. As long as the seller accepts what a buyer is offering, property can transfer.

who does the govt get property from?

in eminent domain, the government buys it back from the title holder at market value, although this amount may be litigated. The US also purchased land from other government, and acquired land via treaties with the native american indians, or traded for it. Some land came via wars with other countries. The government may grant land to settlers, or lease it, or hold it for the countries enjoyment (like national parks).

who is the original owner of the lands?
I would say the Native american indians, but I believe they didn't have the concept of land ownership. That came over with the european colonists, and spread from there. They would be the first to "Own" land.

who is govt?

In the US at least, I think we can say that the government is made up of elected officials, political appointments, and all those in their employment.

who created govt?

Our current system, and not our first, comes from the constitutional congress ratification of the US Constitution, and the amendments created under it. There was a ratification process attached to that too, which I am not going in to here.

who gave govt the power to act as owner?
The US government can not take my property without due process, under the aforementioned constitution and its amendments. The government can acquire land, through purchase, treaties, or gift. Heck aren't we trying to buy Greenland?

What your questions tell me is that you have no understanding what subject matter means in law, and have a warped view of land ownership. You seem to want to contort legal words into something they are not, to fit this strange legal theory you have. YOu are just plain wrong on all accounts, and are not trying to understand what we are telling you.
subject matter jurisdiction, subject matter of life tenant is in law of property..... subject matter, is property as life tenant.....

subject matter jurisdiction is not the same as that for the settlor of the SETTLEMENT NOT AS LIFE TENANT....

so where does the SUBJECT MATTER come from, and what COURTS have the power to hear THAT SUBJECT MATTER....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPGhmXWPPYc

just this fact alone, shows you as lawyers are dodging the REAL SUBJECT MATTER of THIS ISSUE, you are combining 2 jurisdictions and can not happen.......

once again it is called LAW AND EQUITY , not low or equity......

so once again where DID GOVTERNMENTS GET THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE EQUITABLE ESTATES UNDER LAW OF PROPERTY HAHAHAHA :beatinghorse:

BTW you forgot the last half of the copy and paste from wiki lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject-m ... risdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction must be distinguished from personal jurisdiction, which is the power of a court to render a judgment against a particular defendant, and territorial jurisdiction, which is the power of the court to render a judgment concerning events that have occurred within a well-defined territory. Unlike personal or territorial jurisdiction, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. A judgment from a court that did not have subject-matter jurisdiction is forever a nullity.[1][2] To decide a case, a court must have a combination of subject (subjectam) and either personal (personam) or territorial (locum) jurisdiction.

Subject-matter jurisdiction, personal or territorial jurisdiction, and adequate notice are the three most fundamental constitutional requirements for a valid judgment.

what is fraud on the court?