A Dictionary of Law
This is an examination of Law, by using the very same foundations as has been practiced in Law. It is fascinating to note the level of correlation, and ignorance of those whom claim to ‘uphold’ the Law. It does not cover explicitly every entry, there again, as can be seen – there is no reason too.
Extracts originally taken from L B Curzon: Dictionary of Law. Pitman Publishing, fourth edition. With additional commentary from myself.
Absolute: without conditions, complete. By nature, everything has conditions; therefore it can only be validated by the meaning of containing all possibilities in itself without contradiction: Absolute – the root off all.
Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea: an act does not itself constitute guilt – unless the mind is guilty – as defined by consciousness; there has too be a foundation upon which to compare such a ‘condition’ as this. An Absolute that is in itself complete and beyond ‘corruption’, whilst being accessible to (and originator of) the ‘ordinary’ mind. That which defines ‘error’ and ‘correction’, with ‘guilt’ being the knowing failure of correct actions.
Actus reas: a structural building up of the elements of choice, that gives a cohesive picture of ‘guilt’ or ‘innocence’.
Ad idem: of the same ‘mind’, this with the previous indicates the law of Freewill in action, the separation of the individual ‘mind’ with the Absolute state; freewill is an absolute condition of C/consciousness.
Aedificatum solo, solo cedit: that which is built upon the land becomes part of the land. We do not own anything, we are – as it were – simply custodians of own cells of ‘consciousness’; a single ‘cell’ would have no ‘laws of governance’, as there would be no other ‘cells’ in which to disrupt its own ‘freewill’. How does this relate to the law that ‘nine tenths of the law is ownership’ – it is not material but Consciousness Absolute.
Simply because a monolith (such as ‘ownership’ of houses, land etc) has become commonplace does not imply an A/absolute right. There is clearly no foundation of legitimacy, thus any perceived ‘rights’ are automatically forfeited – along with said ‘properties’.
It should be further noted: custodianship does not infer rights of sale (so to speak).
All that they have vainly worked for shall come too naught.
Aequitas est quasi aequalitas: Equity is, as it were, equality. Balance, the only the true state of such must be Absolute in origin and comparison. This again, can only be defined through a state of Consciousness.
Affirmanti non neganti ncumbit probatio: The burden on proof is on him who affirms, not him who denies. This on the surface is an extraordinary statement, on first examination this makes it extremely difficult (or incredibly easy) for any person/s to uphold/reject the Absolute. Perhaps a lubricant for those that chose to deny such a basis of Consciousness.
Agent provacateur: This of course depends upon the Foundation of the agents actions; culpability is correctly defined.
Allodial land: Land owned outright – Absolute custodianship; not by lesser states of mind (consciousness).
Animus: Intention; disposition. Definition of a collective state of consciousness in/and individual or group; taking into account previous defining choices. An innately corrupt person will continue to act thusly.
Anticedent rights: re-confirming Absolute rights for those of correct-actions to exist without adverse interference.
Just to get away from the alphabetical order that this seems to be going in…
Sovereign/Sovereignty: The Supreme Ruler of the State. For this to have any level of validity, it’s essential that these be Founded in Absolute Consciousness; not merely in the stated idea of the ‘Ideal’ , but proven in all actions to have been so. Therefore, any consideration that Monarchical authority is ‘hereditary’ must have proven precedence of it being so, a comparison between the Ideal and actuality. Chance of birth is not proof of Absolute Consciousness, and does not give those rights (or any form of legitimacy) to such a person. Any actions taken by such a persons and given undue authority by others (regardless of circumstance) is Treason against the Absolute; this of course goes for all regardless of status.
Id certum est quod certum reddi potest: That is certain which can be made certain.
Ignorantia juris neminem excusat: Ignorance of the law does not excuse. This is the counterpoint to: Affirmanti non neganti ncumbit probatio. For law to have any validity must be based upon an Absolute, this gives a deeper interpretation to: “every [person] must be taken to be cognisant of the law, otherwise there is no knowing of the extent to which the excuse of ignorance might be carried. It would be urged in almost every case.” Gives a rather in depth critique of the legal minds at work within society – those whom are supposed to give judgment upon society.
Well, we know the answer to that one anyway; the level of ‘denial’ throughout society of the Absolute basis of law is – well, absolute.
Immunity: Freedom or exemption from some obligation, penalty or power or another. As shown previously, it is either an Absolute or no validity; in the case of Absolute it’s only gained from an Absolute state of Consciousness (Attained). In all other cases it has no legal validity. Thus to say (for instance a monarch) has ‘immunity’ is a construct only held up by those whom seek to gain from it – politicians, for instance. A State cannot have ‘immunity’, because it (country, nation) consists of a collection of citizens – society. Culpability is for the lesser and greater – regardless of consequences.
Illegal: In violation of a law or rule which has the force of law. Since all law is an aspect/manifestation of Absolute Consciousness, it must be realised that this means wilful aberration from such (A.C).
In aequali jure melior est conditio possidentis: Where the parties have equal claim, the claim of the actual possessor is the stronger. Again, this must come down to a state of Attained Consciousness, for this is closest to the Source of all Ownership (or: Custodianship, for Sentients).
Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius: The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. As a state of Consciousness that has been gained through unique individual endeavour (the types of choices can be placed into three distinct Classes), this is only reasonable and legitimate.
Indefeasible: That cannot be annulled or made void. Decisions or choices made through freewill, no matter how minor or seemingly inconsequential, are a part of our very existence – collectively and individually. The Absolute Foundation of all law.
In invitum: Against a person’s consent or will. Used in reference to the force of law, Force Majeure – when a person/s continues to defy absolutely, that which gave rise to their/our existence.
declaratory theory of common law: The theory “that every case was governed by a relevant rule of law, existing somewhere and discoverable somehow, provided sufficient learning and intellectual rigour was brought to bear.”. Indeed, the points of requiring learning and intellectual rigour are of course indisputable evidence of consciousness, stripping away the ephemeral for that which is absolute. But, common law is also a charting of the state of consciousness of (the given) nation; the seemingly interminable desire to create more and more ‘laws’ shows a powerful shift away from the infinitely simple, yet elegant and effective Absolute state of Origin. And yet, for rejection of this basis, all such ‘false’ laws and resultant effects have no legitimacy.
Jus dicere: To say what the law is, “Judges ought to remember their office is jus dicere and not jus dare, to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law”: Bacon (Of Judicature). “Whoever hath an absolute authority to interpret any written or spoken laws; is he who truly is the law-giver to all intents and purposes and not the person who first spoke or wrote them”: Bishop Hoadly; something that should have been more closely adhered too – Absolutely.
Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa: No person should be a judge in his own cause. So much for the fucking politicians and legal system, setting up and delivering that which is benefit to themselves and their supporters. Again, all judgments must be set and founded upon an Absolute state, and not of the ‘little’ mind.
Nullum crimen sine lege: No crime except in accordance with the law – an aspect of the so-called “principle of legality”. “ The great leading rule of criminal law is that nothing is a crime unless it is plainly forbidden by law…”. And yet, look around us at the present state of the law – simply declaring something as ‘illegal’ does not make it an Absolute. It must be from and upheld as an Absolute for anything to be made ‘illegal’, this cannot be codified except through a state of Absolute Consciousness.
Qui facit per alium facit per se: He does a thing through another does it himself. Up to the point of individual culpability, if a person upholds (through whatever manner or means) corrupt instruction/s, then that person is as guilty as whomever gave said instructions. Thus Judges (for instance) that have upheld corrupt/illegal instructions as given by Parliament are as guilty (if not more so, as they are supposed to uphold the true Sovereignty of Absolute Law) as makers of such; acquiescence is akin to acknowledgment of guilt – for all.
There is a positive aspect of this, in that a person/s whom upholds through a correct (Absolute) path can also gain benefits corresponding in accord with their effort; indeed, if a person upholds Absolutely there is an inherent form of immunity regardless of their actions. Thus in unique circumstances can do what would otherwise be considered – for anyone else – corrupt; but, this can only be attained through/part of a State of Consciousness Absolute. To give further explanation: a Judge (for instance) can uphold an inherently corrupt regime through explication of the law of Equity in Society; this in itself is only a ‘temporary’ state of affairs, and therefore must be relinquished with appropriate condemnation and rejection of corruption.
Perverting the course of Justice: Acting in a way which has a tendency and is intended to pervert the administration of public justice. It speaks for itself.
Treasonous Felony: act 1848, committed by one within or without the realm, who compasses, imagines, devises or intends, to deprive or depose a Monarch from the style or Royal Name of the Imperial Crown; to levy war against Monarch within the U.K, to stir any foreigner to invade the state.
This is what I must be charged with: in order that this be the case, any said Monarch must have an Absolute foundation upon which to be declared Monarch – a state of Absolute Consciousness; if there is no such state, then no such crime can be committed. Indeed, it is the putative monarch (and all those that support said) that is guilty of Treason Absolute.
Open justice: “It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.
Ownership: Right to the exclusive enjoyment of some thing based on rightful title. “The entirety of the powers of use and disposal allowed by law”. “A right, indefinite in point of user, unrestricted in point of disposition, and unlimited in point of duration, over a determinate thing”: and so on…
Was all that I have written known from the beginning Absolute? Of course it fucking was!
From an Absolute state of origin – given freewill absolute, corruption will (eventually) absorb all (non-essential: irrevocably Sovereign) resources: this state of affairs can only then be compared to Original Absolute for Corruption to be defined Absolutely.
Thus Satan (Vindex) and God are not from empty chance of birth, but through real Endeavour and Achievement: Absolute to Absolute via Existence and Will.
Apprenticeship Par Excellence.
Everyone has the Absolute right to Existence – but this does not translate to Absolute right of life: such continuance and severance (all other aspects) remain under the Dictatorship of the Agents Absolute.
Finally: it is a well noted peculiarity of many for their seemingly insatiable desire for honours and titles, therefore there is one more gift (Absolute and therefore non-returnable) that is in my remit to give, the Title and Honour of: Order of the Mark of C.UN.T
Segue Fulcio Radicitus
