The Mystical Incantations of the Priest Class Lawyer Set

"First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Dick the Butcher from Henry VI, Part II by William Shakespeare

Lawyers have been reviled for centuries now, and for good reason. For too long have lawyers embraced the mysticism of mumbo jumbo in an attempt to bedazzle whom they clearly view as their laity, and of whom they clearly endeavor to influence legislative processes in order to maintain a mass perception that law is arcane and complex.

There are few lawyers that will agree that law is simple, true, universal, and absolute. Hell, today there are few scientists who will agree with that, but to be sure, scientists and lawyers alike are inclined to argue that the laws of "society" are not the same as the laws of science. That the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is completely different from the law of just government, even though all governments that fall prey to what sociologist Donald Black defines law as "governmental social control", will also at some point fall prey to entropy. Obviously Donald Black was a poor history student when he was in school, and seemingly ignorant of the multitudes of revolutions and insurrections that have taken place since time immemorial, but the priest class lawyer set will readily agree with Black that law is "governmental social control".

Ignorantia juris non excusat

Here is a legal principle so ancient it is spoken in Latin! Ignorance of the law is no excuse, and yet when someone tells you that you have to pay income taxes because it is the law, ask them to point to which statute specifically that makes you liable for any tax, and few will even dare to try, most will readily admit they never read the tax code! A member in this site a while back, representing himself as a tax lawyer, authored a thread called Ask a Tax Lawyer About Tax Law and if you bother to read through this thread you will discover he was soon overwhelmed with valid questions he just could not answer. To his good credit he was polite, (for the most part), and attempted to earnestly answer most of the questions, but when it came to how most people are made liable for an income tax, he found himself in way over his head. A tax lawyer!

What is interesting to note about this tax lawyer is how readily he admits that the tax code is tautological by design but seems to have no problem with this needless repetition. Why? Because tautology is a part of the mystical incantations of the priest class lawyer set. It is a language designed to confound and confuse those who do not speak the language. This is not law, this is simply mysticism.

There are several members in this site who represent themselves as lawyers, and too many of them love to enter a thread and admonish people who simply want to be free for being so ignorant of the law, but these admonishments are not over an ignorance of law, they are advertisements for the priest class lawyer set, urging people to abandon all hope of ever using reason and logic in terms of law, and instead to rely on a "professional" to tell them what law is, and when they even bother to attempt to explain what the law is, (which is rare), they fall back on the arbitrary nature of law and defend its capriciousness as simply being a part of the system.

In the United States, the federal government currently has a 97%l conviction rate. A 75% conviction rate after going to trial, and the number jumps up to 97% because lawyers are advising their clients to accept a plea bargain, even though 91% of them will spend time in a federal prison.

The federal government currently has a 97% guilty plea rate in federal criminal cases. Federal prosecutors have over a 75% conviction rate following trial, and 91% of federal criminal defendants receive a prison sentence. It is no longer a question of will I go, it is a question of how long will I be there. Frantz stated that with those statistics it is only prudent to hire a Federal Prison Consultant. How can a federal criminal defendant afford not to?

lawyers-law.com...

So worthless are "professional" lawyers when it comes to relying on them for a defense against federal charges that there are now professional prison consultants preparing people for spending time in a federal prison. Why are "professional" lawyers so worthless in defending people from federal prosecution? Precisely because they are "professionals", which means they are licensed attorneys who have sworn a fealty to the court system that railroads people into becoming a part of the prison population that is by far the largest in the industrial world.

The United States imprisons more people per capita than any other industrialized nation on the planet. More than China today, and more than the Soviet Union at the height of their tyranny, and American lawyers have the audacity to castigate members in this site for taking the time to learn the law? If lawyers are so damn important then why are so many people in America in prison? Are Americans that criminal, or is something more insidious going on, and if it is insidious, how much of that is due to the priest class lawyer set with their strange utterances of mystical incantations?

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

What is interesting to note about this tax lawyer is how readily he admits that the tax code is tautological by design but seems to have no problem with this needless repetition. Why? Because tautology is a part of the mystical incantations of the priest class lawyer set. It is a language designed to confound and confuse those who do not speak the language. This is not law, this is simply mysticism.

From what I understand,
this is what Jesus was crucified for.
He dared to try and explain the law to average people.

But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Interpretaions may vary


David Grouchy

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Excellent thread!

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Why are "professional" lawyers so worthless in defending people from federal prosecution?

Incompetency and a general tendency to assume guilt in advance of innocence. That is what really pushes the plea bargain train. Defendants fear juries.

In fact, little mention is made of juries. They play a significant role in this too.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
The United States imprisons more people per capita than any other industrialized nation on the planet.

Is that really because of lawyers or our drug policy? I always assumed the latter.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
...how much of that is due to the priest class lawyer set with their strange utterances of mystical incantations?

I happen to have known lots of lawyers, most of whom I didn't think were that bright. Those strange utterances of mystical incantations you hear are really rote phrases used by many to disguise the shallowness of their understanding of the subject matter.

But I think even less of most physicians... Perhaps we should engage in a thread on that subject.

reply to post by loam

Is that really because of lawyers or our drug policy? I always assumed the latter.

The two are inextricable. We have foolishly come to rely upon lawyers to guard the law, when in sad reality what they do is guard legislation. It is, in my not so humble opinion, no accident that the legislation prohibiting certain "illicit" drugs has never been successfully challenged. The prohibition of drugs is good business.

But I think even less of most physicians... Perhaps we should engage in a thread on that subject.

I throw out the term iatrogenocide every chance I get, so I thank you heartily for the opportunity to do so here.

Also, I have recently been wondering if the proclivity to reduce the laws of justice to the whimsical inventions of humanity hasn't affected the scientific method and now the laws of science are as arbitrary and capricious as any bogus act of legislation on the books. In fact, when I was researching wheat grass and its health benefits I was astounded at how many physicians were so willing to engage in ad hominem attacks on a certain Ann Wigmore for her advocacy of wheat grass, and scientifically speaking all that could be said was that there was no scientific evidence to support Wigmore's claims, but as I researched further, I began to realize that it very well could be that there is no scientific research to support Wigmores claims because no "peer reviewed" studies have been done on wheat grass. Sigh.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I throw out the term iatrogenocide every chance I get, so I thank you heartily for the opportunity to do so here.

Then let me thank you for introducing it to me. I don't believe I have seen it before.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Also, I have recently been wondering if the proclivity to reduce the laws of justice to the whimsical inventions of humanity hasn't affected the scientific method and now the laws of science are as arbitrary and capricious as any bogus act of legislation on the books. In fact, when I was researching wheat grass and its health benefits I was astounded at how many physicians were so willing to engage in ad hominem attacks on a certain Ann Wigmore for her advocacy of wheat grass, and scientifically speaking all that could be said was that there was no scientific evidence to support Wigmore's claims, but as I researched further, I began to realize that it very well could be that there is no scientific research to support Wigmores claims because no "peer reviewed" studies have been done on wheat grass. Sigh.

This theme you are on, here and elsewhere, is something I have struggled to reconcile for myself.

Frankly, I frequently return to the notion that Lewis Carroll was not only a literary genius, but a prophet too. (I have a seven year old, so have had occasion to return to Alice's Adventures...)

I am struck by how descriptive it is of the world we live in today.

While I find much of it disturbing, I also oddly enough find that very reassuring.

It means the insanity of our world is neither novel or urgent. It has been this way for a very long time......

Perhaps the delta between truth and what we say about can never be closed. Perhaps it goes against our very nature. Perhaps such distortions, for whatever reason, are necessary to our collective survival.

If true, then complaining about such things is like complaining that water is wet.

Essentially, I proceed on the basis that EVERYTHING I think I might know about the world could be terribly wrong.

Strange... I'm suddenly craving tea...

reply to post by loam

It means the insanity of our world is neither novel or urgent. It has been this way for a very long time.

I suspect that insanity is a natural reaction to an immortal spirit inhabiting a mortal body. I suppose I will get flamed for this suggestion, and I certainly have no scientific proof that we are immortal spirits inhabiting physical bodies, and such a notion is not nearly as self evident as unalienable rights, gravity, or the laws of motion, but I suspect it just the same.

If we are immortal spirits inhabiting mortal bodies, then we are playing an insane game. There seems to be a self evident biological command to survive. Imagine the cognitive dissonance an immortal spirit must go through responding to the command "survive".

I also suspect that justice is simply harmony with the physical universe, and while we as humans, with our proclivity to deny and disparage each others rights have never known this harmony, or justice, we certainly know injustice, and this, at this point in time, can be our only reference point to know justice...through the lack of it. We certainly know injustice when we are confronted with it, and more times than not, that injustice is a derogation or abrogation of some right. I remain an optimist and trust that at some point humanity will evolve to the point where we know justice by knowing justice, rather than by the lack of it.

I love the works of Lewis Carrol, and agree with your assessment of this writer.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I also suspect that justice is simply harmony with the physical universe, and while we as humans, with our proclivity to deny and disparage each others rights have never known this harmony, or justice, we certainly know injustice, and this, at this point in time, can be our only reference point to know justice...through the lack of it. We certainly know injustice when we are confronted with it, and more times than not, that injustice is a derogation or abrogation of some right. I remain an optimist and trust that at some point humanity will evolve to the point where we know justice by knowing justice, rather than by the lack of it.

Justice is simply the act of giving a person their due:

If someone has done a good act, they deserve to be rewarded and praised.

If someone has done a bad act, they deserve to be punished and their actions condemned before their peers.


Why the laws cannot figure out this simple principle is beyond me.

reply to post by FortAnthem

Why the laws cannot figure out this simple principle is beyond me.

The laws have figured this out, it is legislation that is the problem. This is why my legal mantra remains that legislation is not law, merely evidence of law.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
...immortal spirit...

Maybe. I'd like to think so, but can also accept maybe that's wrong.

I try not to think too much about that.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
If we are immortal spirits inhabiting mortal bodies, then we are playing an insane game. There seems to be a self evident biological command to survive. Imagine the cognitive dissonance an immortal spirit must go through responding to the command "survive".

If we are immortal, then don't we "survive" by default?

In fact, if such a thing were true, wouldn't that be a disincentive to stay in any physical self you simply didn't like?

Suicide would sort of be like engaging in an extreme makeover...a quick route to fat loss or new friends!



Just kidding, but the point stands.

I guess that would require the actual knowledge you were in fact immortal, which implies most people, despite what they otherwise say, aren't really sure.

Thus, we endure...survive...

..for a reason different than the one you suggest.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I remain an optimist and trust that at some point humanity will evolve to the point where we know justice by knowing justice, rather than by the lack of it.

Maybe. I hope so.

Since I'm not so certain on the immortality thing, it certainly is a goal worth pursuing.

reply to post by loam

If we are immortal, then don't we "survive" by default?

This is what I suspect is the impetus of our insanities.

In fact, if such a thing were true, wouldn't that be a disincentive to stay in any physical self you simply didn't like?

What makes you think this isn't happening? Ever known someone who so completely changed you don't know them anymore? Isn't it possible that "they" have left the body, and now some other spirit inhabits the body? Just a thought.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Before I answer, does your question include the assumption the interloper knows?

ETA:

I hope I never become the interloper. What a bad deal...sloppy seconds.

Isn't it enough I have to deal with my own messes, let alone the ones made by someone else?

reply to post by loam

Before I answer, does your question include the assumption the interloper knows?

Here is where my hypothesis tends to fall apart. If we are spirits inhabiting a body, why don't we know this? Although you have mentioned your 7 year old, so I suspect that you have had opportunity to recognize great wisdom within such a tiny little body. I certainly have. In fact my little boy when he was barely two years old displayed such a profound sense of ethics that there is no possible way he could have learned this from his mother and I, it seems as if it was something he just inherently knew. So, maybe children know they are spirits inhabiting bodies and we wind up "teaching" them to forget this and just view themselves as a body.

Of course, these are just hypothesis of mine that I wouldn't even know how to begin to test. Funny how a thread on law and lawyers is turning towards this discussion, no?

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Funny how a thread on law and lawyers is turning towards this discussion, no?

I'm sorry, probably mostly my fault.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
In fact my little boy when he was barely two years old displayed such a profound sense of ethics that there is no possible way he could have learned this from his mother and I.

I have marveled at my own child in this way and I would be lying if I didn't say I have had similar thoughts about what it means.

But I have drawn few conclusions.

As I said previously, I proceed on the basis that EVERYTHING I think I might know about the world, including such matters as these, could be terribly wrong.

reply to post by loam

I'm sorry, probably mostly my fault.

No, my friend, I am not complaining at all, and am enjoying the discourse, and do think that if we are spirits that exist outside of a physical universe this has something to do with the laws that exist within a physical universe...I just have no idea how.