What is the trick we are missing that allows them to get us

Some great stuff about and has been since Carl Lentz, Marcus-servant king and Bill Thornton with Sovereignty and more recently Justinian Deception and a host of other great discoveries and thoughts.

But something still allows us to be deceived.
Our Cristian name to claim right and second/registered birth certificate
Our surname in ALL CAPS - DOG LATIN
A combination of above or our name spelt correctly with a capital letter only at the beginning

But... All seem to still let us be nailed, or do we allow it by bowing down to their threats?

One thing i have noticed there is always a constant use of the term/abbreviation Mr - what does it mean?
mens rea
/ˌmɛnz ˈriːə/
nounLAW
the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.
"a mistaken belief in consent meant that the defendant lacked mens rea"

i guess for a woman they use Mrs - mens rea again?

there's got to be something in front of us that will work as the trick is happening in front of us and yet they can change little bits now and then and still maintain the trick somehow

Ha ha and after re-reading that, what is right in front of us??? Mr, or Mrs

incidentally timing or what, Loving the Alien by Bowie just come on the tune player. i highly recommend listening and reading the lyrics

Its called stupidity Itheman. The problem is people deny their own stupidity and defer it on to others instead of accepting head on , Think of all the wasted time we have to endure listening/responding to people who are just stupid but think they are on some kind of metaphysical journey of enlightenment only to be repeating any old sh*t they find on the internet. The exact problem we had in the first place, people are stupid.

As you're clearly way above stupid i for one would love to know your thoughts to the swindle? This is a revelation Lopsum, you know the answer? Or know there is no way round this swindle?
It would also be of great benefit to know the credentials of someone who knows everyone is stupid, simply because i'm always trying to learn the right stuff.
So, Mr, mens rea...please enlighten as to why that does not work, i've never seen anything on internet mentioning it

credentials? There you go , stuck in the same paradigm you think you are free of?
If you understand my post you wouldnt need to turn it against me. Your ego got in the way. Your mentioned this sort of thing as part criticism of others then completely did it yourself.
Its things like this that give you away itheman

i understand your post to be answering my topic title, but as you say, the answer is because people are stupid. Fine, so in order not to be stupid...how do we get around it? This is one of the main things that i am striving for.

Credentials, your experiences which could explain how you can call people stupid, but you're right there was some ego in my comment and no place for it. Has been long days and as i also know humans, we are not perfect.

i am confused by your last comment...please explain what you're eluding to.

i also don't want this topic to get off point, so anything more than, because we're stupid would be good

my "credentials" are that i dont tend to fall for the bs that 90% of people fall for.
confidence to aproach things in the right way through self analasys , removing bias to give a better chance of reasoned logic. Its called critical thinking skills, im sure ive mentioned this before ...

All commendable, all i will add is, keep an open mind, always, because facts and perspectives can and do change. Or too easy to be judgmental.
Are you going to say what i really am? Or is this formed from a pre judgement? / Past experience?

Anyway https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cilexlawschool.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/HQ03-Criminal-Law-Sample-2019.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwizyPa6haXoAhVZSxUIHdJuB94QFjAMegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0xrFRaD6bYgwl0afN1xpZZ&cshid=1584569765333

So we have a mind to commit a crime "Mr" then i guess the presumption (act) is the document and that we don't correct it?...just initial thoughts

have you thought about it? "Keep an open mind" , i say until you find out the truth, i know it all goes wrong when someone "believes" they are right when wrong. This is why its a good idea to practice removing bias,etc
This reminds me of modern "meditation" which is repressing thought/brain activity vs "focusing the mind" into a sharp tool with concentration and attention as i think meditation used to be to the anchients but is now inverted for the stupid masses.

if you always think you might be wrong you would fear any action of consequence.
Isnt this part of the problem too?
I dont agree that the "trick that gets us" is MR, since were not all accused of a crime. Unless you can clarify how MR tricks us all and what relevance it has to us all in general.

Mens rea is really interesting as it is Latin for "guilty mind" and is the mental element of intent to commit a crime and this is where they use confusion.

You may think about committing a crime but do not commit a crime, so basically mens rea finds you guilty of thinking of committing a crime and not of actually committing a crime and it is merely fanciful language to find you guilty of something you haven't done, but may have thought about.

Absolutely Lopsum belief is dangerous because it is believed true but may be far removed from true. Let's take the word religion as many are into religion and believe they are right. But to religion is to re legion (so from a known source ie parents comes another source ie birth) one has changed legion from true to alien (hence the track loving the alien). Truth is that and law is immutable like knowing a fact is truth.
Interesting about the meditation, i have seen quite a few of Alan Watts videos and get that we are no longer connected to the earth and spiritual life which is quite damming. That we strive know why something works and knowledge, which easily creates the ego. Unlike the Zen way of life, to be at one with the universe as you're in as it's you, typething.

Still confused as to what you think i am, as third time of asking i'll assume if no answer you made a mistake and got me mixed up with a person

So we have the thought to commit a crime "mens rea" then the act of crime "actus rea" the two need to exist for a crime to have occurred....a guilty person.
The act is why i added (act) in previous post. Mr (not MR, don't know if any significance) is the mindfulness to wanting to commit, then the act will be the crime that is set out in their document. Therefore once you have accepted (unknowingly) you're guilty!

i did wonder if mens rea occurred in the Bible (because this is the book of law they swear on and persons have to swear on it is very significant, irrespective of belief in God. God = grantor of Dominion!! So now what God do you believe in?) And found this, interesting read

Source: https://shepherdsforpeace.com/writings/MansVsGods.php

HomeWritingsServicesAbout MeContact

William D. Bontrager, J.D.

1710 C.R. 121

Hesperus, CO. 81326

Ph: 970-259-3384

E-mail: wdb@frontier.net

MAN'S LEGAL CONCEPTS COMPARED TO BIBLICAL CONCEPTS

Ever since the rise of what has, unfortunately, become known as the Religious Right, the debate over any Christian basis to the American form of government has been going on. But what has not been seen is a debate over the question of the degree to which our legal concepts comport with biblical concepts of law and process.

I was born in 1941. As I grew up, my lawyer father, the church, and the school system preached one consistent message: "The basic legal concepts of our law and legal system are taken from the Bible."

I would summarize those "biblically based legal" concepts as follows:

We may be held responsible for our criminal acts because we have a guilty mind -- mens rea. But because we do not want to convict an innocent person, guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. We have a jury to protect us from the tyranny of the monarch or the law. No act may be a crime unless it is made so by statute. We may not be twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense. We have the right to remain silent. We have a right to be free from unlawful intrusion upon our property or person. We have a right to know the charges against us, and to a trial before an impartial tribunal in the area in which the offense took place. These are the essential features of the Criminal Law.

We may be held responsible for our tortuous acts because we were negligent or reckless and caused harm to another. That is, we did something which a reasonably prudent person in same or similar circumstances would not have done, or we did not do what a reasonably prudent person would have done. That is negligence. Or we acted with a heedless disregard of the consequences knowing there was a high probability that harm would result. That is recklessness. Again there was the right to a jury, but here it was so that the community, speaking through the jury, would declare what was or was not negligent or reckless behavior. This is the essence of Tort Law.

We may be held liable for breach of promises we make where the minds of the parties meet on all necessary terms of the agreement. We might also be held liable where another acts to their detriment in reasonable reliance on our words or actions. All this is the essence of Contract Law.

We may be held liable for violating the rights of another in and to their personal, private property. This is the essence of Property Law.

In 1983, after 17 years in the law, I left the law to become a minister of reconciliation, helping people respond to conflict according to biblical principles. In 1994, after 10 years away from the law, I was called back to teach law in Eastern European universities along with a biblical world view.

In order to teach, I felt it necessary to re-immerse myself into the language of the law. In three months I read numerous books on law, government, philosophy, and theology. I also re-studied the Old Testament law of God. But this time when I read the laws of man and God, I read them with a mind-set of a reconciler. And I was surprised. I found that what I had been taught as a child was largely untrue. Let me try to explain.

The philosopher and theologian discuss the Source of Law, Purpose of Law, and Method of Law -- these constitute Rule By Law.

The political scientist and lawyer talk of the Creation, Implementation, Enforcement, and Interpretation of Law -- these constitute Rule Of Law.

And we the people must have a Right Attitude towards the law and legal system -- that is the Rule Under Law.

Now Source must be either the mind of man (darkened by sin) or a Source Outside of and Above Man (God). There is no third option. Of course, if God is, and has law for us, but does not disclose it to us, then that Source does not exist in fact. But we do have the Bible, the image of God in which we are made, the example of Christ, and the statement of the Bible that the law is written upon our hearts (Deuteronomy 30:11-14). Thus, an absolute, binding upon all, LAW does exist which will eventually vindicate Himself. That LAW will also display its purpose and method, if we seek to understand.

My studies in the past knew that the Purpose for the law of man was to restrain evil. That is, by publishing law and having a system to process violations, we expect man, in fear, to restrain his actions. History seems to put the lie to this theory.

But I was surprised to find that the Purpose of God's law is restoration of people to God and to one another. The lawyer Paul said it well: "Because by the works of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the law comes the knowledge of sin." (Romans 3:20) When we have the knowledge that we are sinners -- which knowledge we gain by comparing our life to that life which God demands of us as set forth in His law -- His law then calls us to confession and repentance. That, in turn, reconciles -- restores -- us to God.

The Method of restraint in man's law is to threaten to punish the wrong-doer. We threaten to put him in prison in criminal cases, and threaten him with bankruptcy in civil cases.

The Consequence of our focus on punishment is that when we are confronted by the law, we will deny. Denial turns to rationalization, then justification, then casting blame somewhere else. Those who offend, and those who are offended, are not only not reconciled -- restored in relationship to God, each other, or community -- but they are most often filled with anger, confusion, and bitterness by the adversarial nature of the process. This very adversarial process is, itself, born out of the punishment focus, and the need to prove "fault" as opposed to prove "acts which cause a harm". And so the participants leave the system crying for justice even when they appear to have won their case!

God's method begins with an offer of grace -- "I am the Lord they God Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. If you would like to know how to respond to One Who loved you that much, let Me give you some ideas." God calls us to own the acts which we do which harm others. He then invites us to confess those acts to Him and to those whom we have harmed in a face-to-face setting, aided by the community as needed. Finally, He asks us to do towards the one we have harmed such acts of justice as the Holy Spirit places upon our heart. And as this takes place, the community is called to help bear the burdens of those offended, and of the repentant offender. There is what looks like punishment only when the offer of grace is rejected.

In order to encourage this method, and because our hearts are deceptively wicked, our minds are darkened by sin, and we live in a fallen world, God did something very interesting with His law. He almost totally removed the concept of fault as we have it in our law.

You will not find, in God's law, mens rea (guilty mind) in the process of determination of responsibility for an act which hurts another. You will find it only where doing the act is denied and conviction for having done the act has taken place; that is, where the offer of grace was rejected by refusing to take ownership of one's actions. In such a case, the restitution is increased as a "punishment" so that "crime does not pay." But the "crime" involved is the crime of living in self-interest (refusal to take ownership of acts which have hurt others) rather than in other-interest (ownership and seeking to make things right). In such a system, the need for massive numbers of statutes is diminished (note that there are only 10 commandments!). So is proof beyond a reasonable doubt (except in capital offenses where two eye witnesses were required). Any most of the other "protections" which we think of do not exist.

Nor will you find negligence or recklessness in His law. If you graze your field bare, and your animal goes onto your neighbor's field, you make an equal restitution of the first fruits of your land. (Exodus 22:5) We read this case in the Bible, and we think: "Well, he must have been negligent and allowed his animal to wander. Of course he should pay for his negligence. If he were to prove that the fence was stout, and a sudden wind blew a tree over and ruptured the fence and the animal went out through the rupture before it could be repaired (allowing a reasonable time for discovery and repair), then he would not be liable for it was an 'act of God' which caused this and he was not negligent." But the passage in Scripture does not say this. The passage says: "Your animal got out, a harm resulted, make it right for the sake of relationship and peace." Maybe God was also taking into account in this case example (note: the Ten Commandments are the Statutory Law; these examples given are Case Law showing application of the Statutory Law!) that letting your field be over grazed was a denial of His demand that you tend His earth properly. Maybe the over grazing is a sign of a selfish heart rather than living responsibly in community.

You will not find a concept such as "meeting of the minds" in matters of contract. Instead, you find the simple statement to honor your vows, for vows are made as unto the Lord. (Numbers 30:2)

And you do not find an absolute "my property" in the Bible, but property held as steward for God, and subject to periodic partial re-distribution.

What you do find in God's law is what, in the law of man we call Strict Liability. It exists in some crimes, some torts, and some instances of contract. These laws say that if you sell alcohol to a minor, you are guilty. These type of laws do not ask for what was going on in your mind, or call you evil. They do not compare your action to some reasonably prudent member of the community. They do not care what precautions you took, or how reasonable your choice may seem to have been. No, the law is strict -- you did the act, the act causes a harm in the eyes of the society which made the laws, and you are asked to take responsibility for your action without excuse, justification, rationalization, or casting blame.

All of God's law is strict liability! We recognize the Ten Commandments as such -- "Thou shalt not." But we read the case law as something different. But case law can only be read in the light of statutory law, and in light of the declared purpose and method of the Source of the law.

God, you see, does not want us playing mind games or heart games. He wants us to confess the things we do which hurt others and seek to make right the wrong. In this way we may restore relationship with the other person. In this way we lessen the need for the community to choose up sides and lose peace. In this way we avoid confusion, anger, bitterness, and the constant crying for justice. Justice, after all, comes from God, not rulers who can only grant favors (Proverbs 29:26), and it comes only to those who deal with conflict according to biblical standards. But that is also for another article.

This brings me to three closing questions:

(1) Why to we rail against strict liability when it comes from God, but not when it comes from man?

(2) Is it possible for man's law and legal system to offer restoration as an option at the start of the process? I know people cannot be forced to live in peace with one another. In fact, if we could simply agree, and live out our agreements, we would have no need for law. Justice is a word which we would not have in our vocabulary were it not for our conflicts.

Well, I happen to believe that we can have systems which offer restoration and reconciliation, and which reserve punishment for those who reject the offer of grace. I also believe that we can have systems which can respond to repentance regardless of how late in the process that repentance may show forth.

(3) Assuming this is possible, what would such a system look like? What legislation would be needed? How would police act differently? Prosecutors? Lawyers? Judges? Probation officers? Correctional officers? I have a number of ideas. Central to them all is the need to train people to be ministers of reconciliation. But all that is also for another article. For some ideas, see [Reconsidering and Redefining Justice].

If what I am suggesting here is accurate -- that our legal concepts are far from God's -- then it is time for the lawyers, philosophers, theologians, and politicians to sit down together and begin to dialogue on how to change. In light of the wide-spread dissatisfaction with the law and legal system of the U.S. today, what can we possibly lose by taking a close look at God's ideas for Restorative Justice?

means nothing to me. Bible , god,gods ideas? How do you logicaly reason that god has ideas without the bias of a belief in god? All that is biased , irrational belief.

gives you away as being stupid?
i dont think i can help , you havent explained how mensrea affects everyone or tricks us all.

Really? Please read my last post it makes perfect sense, but you need to know (or relearn) some words.
Define stupid, there are those who cannot get meanings so call them stupid, but is that so?

i will reiterate, God = grantor of Dominion
Bible is a book written by about 14 individuals over about 1300 years. It does not contradict itself. It has 10 laws that if followed would lead to a good world

We have been deeply tricked with subtle and great lies for so long we take it as being true, you know this? Or choose to ignore this?

your last post didnt explain anything, it just asked me more questions

i think one must take on board everything then boil it down, you are left with whatever is.
i've looked and read and listened and questioned a lot and see that there have been people who have tried, some failed and some succeeded with various tactics to prove they are not the strawman (etc). So i question, what is left, as some of these people and attempts have worked at one time then the door is shut and they fail (A4V for one, despite Spaniard has a "proven" method you have to pay for it and i'm sure he was against FIAT). Why and how do they now fail, what has changed? More importantly, what has not changed? Which is where i'm now at with mens rea.

Mr if is mens rea surely means that if you accept a document with Mr / Mrs before your name (written anyhow) you are accepting that you have....a mind to commit a crime? Then all they have to do is tie you to the legal sh*t that is also on the document! You see, there has to be both parts for a crime to have happened; a mind to commit (mens rea) a crime and a doing/act of committing (rea actus) the crime. Now, i know it is all talking about crime, but the civil legislation is acting in the same way, or so it seems...and the trick now works. Does this add up and make sense....?

Most of the stuff i've considered relevant to my journey i've posted, some was already on here but it has taken a long while to get here....and after all this maybe we're all wasting our time thinking somethings is wrong when really we are all f*cked! Or maybe just me who's up the wrong tree! You see, the legal system is so heavy in legalese and blackslaw changing definitions that make it a minefield for us, yet there is on occasion a loophole in their BS. But it takes our money all the time...that is what the system does...Acquisition of property...debt enslavery! Boom...what else is it about?

"they" the slaves to the system impose all the legislations and work like ants milking the aphids (us persons) for the greater good!

But it's a swindle, we've been tricked out of The law (written in the bible - theology never been disproven how can it... their world would fail, it relies on twisting the truth (as all good lies do)) and put under legislation and counted (country, county!) for accounting purposes.

Meaning of words do NOT change (its interpretation might), neither does a law (its interpretation might). If a definition is changed then we are confused because we don't know what it means anymore. Legal/legislative laws/acts change...to suit, whom?

well were a few hundred years past this avenue of fixing anything.
its almost time for the new sets of "laws" for the whole world.
Also mensrea is a judge-ment so it doesnt matter what you do if you cant persuade the judge.
We could be a few days away from martial law rolling out in US and elsewhere maybe here too .

and lets say you persuade the judge, who persuades the rest of soceity that your no longer in their system.Do you end up in the same place or do you go somewhere? Wouldnt the scumbags be there too? What about the rest of the people?
fact is its not the paper that controls you its your own mind and the force and violence that can be inflicted on you.

You don't sound much like your avatar! what's going on...? not the brainwashing and bombardment?

So, it is part of an agenda then there will be an antidote and some will have it, some will administer and some will make it...someone needs to find one of the some who know of it.

judgement can only be passed if all criteria is met, yeah...so part of that is the "who" is on trial and if it is a Mr then, they need to tell you what this term means and prove it in their law book...which will they use!

If/when the new world order is coming a cave is needed and before then watch Red Dawn (1984) aka Wolverines to get an idea of what must be done

Interesting and a good reminder



pay attention at 6:04

that really is interesting. We the people have the power, I think enough said.

sorry itheman , my posts werent all that good and a bit negative, it was a long night .
Thanks for clarifying for me i made more sense of it after!

also , pls note i was only using tough love when i use the term stupid. to define stupid is in the context i wrote , someone who is biased and unaware of it is bound to act stupidly or say stupid things . Learn about bias and all the ways it manifests , this will help you and anyone greatly(were all stupid sometimes i include myself first and foremost) . Efficiency with words is another thing in this format less is more, framing point by point and setting the table up before tangental links are made helps.Its this that confused me in your long post.The tieing of things together in the wrong places.

when we fail to recognise our own bias we have our community to hopefully point it out (finding bias in others too v important, in media and statistical data colection methods ect but we are better at seeing in others than ourselfs), and if we can lose ego associated bias we can accept when we might be wrong alot easier, even being called stupid in the right context should bring the positive outcome. Though i should try to use more words in future, its not the best habbit

this is a good read just found it...
https://medium.com/better-humans/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18

Lopsum, I have read that, and I felt immediately that the writer was negating conscious intuition. We 'sense' waht is going on but are taught to 'override' by blocking it with what we are told/see on the idiots lantern in our living rooms.

Its that intuition that we seek 'confirmation' of, that others mat be thinking the same way. we don't really want to know what others WANT us to believe hence more and more people distrusting governments and doctors (ie Vaccine uptake declining).

Its not the first link that gives you a feeling of jackpot. Its your own thoughts and intuition that produced the link you already wanted in order to override the conscious programming.

Its the conscious programming that gives us doubt, leads to anxiety and depression. So much hype has been created by Corona Media long before any medical expert knew anything about it. The Hype has created economies to flop. We intuitively KNOW there is another agenda.

No problem Lopsum, good to hear you're back on form.
Don't worry but thanks for explaining, hard sometimes getting the feel for intended expressions from text, especially when there's some historical bias in play. Yep, words are very important, if not the most of all. So they need knowing and looking after, o and using so we don't forget them. Bias, that's my word of the day

Very good link that, really good to take stock from things in there.

i do do that, ramble on when i get in the flow, but also it's talking that helps ideas flow and formulate. So what do you think to the mens rea?

Is that all you found to mention (1240)? (soon 1241)