Firstly, we recommend that everyone look up the true meaning of Admiral.

What do you mean "the true meaning"? :/ Is there a "false meaning"? Which meaning you are referring to? And who is "we"? :/

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/admiral

<<ad�mi�ral (dmr-l) n. 1. The commander in chief of a fleet. 2. A flag officer. 3. a. Abbr. ADM or Adm. A commissioned rank in the U.S. Navy or Coast Guard that is above vice admiral and below Admiral of the Fleet. b. One who holds the rank of admiral, Admiral of the Fleet, rear admiral, or vice admiral. 4. Any of various brightly colored butterflies of the genera Limenitis and Vanessa. 5. Archaic The ship carrying an admiral; flagship.>>

Mackximus: G'day :-) Firstly, we is the man of body, mind and spirit known as Colin. Secondly, pls look up the meaning of Admiral in Lexica Dei Divinus.

Ooh! (Slowly backs away...)

Mackximus, no need to back away we don't bite.

Admiral: amir-ar-rahl "chief of the transport". But there is no definitions for "chief" and/or "transport". So what is the "true meaning" of those words, if they are not in the Lexica Dei Divinus? :/

As an observation, for a "Dictionaries of the Divine," it looks like it is missing quite a few words. I'm just saying. :/

Yes, it does miss many worlds, however, we don't think its intention was intended to challenge the Cambridge, Oxford, Blacks and Bouviers dictionaries. We thought "chief of transport" was self explanitory.

<<Firstly, we recommend that everyone look up the true meaning of Admiral.>> So, what is the purpose of knowing the "true meaning" of admiral? Where are you going with this? I am trying to understand what is it that you trying to accomplish by posting this.

<<We thought "chief of transport" was self explanitory.>> Well, explanitory is not in there, as well. But I could not find it anywhere else, either. :/ And when you say "We," that means you? :/ <<Firstly, we is the man of body, mind and spirit known as Colin.>> I am trying to identify the AUTHOR/S or AUTHORITY behind the Lexica Dei Divinus.

Yes, we feel you have missed the point. It is Scott's title and the purpose of his TENDER FOR LAW page? "Transporting" information and knowledge.

The author/entity is shown on the bottom of the Lexica Dei Divinus page.

Maybe I am missing the point. Would you please point me towards the point? :/ Is like you want to say something, but are leaving clues, or something. When Scott teaches, he does not "dance around." TRUTH does not need such complications.

Admiral is Scott's title and the purpose of his TENDER FOR LAW page is "Transporting" information and knowledge. If you don't see that, then never mind.

Sorry, Colin, I do not read minds. I was/am really trying to get this. <<Admiral is Scott's title and the purpose of his TENDER FOR LAW page is "Transporting" information and knowledge.>> If that is what you really wanted to say, why did not you said so from the beginning? :/ I am not the brightest, but I usually "get" most of the information. Your post has been extremely difficult to decipher. I SWEAR I STILL do not know. :/

But I accept your offer to "never mind." :D

One-heaven.org is Frank O'Collins site... The guy who claims angels have visited him in visions...

Ohh well, that would explain why I do not get this post then! :D

Yes, Ceit, it is; Ucadia. However, we don't follow that stuff. The Canons on One-Heaven.org make interesting reading

I got visited by angels, many, many times. In fact, one of them is the mother of my 3 children now. Now the other angels do not visit, as much. Damn, do I miss all that extra angel-booty! :/

Mackximus, when we chose to look for Admiral, from curiosity, on the Lexica Dei Divinus page, it looked obvious to us. We hoped others would see it, too, as we did. Maybe Scott would like to clarify our comprehension of Admiral later.

The Admiral has slipped back into that Microsoft Coma�, you may be waiting for awhile. :p

:-\

I command a fleet of ships. I am a transporter of knowledge. The word fits :P

Well... that was easy.

And NO visions from angels! :D

:D

You think I can't spot Frank O'ConArtist Copypasta? :D Whenever bullshit is sold with truth, there is fraud going on SOMEWHERE.

I saw an angle in a vision once too, it was an isosceles and it didn't have wings or a bugle or anything like that.

Oh wrong dream it was a triangle, please forgive me. :)

BONUS POINTS: Geometry Joke. :D

i saw angels, in bikini's, washing my boat. got pictures too!

"Whenever bullshit is sold with truth, there is fraud going on SOMEWHERE." thats a great line. put that on a tshirt!

THE TENDER FOR LAW is an examination of what you need to know to fight Judicial corruption, by examining the stuff you are LIED TO about. SPOILERS: IT'S ALWAYS ABOUT ACCOUNTING AND SURETY. gee now where have I seen that before?

and the circle gets the square.

David Johansen, YOU put that on a t-shirt. YOU make as MUCH MONEY as you can get people to pay for it. "Scottisms" are yours to distribute as far and wide as you can. Profit if you can!

The group will go "secret" soon. I have a whole shitload prepared for those that survive the coming purge. One of the things that I will COMPEL you to do is learn to MAKE MONEY off of WHAT I TEACH YOU. We will use that money collectively to preemptively affect key factors in the global market. SOME of you will become stupidly rich, VERY quickly. Those who don't should WATCH THOSE WHO DO! They will be your cautionary tale. Pigs get slaughtered, and greed does NOT pay. I have too many irons in the fire. I need more SimuDrones! ...so pay attention.

i exchanged a $20 NOTE for $1.10 in pre 1965 coins friday. thought that was fair. cheaper than a morgan or peace, and more weight then just a dollar. plus it is allready partially divided. my new hobby.

Could you please give an example of MAKING MONEY from what you have taught us Scott? No one I know knows or cares what crypto currencies are despite me trying to explain the benefits and what money really is... I have a group that I set up pre Tender for Law days where I share what I have learned because I feel that the function of law should be basic knowledge but is not taught (for obvious reasons)... I play music for a living and in Ireland's forever thriving pub scene, despite recession, that is one value I can offer potential contractors... I won't lie that my heart jumps when I read that "some of you will become stupidly rich" because I think of maybe affording that ridiculously expensive guitar I want someday, but still fall back to the reality that "you get what you give"... Am I still thinking wrong? :/

:D

For "me", stupidly and rich can easily fit together !! Like peanut and butter, or Legal and Tender, or any other shit like that :/

I was going to ask about sharing your articles ...... my step dad wants to know where I've been getting my info.... he is a chartered accountant In manitoba..... I am under the impression he will label Scott as arrogant or ego based of something

I want to see if he is capable of getting passed his programming..... often when I'm discussing issues with him he ignores my Content and focuses on my delivery ..... he calls it angry cave man

You can share MY dictionary with him, if you like.... :D

My dad just gives a short laugh and repeats his question... In fairness, the first I mentioned to him was 2 years ago after listening to a Mary Croft talk and telling him he wasn't "Kevin O Brien"... :p

Sweet thx Pete. ... the thing about my step dad is I keep trying to get him to admit that accountants set policy but he won't he gets that blank look and tries to change the subject

He will probably see it as very inoffensive, he will laugh, and will probably say: FUCK, this guy is RIGHT !!!! :-o

That's the "Forrest Gump" approach, it works all the time :D

I came across this article last night on Yahoo: "There are wonky legal discussions about the differences between "artificial persons" (corporations) and "natural persons" (the kind with flesh and blood)." Can you explain Scott, what exactly the term NATURAL PERSON means? I've heard it so many times, i just dont really know what it means. http://news.yahoo.com/corporations-people-real-legal-concept-070458465--finance.html

It's an administrative distinction only.

"Natural Persons" can't have LIMITED LIABILITY. THAT is the distinction.

So, if "natural persons" cannot have limited liability, what kind of liability they have, Admiral Scott?

Kirsten Carlstrom

I would think FULL. Why would anyone want to be a NATURAL PERSON?

"Why would anyone want to be a NATURAL PERSON?" NATURAL PERSON has always seemed somewhat of an oxymoron to me..

Its like Lou Manotti says "They only have legal rights...why would I want those?"

Legatus non violatur..does this mean "don't shoot the messenger?"

NATURAL PERSONS are ALWAYS PRESUMED TO HAVE FILL LIABILITY (Sui Juris)

Legatus non violatur = "Solicitor is not a violation" if you want a LITERAL translation.

"Don't shoot the messenger" is the weasel-word excuse that people who claim "higher authority" is valid. Lawyers use it as an excuse for their behavior.