Email: Doug at DougBuchanan.com
20 December 2003
If there is any error or contradiction in the following, please assist the author's desire to correct it, but you might wisely first ask several questions of your conclusion, because the author did.
Gerry L. Alexander, Chief Justice, Washington State Supreme Court
Gerry L. Alexander is the Chief Justice of the Washington State Supreme Court. Therein he represents a general intelligence level of the people of the State of Washington, much to your amusement, as long as they retain him rather than impeach him.
How does he represent the intellectual ability of himself and the people of Washington?
From the following verifiable data of an actual case for which he signed the court's unanimous conclusion, would you suggest that he is an intellectually capable person who administers written law, or something quite opposite? Your answer to the question will illuminate your mind's ability to identify and resolve a clear contradiction in the law and its administration. If your mind can identify and resolve the exampled contradiction, do whatever it takes to retain that priceless intellectual ability, least your mind end up as horribly impaired and uses as that of Gerry and the other Washington State Court judges.
Within his professional activities, it is apparent that Gerry is a typical power-damaged mind which cannot identify or resolve even simple contradictions, while you you can do so. Gerry's mind can read these words, consult a dictionary to ascertain the meaning of any words he does not understand, and then be categorically unable to identify and resolve the exampled contradiction he created, as you will recognize from the following proof.
You will laugh at the hilarious and pitiable nature of his mind. Fear that you could become such an embarrassing victim of his affliction, if you fail to learn what power is, and how it functions within the human mind.
Pity any offspring of Gerry, and his other associates, who may function within the daily influence of his information base that cannot tolerate the open identification and resolution of his glaring contradictions. First your mind is trained by yourself, in reaction to the common stimuli around you. And then your mind controls you.
If you are raised by parents within a social sub culture, wherein no effective questions are allowed to be asked of any particular institution's teachings and beliefs, which you are taught, it is likely that your mind will adopt those teachings as truth above any questions. You will later not consider any such questions from those outsiders who do not dutifully express respect and compliance to your institution's teachings, just as did the adults who taught you, by the human mind's reaction to its training. First you train your mind. And then it controls you.
If what adults taught each next generation were not ludicrously flawed right from the get-go, and hopelessly contradicted thereafter, there would be no wars and countless such manifestations of abject human illogicality.
That is how the pitiable Nazi Gestapo chaps were taught to genuinely and sincerely believe that killing all Jews was the correct thing to do to advance a better society, and ask no questions, and attack anyone who would openly question them. That is how the pitiable American, Russian, Iraqi and other war mongering flag-wavers are taught to believe that whomever their leaders attack with a war machine, is evil, and attack anyone who would openly question the flag wavers. That is how the pitiable American lawyers and judges were taught to genuinely believe that the written law is whatever any court judge damn well says is the law, no matter how laughably absurd, and not what is written in the prevailing law, and maliciously attack anyone who would dare to openly question da judge or ask that the written, prevailing law be presented and certified as such in court as evidence.
If you refuse to recognize a glaring contradiction that other people recognize, or refuse to ask the questions that resolve the contradiction, your mind will end up as useless to you and society as Gerry Alexander's, and result in your being laughed at by common sense people.
The institution of written law was invented by thinking human minds as the reasoning-based replacement for the mental midget knuckle-draggers of yesterday and today, who attempted to solve problems by bashing other people over head with clubs, gunning them down with M-16 rifles, and bombing them into shredded body parts, from F-16 and A-10 bombers, and who are so intellectually void they still cannot figure out why the other guys therefore get pissed-off and retaliate with easily hijacked suicide airliners and such inherently unstoppable counter-creations of equally innovative human minds.
Written law, because the process of writing words slows the hasty mind down to a speed that allows a bit of thought while the words are being written, and produces words not later deniable, produces more thinking than the hasty verbal decrees of idiots, such as Saddam, Bush and their Neanderthal ilk who will forever be eager to kill their way through their illusions, in abject fear of those illusions.
The potential of replacing the use of force with the use of written reasoning was first briefly illuminated in human history by the creation of the British and American common law, and the unique mechanism of its origin, inherent to the design of the human mind. But then the executive, legislative and judicial branch leaders of the most powerful common law nation, the United States, buried the common law because it limited their raw power to imprison and kill their way through the illusions of their fear-saturated, power-damaged minds.
Humans are a new experiment. The reasoning-based common law will return, but only after it is first fully eradicated from the United States Gestapo-styled Police State, in the name of security, of course, and the war on terrorism, to defeat those evil-doers, and don't forget the drug war, and the war on guns, and poverty, motherhood, apple pie, enforced by the American Judicial Branch personnel, identical to Hitler's highly refined Judicial Branch which ordered the executions of millions of non-Jew Germans who dared to suggest words such as you are reading. Every society holds that sector from which Hitler derived all the eager Gestapo and court judges he needed, by design of humans, as Gerry Alexander magnificently illuminates.
Precisely what mechanisms at play in human minds caused Washington State Supreme Court Chief Justice Gerry L. Alexander and his judicial ilk to utilize every device they could invent to destroy or hide the most brilliant reasoning-based, social invention of the human phenomenon, the common law? What caused him to professionally become just another mental midget knuckle-dragger, commanding armed court security thugs, enraged that any mere lowly human would even mention the common law or process of reasoning in a court of law?
If you ask enough questions, and answer them, you will learn that precise electro-chemical mechanism in the human brain, and much more, from this website. But Gerry will eventually die of old age, still pitiably clueless, enraged at his lack of enough raw power to force everyone do as he decrees, just as old Nazis continued to dream of the return of their power and the death of all Jews, and could not understand the words of any question of their glaring contradictions. The power-damaged mind is permanent. Never adopt power for your mind's process.
Humans think, that is, they ask and answer questions, by design of their mind. Even Gerry's mind is occasionally troubled by a rudimentary vestige of the process of thinking, despite the effectiveness of power in his mind, suppressing the threat of thinking. Power cannot prevail against knowledge. Knowledge is created by thinking, asking and answering questions.
Because there are many human minds which do not fall victim to accepting institutional titles and trappings, and thus do not adopt power for their reasoning process, and because humans have learned to communicate, power-damaged minds are constantly fighting against the common expressions of thinking among fellow humans. The devices that power-damaged minds invent to fight against thinking and its results are easily identified and itemized. American lawyers and court judges illuminate some such classic devices.
After the invention of written language, the ritual of the old concept of forming institutions for the greater good of society, was centered on writing documents, referenced as charters, constitutions, articles of association, trusts, corporations, contracts, by-laws, and all that. The writing slowed the process, and created permanent displays of reasoning, to create more thinking, which resulted in documents illuminating an advancement in the reasoning base of the established institutions.
But easily notice that the leaders of one hundred percent of all human organizations violate their written charters. All of them, no exceptions, for an identifiable cause. For example, not even one article, section, sentence or clause of the US Constitution is honored by the government dolts. The last clause to be honored was the right of contract, because it protected the old money super-rich families who protected their assets under that clause. But even that has since gone by the wayside. The US Constitution is a fool's illusion, categorically, with proofs that prevail against any questions anyone can create. When you perceive that the constitution is honored, it is only by temporary whim of the government official, as a grace rather than bound duty. The times that the officials and judges more often violate it with impunity prove the case.
What causes the mind of every organization leader to inherently violate the organization's written charter, without exception?
The organization creates power for the titled leaders, no matter how small the organization, and how petty the title. Read that as often as you need to understand its full meaning.
Within the institution of courts of written law, because the creation of the institution created power, the devices that lawyers and judges invented to increasingly eradicate expressions of reasoning from the courts, to grab and centralize their raw personal power of office, are itemizable, and illuminate how Gerry fooled his mind into sincerely believing that his raw personal power must prevail above any human reasoning written as law, not matter how obviously illogical, malicious and damaging his resulting displays become.
Watch the progression of only one such device.
If the law states you must look up, you must look up. If the law states you must look down, you must look down. And all people must do precisely that, including the accused, the accuser, the judge and the spectators, by design of written law. No exceptions, least the law would not be the law, and would only be the decree of he who could exempt himself from the law.
But the identifiable process of power within the prestigiously titled mind of the judge, for whom all must rise upon his entrance, and all must look up to his higher throne, ah, chair, is enraged that it must do what is required of those lowly, untitled, inferior, mere humans.
So how can the judge's mind escape the duty to written law, and still claim that we are all equally under the rule of law? It the government cannot claim that everyone is equal under the law, to fool ignorant people with those words, the people will stop respecting the law because they will recognize that the law is just a rhetorical ruse invented to hide the personal dictatorship of government thugs.
By design of the mind, it needs a mechanism, a straw-man, a device, a rhetorical illusion, something imagined, to separate it from the written law and still retain the illusion of the law. With the invention of an imagined device, the power-damaged mind does not have to produce reasoning for not having to obey the law. It can substitute the rhetorical illusion for reasoning. It it had to express reasoning, the goal would fail, because that reasoning would inherently exempt all the other inherently equal humans from the law if any one person could be exempted. So the power-damaged mind fabricates the rhetorical illusion as a bare conclusion, without reasoning that would fail against questions. The bare conclusion is then imposed by raw power, with the usual intimidation tactics, such as the presence of armed security, police or military thugs, the knuckle-draggers who are paid to respond like did Pavlov's dog, and trained to ask no questions.
Power cannot prevail against questions. All questions and other forms of reasoning must be silenced if power is to prevail.
Now consider that court judges, humans of the same design as all other humans, and not possibly superior in any way, by design of humans, who are first made stupid and unquestioning in law school, were created and are paid for the duty of administering the law, the written law itself, as written, only as written, by the charter creating their institution. The court judge is the real person who is responsible and liable for revealing the written law, a piece of paper with print, certifying it as applicable to the action precisely described in the written law, and applying it to an action brought before question in court, without creating any resulting contradiction, such as a contradiction with another law or with the fundamental action to which the law is applied because it is described in the law. The buck stops at da judge. He is it. There is no other person in government with the final duty and responsibility to administer the written law, to match the proper law with the applicable action.
The judge is only a paid servant to written pieces of paper, and bound by those written words least he is guilty of a crime by contradicting those written words, the law. Such words of immutable fact enrage the power-damaged minds of court judges, because it destroys their power.
But to so perform, the judge would have to know the law. That would require that he read the written law, and learn it, or at least learn how to find it for each action brought before question in a court. But learning the law or how to identify it in the law library, involves the arena of written words. Even reading written words requires more time and thinking than spewing verbal words.
But thinking is the death of power, and the judge holds a title that convinced his mind, by a simple electro-chemical response to related stimuli, that he holds power. Thinking and power are mutually exclusive.
The written law prevails above any personal decision available to the judge. The decision was already made, as revealed by the words of the written law that was previously written from the process of careful thinking. The court judge was designed to be only a secretary to flawlessly match the law with the action. Any device to create and maintain power in the mind of the judge, above the mind's thinking process, therefore must separate the mind from any act of thinking, the asking and answering of questions to perform the duty of matching the right law with the applicable action.
The other of many compounding devices that lawyer/judges instituted to create their power above reasoning, to separate their mind from being subject to questions, such as never removing inferior laws from the case law books, to thus leave all human actions as constituting crimes at whim of judges, are discussed elsewhere. The example used on this webpage is sufficient to represent the effect of them all.
Because all people are equally bound by the written law, the judge and his institutional colleague lawyers, they being of the same power-based institution, simply invented another device (rhetorical illusion) to separate themselves from any requirement to obey the law. They wrote themselves a new law, as a bare conclusion without reasoning, simply penned into the Rules of the Court, and into the court requirements for being granted a lucrative government lawyer's license, that states that lawyers and judges are Officers Of The Court.
That ancient device, with a new arrangement of words, is identical to George Bush's gambit of decreeing that prisoners of war are enemy combatants and therefore under the non-existent law of enemy combatants, which therefore describes no human rights available to enemy combatants, because the law granted human rights to prisoners of war, and Bush's power damaged-mind, like American court judges, is enraged by any suggestion that its power is limited by written law, so he just fabricated a rhetorical illusion to fool his easily fooled mind, and the minds of any other unquestioning idiots.
Because the lawyer/judges were writing a law for the identified goal of exempting themselves from the law, the thinking they produced was for that goal, not any common good. Because writing is accountable record not easily deniable, the judge/lawyers wrote their self-serving law inside the secrecy of their institution, and keep their law functionally obscured from the general public. No lawyer or judge will tell you about the multiple hidden meanings of being an officer of the court, or any other of the rhetorical illusions they fabricated to fool fools, first themselves. The phenomenon is common to the human mind. The repugnant slaughter of innocent people is suddenly acceptable to the mental midget military minions who simply mouth the words, collateral damage. The power-damaged human mind actively seeks to fool itself, to stay comfortably stupid. You must work hard, asking and answering difficult questions, to advance your reasoning ability.
Gerry will never recover his reasoning ability, as herein proven.
The judge/lawyer-penned law states, as a bare conclusion, that an officer of the court is beholding to the decisions of the presiding officer of the court, the judge. And the judge is an officer of the court. Read that again. There is no mention of being beholding to the written law itself, and therefore the judge/lawyers created their mind's rhetorical illusion to rule by absolute personal power, whim and verbal decree of the judge, with no duty to obey any other written law. Their self-fooled mind can perceive it is obeying the law because it is obeying the pocket law that states that the decrees of the judge are bound by no other law. That is how the power-damaged mind functions. It will do anything within the imagination of the human mind to create an illusion to place the functioning of raw power above any reasoning process subject to questioning. Without questioning, reasoning does not exist. Reasoning is the process of asking and answering questions. Power is the process of evading any questioning, and imposing bare conclusions unsupportable by questioned reasoning.
You immediately recognize the contradiction with the oath of office taken by court judges, in which they swear to uphold the Constitution, the supreme written law of the land. But in that oath, they swear to obey other laws, and thus created another of their series of rhetorical illusions to evade any duty to anything but their own raw personal power of office, the craving of kings and such mental midget idiots. No human can successfully serve two masters, by design of the human mind. Court judges therefore created a demand to serve two masters, the supreme law and the millions of contradicting inferior laws. The impossibility leaves them therefore serving their choice of laws, including whatever they suddenly say is law, among millions of contradicting case laws intentionally left in the law books, that now criminalize every possible human action. That is one of the descriptions of serving power, serving mutually exclusive contradictions. Power serves only itself, and never any humans. Rational humans resolve contradictions, by design of the human mind. Power, a designed alteration of the human mind's process, creates contradictions, and cannot possibly resolve them, least power would not exist above reasoning.
What mental process will cause the next self-glorifying and government-glorifying idiot, perhaps a titled American Air Force officer, to bomb another group of innocent women and children in Afghanistan, Iraq and the next Wag The Dog War, on schedule? (Power) What process would prevent it? (Thinking). You will never identify a thinking military officer, by definition, least they would quit the job that requires them to function on mindless, destructive power, instead of thinking.
So officers of the court, which include all government licensed lawyers and many other government drones, including judges, are by an inferior law required to obey the judge, under criminal penalty for not doing so. But a contradiction cannot resolve a contradiction, and each contradiction compounds itself, by design of the human mind.
What happens when someone brought before court, is represented by a person who is not a lawyer or government drone, and thus not an officer of the court, and thus not bound by the judge's raw power, and is required to obey only the prevailing written law, and thus protected by the written law?
That is when Gerry Alexander and his idiot judicial colleagues illuminate the horrible damage that power does to their minds, albeit of grand humor.
In this case, counsel for the property owner is not a lawyer or any other officer of the court. Counsel expressly stated that he was not a lawyer, not an officer of the court, did not know the law, and relied upon the known legal duty of the presiding officer of the court to accurately represent the written law itself, the prevailing law, the common law, under penalty of fraud.
A real person must represent and administer the written law itself, least this nation is not under the rule of written law.
The property owner required the judge to actually perform his paid duty. Horrors.
It is no longer possible for an American court judge to obey the prevailing law. They do not even know what it is, or how to find it, and fear their paid responsibilities more than death itself. They are ignorant, vulnerable, power-damaged, petty little minds. Time has passed. The institution of American lawyer/judges has evolved into such a labyrinth of self-fabricated, self-compounding contradictions that its personnel cannot possible escape their self-inflicted trap of power. The minds of American judge/lawyers are incapable of extracting themselves from their mess. Their institution is doomed, and you may enjoy the entertainment of their self-destruction. They are power-damaged minds. But they will imprison and kill many innocent American citizens in the process, by design of the knuckle-draggers, unless a certain reasoning-based event is effected sooner.
Because Superior Court Judge Robert Hackett's law school-addled mind could not possibly function with the property owner not being represented by an officer of the court, he simply decreed, on record, that said counsel must be treated as though he was a lawyer, with the knowledge and responsibilities of a lawyer. Poor Hackett was so confused and incapable of doing his job, that he decreed a law that created an impossibility, that someone held knowledge that they obviously did not hold, and could therefore could not possibly hold a duty to act under. Hackett displayed the reaction of an idiot, as is common for court judges.
Law cannot create an impossibility, as even the dumbest kid on the block can recognize. Because government dolts have so often displayed themselves as dumber than the dumbest kid on the block, the wiser court judges who created the common law in previous years even wrote the prevailing law that negated any law or its effect, that attempted to create an impossibility. But modern American judges are clueless of the common law, the written expression of fundamental human reasoning applied to human actions, just as they are clueless of human reasoning that prevails regardless of the law.
Judge Hackett could read these words, and his mind would only be confused. He genuinely believes that his raw power to decree the existence of impossibilities, as law, must prevail above any written law or human reasoning that limits Hackett's raw personal power.
Hackett created a contradiction, among others.
And then Gerry Alexander compounded the contradiction with another contradiction, and demonstrated that his mind is not capable of identifying and resolving the contradictions he and Hackett fabricated.
As an aside, the fact that Hackett successfully fooled 10 of the 12 minds of the sort of dutifully unquestioning folks Yakima produces for juries, with that ruse, is among the devices that power-damaged minds utilize to fool themselves. If they fool fools, they believe that they have produced a logical action. If you function only among fools, and believe your expressions because fools believe them, you will end up as one. Were Hitler's goals not proven to be wise for society when he stood in the middle of his Panzer Divisions and saw only idiots waving flags in support of his idiot illusions? Is Bush's war mongering not proven to be wise for society when he, like his predecessors, selects a White House Press Corps which only asks the questions that will keep them in good grace with the president, to thus remain on the well paid, ego-gratifying White House Press Corps?
Would a wise person seek counsel among fools and flatterers, or among his enemies who are enemies because they currently perceive and question contradictions created by the wise person? What is your answer? Notice the answer of foolish institution leaders inside their institutional cocoons.
With counsel for the property owner therefore decreed to hold the full knowledge and responsibilities of a lawyer, Hackett effected said counsel as being an officer of the court, by decree, regardless of said counsel expressly stating that he was not an officer of the court, and could not lawfully be one, and did not hold the knowledge or duties of a lawyer. Therefore Hackett decreed his authority to rule by decree above all other laws, and concurrently evaded his duty to represent only the prevailing law, in his pitiable mind. He also effected several other devices hidden within the inferior lawyer license law and related rules of the court, written by judge/lawyers as excuses to evade their duties under the prevailing laws.
But now the amusement begins. Hackett effected the full results of counsel for the property owner being a lawyer.
But Gerry Alexander, as the Chief Justice and signer for his colleagues in Department II of the Washington State Supreme Court, refused to hear the case, and summarily denied all motions, without stated reasoning, to let stand the Washington State Appeals Court Division II ruling that counsel for the property owner was not a lawyer and therefore decreed to be too ignorant and too low of stature to speak to the high Supreme Court Kings.
Therefore the Washington State Court decreed that counsel for the property owner must be treated as though he were a lawyer with the full knowledge and responsibilities of a lawyer (and therefore the privileges because they cannot be separated), thus decreeing a law effecting that decree because the Courts can lawfully administer only law, to thus divest the Court of its duties to the law, and the Washington State Court also decreed that counsel for the property owner must be treated as though he is not a lawyer, and therefore without the knowledge, responsibilities and privileges of a lawyer, again to evade their duty, in this instance their duty of having to hear the case, because they have another pocket inferior law that states that only lawyers may speak to the Court Kings.
The contradiction is absolute. Counsel for the property owner was decreed to be opposite, mutually exclusive entities. The contradiction was created only by the obviously addled minds of those court judges, not by any action of the property owner or his counsel who stood on verifiable truth the entire time. The contradiction creates two opposing laws for the same human action, which because Gerry and his sorts are evading their duty to resolve, creates the rule of personalities and convenience above the rule of written law, as law, wherein law can be administered as a rigged shell game at the whim of court judges.
It is not possible for the contradiction to remain in effect without abrogating the rule of written law and proving that Washington State Court judges are idiots at best, and more likely repugnant criminals using raw power of office backed by armed thugs, to willfully, criminally deny people their lawful rights.
Was the property owner defrauded of his rights when he was decreed to manifest the full knowledge, duties and liabilities of a lawyer? Or was he defrauded when he was not allowed to present his case because he did not hold the knowledge, duties and liabilities of a lawyer?
This is the test of your intelligence, in comparison with that of Washington State Supreme Court Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, all the other Washington State court judges and the idiot politicians who selected them. If you can identify that a contradiction was created, and express the contradiction in words, and ascertain the resolution which conforms to verifiable truth, from the above words, you are more intelligent than Gerry and his ilk who have proven on public record that they cannot do so.
If Gerry were in front of his offspring or other colleagues, would he say that he cannot identify any contradiction, to thus advance his action based on his obvious ignorance, to define himself as an idiot for being a court judge so grossly ignorant of the law and human reasoning ability, or would he say that of course he is sufficiently intelligent to recognize such a glaring contradiction, and is only dishonestly cheating the property owner out of his rights, under color of law and power of office, and thus committing a felony crime?
Or would he again flee the question, so intellectually cowardice, incapable and useless to humans, that his flight answers the question of his mind?
But of course only an idiot would criminally cheat a fellow person out of his rights on public record, because the action creates an inherently untenable contradiction, and thus Gerry identifies himself as an idiot regardless of which choice he attempts.
And what would be the reaction of his offspring and other colleagues, belatedly recognizing among themselves that they had been flattering and displaying respect for an idiot, to thus define themselves?
Do not the questions themselves, in face of the indelible record, herein identify Justice Gerry Alexander and his ilk, regardless of their reaction? Learn to ask the questions whose answers are proven by the questions, and can be sustained against every question any human can ask. Learn to ask the controlling questions, against which no rhetorical ruses, such as inferior laws fabricated by idiot lawyer/judges to displace superior laws among fools, can prevail.
Never let your mind become as gullible as the colleagues of Gerry, or as addled and useless as the mind of Gerry. Ask the questions that resolve each contradiction you identify, the moment you identify it, and write those questions and answers, and sign your name to them. Never accept a job or title that results in you denying your own mind's ability, least you successfully do so and sell your priceless mind for the cheap robes of fools.
Gerry Alexander and his thoroughly corrupted American court colleagues, laughably pitiable minds, will continue to fabricate more self-deluding rhetorical ruses to advance their raw power above the human mind's reasoning process, in their own minds, until they eventually die of old age still lost in their illusions. They may successfully cheat the property owner out of the inconsequential property, money and rights illuminated in this case. They may breed and train another generation of their intellectually void lot. They too shall pass within our intellectual dark ages, and never contribute anything of value of the human phenomenon.
The question is of YOUR mind's ability to advance beyond such common Neanderthal displays of these yet primitive humans.
Answer it well. And enjoy your answer.
Justice Mary Fairhurst
Justice Barbara Madsen
Justice Sandra O'Connor
Judge Heather Van Nuys
Judge Robert Hackett
The other court sorts, to be added later.