If you open up a law dictionary, you will find it say that there is no such thing as an "implied" contract. All true contracts are explicit. They could not be contracts otherwise. Each party knows exactly what is expected to happen. (Whether it comes to pass, or not, is beside the point.) To this principle, however, your law dictionary will also add an odd concept -- the quasi-contract. The quasi-contract exists for basically only one, exceptional circumstance. A quasi-contract is an agreement formed against a future inheritance.
Now, I'm no legal expert, so I can't say exactly what happens when this future inheritance is unknown or undefined. But, I expect, the result is not a contract (quasi- or otherise), but "complete nonsense".
'Anon', in Middle English, means something like "until we meet again," or "expect me".
Frankly, I find Anonymous' obsession (and war) with Scientology to be hilarious. It is so obviously a Catholic-infused group. And Scientology treats Catholics rather poorly -- as basically spirits who have lost their free will due to some long-ago incident, and who must attach themselves to more, shall we say, "willful" individuals until they can perhaps manage to regain their independence.
Who might be beset by these 'body thetans'? Obviously, as Scientology shows, actors are among the most common. Actors, we are led to believe by mainstream doctrine, are completely aloof and disconnected from money. They don't have wallets. They have "people". If they need anything done, they ask their "people". Their people arrange everything.
Their people are these 'body thetans'. And Scientology, as a practical religion, seems to be largely concerned with the benign management of these entities.
I tend to believe that others besides actors have this same issue. People like trial attorneys and high-profile real-estate developers, for instance.
Aaron Swartz -- also accused of leading Anonymous. He set out to build a better web forum, one that would be decentralized and uncensorable, using his work on RSS technology. What was built instead was a tool of more fine-grained targeting and censorship -- a platform to facilitate the distribution of commercial notice, and to ensure that you have "read it".
Bill "Gates" emerges to lead the computing revolution, to enable massive automation. (A "gate" is a switch, a transistor -- the basic building-block of computing.) What he does instead is build a platform of employment fraud and make-work -- defective software that requires more hands to operate, not fewer. The central bankers were pleased. Money was printed. The economy "grew", then shrank, on schedule.
Baudrillard wrote "everywhere there is a policy of deterrence". It's not just military. It's economic. We believe we are working to make ourselves, everyone, better-off. But a small group are only working to prevent you from becoming better-off. Because when you become better-off, you become capable of recognizing the fraud that has been perpetrated on you. The fraud is perpetrated, and the blind is erected, at all levels -- through information warfare, nutritional warfare, 'movement' prevention, forced-drugging, front-running, defective products, hypnosis, money-printing, fraudulent employment, and simple property theft. The deterrence surrounds you, in every dimension. It has surrounded me, for a long time.
Last Updated on 01/10/17