Jul 06, 2014 3:05 AM

There were at least a couple of threads that discussed "Judge Dan."

When you say you see similarities to what "Scott has," which similarities specifically, Adrian Thomson?

SPOILER ALERT: This is NOTHING similar to what Scott teaches. In fact, I find the mere suggestion a bit "offensive." :P

I know you can start picking this apart, Adrian. Give it a shot.

It wasn't meant to be offensive in ANY way, and if it was, I sincerely apologize for that

I am joking about getting "offended." That is why I used these " " . Please do no think I am "offended," no need to apologize.

Gee, maybe I come across like some kind of Ogre when I type. :/

The part where he spoke of the birth certificate in the courtroom, that looked a lot like avoiding to become surety for that name... And, I immediately thought of Scott's Notice of Mistake article. There are differences in the approach, but the idea looked the same.

Having said that though, I know that Scott's words are chosen specifically

Humm... did you read ANYWHERE the words SURETY, and/or ACCOUNTING?

I will save you some precious time... Is you want to learn LAW, read EXCLUSIVELY Scott's articles. Period. EVERYTHING I had "learned" before getting here, I had to dump. Literally.

Good point. So, looking back into it from that angle then, it appears that he is dancing around close to the heart of the matter (SURETY) but not explicitly saying so and clarifying what that actually is. Thus, he is only serving to muddle the thinking...

YES!

Although, if it means anything... While I was reading it, I was holding an image of Pete Daoust in my mind with the caption "Where is SURETY?" :)

If is NOT surety, and accounting, it's there to CONFUSE/PROPAGANDA, and make you miss the point ALL the time 100% guaranteed.

Gotcha Sorry then to waste everyone's time.

Perhaps a lurker/newbie will get this as well then. :/

I think is perfect you posted this, so all the newest members can start realizing that it is NOT just a saying when you hear "Scott is ALWAYS right." Remember, LEGAL = SURETY and ACCOUNTING. ALWAYS look for that. The rest is white noise.

If it's not simple, you are doing it wrong!

Adrian Thomson, now that you know you always look for surety, and accounting, don't you think that this is just a bunch of "feel good" info, from an ANONYMOUS source, that will likely end-up getting some retard in trouble, because they will actually BELIEVE this is real information (no verification), from a real "judge", just because he calls himself like that :/ ?

I knew people would be like this. :D

I just have to put it out there and you guys are on it like rabid dogs :D

Janick Paquette, or anyone else, do you think that I come across harsh when commenting?

LEGAL = SURETY and ACCOUNTING "Scott is ALWAYS right."

and there's your sign

we have all read that. it is a fun read. print several copies, and leave them around in the district court some monday morning.

I do not want to scare away anyone from learning. I am afraid I might had scared Bobis away. :(

Bobis Youruncle needs to grow a fucking spine then :D

Well, that is true, too. There is too many softies, anyways! :P

Not scared , verifying.

There is something mildly suspicious about this document. The word choices, sentence structure and presentation, make it difficult to believe it was written by a member of the judiciary. Without further verification it falls into the "close but no cigar" category for me. I suspect there are circumstances where following the advice verbatim could result in an extended unpaid "vacation".

:D