North American Historical Law Society

EDITOR IN CHIEF: IPSO FACTO.
THE OMB ISSUE & THE REAL ISSUE

THE FOLLOWING IS A PARTIAL REPRODUCTION OF AN EMAIL WHICH I SENT TO THE “WE THE PEOPLE”FOUNDATION AFTER RECEIVING AN EMAIL REGARDING THE RECENT IRS -vs- LAWRENCE TAX CASE DISMISSAL IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT. I HAVE ADDED SUBSTANTIAL MATERIAL TO THE ORIGINAL AND EDITED IT FOR THIS NEWS LETTER. Alan David.

I am a researcher, who has been researching law for over 15 years now, and have obtained dismissals of more than 40 criminal charges in various cases by the use of my paper work.

I want to ask you if you are aware that there are published cases on the books in which courts have ruled on the precise issue you cite in the U.S. vs Lawrence case (O.M.B. issue). I have read those cases myself.
The Courts all ruled the issue to be frivolous and without merit, as they usually do, and that the provisions which are relied on in the Lawrence case regarding the numbering requirements on government forms do not apply to 1040s or tax return forms and the defense provisions in the Act cited and relied on in the Lawrence case do not apply in a tax case with the IRS?

I find it hard to believe that the attorneys for the I.R.S. would not be aware of those court cases and would not have cited them in a motion to exclude the said defenses, and preclude the mention of any of that information and any such defenses if they were competent.

I would do some careful reviewing of the record and documents filed by the I.R.S. to find the real reason and /or cause for the dismissal of the case, if they did dismiss it. I would also check the statute of limitations to see if they can refile another case against Lawrence, which is what I would suspect they would likely do in the near future. It is erroneously stated on one of your articles about the Lawrence case, that the Courts’ order dismissing the case with prejudice means that they cannot refile the same charges against Lawrence; this is not what “with prejudice” means. It merely means there is no leave to amend the complaint which has been dismissed, and it will become a final judgment, unless it is successfully appealed to an Appellate Court of appropriate jurisdiction, or unless an extraordinary writ is issued, granting relief from the dismissal, or a motion to vacate or set aside the said judgment, ruling, or order is granted.

The matter of refiling the same or similar charges against Lawrence at a later date is altogether a different legal issue; it has to do with the statute of limitations. If the statute of limitations has not run out, they most certainly can, and I would think they just might refile the same or similar charges against Lawrence in the near future, though they could add different charges and only use some of the prior charges, based on continuing investigation and newly developed facts relating to the same transaction, or transactions, etc., so don’t be surprised if that happens. The real reason and cause for the dismissal may very well be altogether different than what you believe or think, and is a matter for careful research and scrutiny of all documents filed in the case, and all available information (although it may just be that other unavailable information has played just as big a part in the dismissal, which we might never know about).

Good luck in the future,

Alan

ALANSLEGALRESEARCH@JUNO.COM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 2: THE REAL ISSUE

I was a guest speaker on the John Bryant show a while back and informed everyone listening that in tax cases regarding the alleged income tax the I.R.S. and the courts are not operating by the "law", they are operating under executive emergency war powers, granted in 1933, after the request by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, which is evident by the following information:

1. In 1922 the U.S. Supreme Court published a ruling in an I.R.S. tax case where they clearly stated that the Government couldn’t tax debt. Debt includes credit, or loans. I have that case in my files.

2. In the Congressional Record of 1933 regarding the new Monetary System installed after the granting to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt of Executive Emergency Powers, and his Declaration of a National Banking emergency, and his Proclamation of a Bank Holiday and the temporary closing of the Banks, etc., and passing of laws taking us off the gold standard, forbidding the hoarding of gold, or personal possession of certain forms of gold, etc., it is clearly stated that: This new monetary system which was being proposed in the Legislature, in the new laws being debated before the Congress, was a loan from the creditor class to the debtor class, and is essentially a mortgage on all Americans homes and property, and that there will have to be collateral payments from time to time on said loan. Based on further independent evidence discovered in my own research, which I will not mention here, I have come to the conclusion that the so called “collateral” payments from “time to time”, as stated in the congressional record of 1933 (though the speaker in the Congress made a statement that the collateral would be paid by the bank, which I took as an intentional obfuscation of the record to throw people off the track of the real design and purpose of the said new law, which I conclude was to take away all title to land in the "United States” from the people who comprise the debtor class ) was really the handing over of large portions of forest, deserts, wild lands, rivers, etc., to the United Nations, and other private international organizations, etc., ( U.N. Man And Biosphere Program; Bio Spheres; The Heritage Monuments Act; The Heritage Rivers Act; The Nature Conservancy; as well as the Desert Tortoise and other threatened or extinct species protection via the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Environmental Protection Act ). As anyone who has ever obtained a loan from a bank or lending institution knows, the creditor does not put up the collateral. The debtor or party receiving the loan puts up the collateral.

3. The last time I checked, loans, mortgages, and credit are all debt, and cannot be taxed under the law as stated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1922. Therefore an individual person cannot be taxed for receiving debt notes issued by the Federal Reserve Bank or any other lending institution because they are only a loan from the creditor class, and are only evidence of debt owed to the Creditor class. Therefore the taxing of such debt cannot be accomplished under the Law, and they can only get away with it under the application of the Emergency Powers Granted to the Executive in 1933.

For further proof see “4”below.

4. Check the appendices in Attorney Jeffrey Dickstein’s book titled “JUDICIAL TYRANNY,” and read the court transcript of a case which he argued in 1988 before a Federal District Court. In that case Dickstein pressed the Court for a ruling on his motion to dismiss for lack of Federal Legislative Jurisdiction within the State, under Article I section 8, subparagraph 17 of the Federal Constitution. The Court called a recess and brought the Attorney back without the Jury. At that time the Court was again moved by Dickstein for a ruling on the issue. The Court asked Dickstein if he had ever heard of MARTIAL RULE ? ( it is wise to take note at this point that the persons standing in the Federal Courtroom with uniform, badge and gun are given the name and title of Federal “Marshal”). When Dickstein answered that he had heard of Martial Rule, the Court asked him where had he heard of Martial Rule? Dickstein replied that he is an Attorney, and he went to Law School, and “Martial Rule” did not apply! The Judge replied to the effect that, well, sometimes we have to do some things we do not want to do, or we have to do things we would not ordinarily do, and that was the end of the issue.

What is a matter of record is that the Judge stated we are under Martial Rule when it comes to the collection and enforcement of income taxes inside the States against individual persons who would ordinarily not be subject to the tax & Federal Jurisdiction under Constitution Article I section 8, subparagraph 17. “Martial Rule” is under the Military Dictatorship of the Executive, as the Commander and Chief of the Military of the United States of America, the last time I checked it out!!! Remember, Roosevelt asked for Executive Emergency Power to wage a war on the domestic side, just the same as if he was waging a war against a foreign enemy! That is a documented fact of history, not any legal theory!!! These are Roosevelt’s own words in a recorded speech he gave in 1933, which I have heard with my own ears!!!

For more proof see number 5 below;

5. Sometime around the year 1998-2000 Anno Domini, the organization known as RIGHT WAY L.A.W., in the state of Ohio, published a transcript of an interview with a retired Judge by radio show host John Quade in which the said retired Judge clearly stated : All Judges in the United States of America are required to attend the NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE on the campus of the UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, in RENO, NEVADA. He further stated that when he personally attended said NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE he was taught regarding traffic cases to listen to both sides, treat the parties politely, but do not worry about the Law or Constitutional issues, because Traffic Court is only collecting revenue, they are under “MARTIAL LAW”!!!

For further clarification and enlightenment on this issue see number 6 below.

6. For your Further education please read the book: “ALL THE LAWS BUT ONE” by the recently deceased U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE William Reinquist. In it he writes about the Supreme Court case of “Ex Parte Milligan,” informing us that Milligan’s last Attorney to argue that case before the high Court astutely pointed out to the Court that there is no such thing as "Martial Law,” the correct term is “Martial Rule,”because law does not enter into it. It is merely the Dictatorship of the Executive, either in person or by his appointed designee, a GENERAL, or a COUNCIL, a COMMITTEE, etc.

For further proof, see 7 below.

7. A document was released, allegedly back in 1985, having been de-classified after a secret hearing in 1942, regarding a new Emergency Federal Law creating the device we know today as a withholding order for taxes. I have a reconfigured copy of the alleged original, with the Congressional Session numbers, year, and other official numbers, titles, headings, and information in it. This is a transcript of the secret meeting of a Congressional or Senate Committee in which it is clearly stated that a withholding order is a “forced loan ”for taxes and is an “Emergency Measure” to raise funds for the United States to enter world war II, and that the “tax payer” can request a refund later, and further that the 1040 form is a request for a refund. I should point out here that the term used in the secret meeting by the unscrupulous Government officials in question, “forced loan”, is an “oxi-moron” as there is no such thing as a “forced loan,” this being merely a “legal artifice” or “term of art”, such as those used by wiley attorneys. Each of said terms is irreconcilable with the other, in that the legal definition of a “loan” is in fact a contract between the parties. To be a legitimate lawful contract, there must be a “meeting of the minds” and a “willing agreement”, which means freely and willingly entered into by both, or all of the parties. “Forced” means at the point of a gun, under direct threat, duress and coercion, against the free will of the victim, and as such cannot be an agreement or contract, and is not a loan, but pure robbery or theft and conversion, which is a criminal act, being authorized or falsely justified by “Emergency Legislation ”under the “NATIONAL EMERGENCY,” or “EMERGENCY RULE. ”Once again, we have the application of secret “Emergency Powers” and “Emergency legislation”to fund a war, just like the original income tax passed by President Lincoln to finance the war against the southern States who dared to declare they were leaving the “union.” Well, there is no doubt in my mind, I think we have been here before, Deja Vue, the past really does repeat itself, over and over, and over again!!!

Is this why we have the old saying that those who fail to learn the lessons of the past are condemned to repeat them?

What more evidence do you need to realize that the I.R.S., the COURTS and AGENCIES are not operating Under LAW when it comes to collecting revenue, and cold hard cash, including traffic tickets, collection & enforcement of income tax!!!?

- THE REAL ISSUE HERE -
8. The “OMB” and other patriot myth, false phantom arguments are not the real issue that must be addressed if anything in the taxing arena is ever to change. The REAL ISSUE that must be addressed is: the misapplication of emergency executive war powers; that is the real issue in the courts, with the agencies, and with federal and state congressional bodies; until you address the mis-application of emergency power you will get nowhere with the income tax issue, or any other money revenue related issue. it will continue like clock work and people will get thrown in jail & prison for not paying their income taxes, and their traffic tickets, etc.

For more proof see number 9.

9. In early MARCH 2002 Anno Domini, 5 months after the “9-11”event at the Twin Towers in New York, the Arizona Sun newspaper published an article on the front page which was an interview with the President of the United States of America, George W. Bush, in which Bush stated: “I have activated a shadow Government to protect us from the terrorists.” I was on a weekend trip at a conference in Laughlin Nevada when I read that article the day it was published and released to the public. I was astonished at what I read; that such an admission would be printed in plain view of the American people!!! Yet there it was for all to read: WE ARE NOW UNDER A SHADOW GOVERNMENT!!! I wonder if the founders of the “Shadow Government,” who ever they are, ever bothered to write any Constitution for the proper regulation and control of that “Government,” or do you think they may just fly by the seat of their pants, engaging in whatever suits their fancy at the time, given the apparently unlimited “emergency power ”at their disposal!!!? To anyone who is aware of the documented fact that many in the so called “PATRIOT MOVEMENT,” or perhaps otherwise referred to as “CONSTITUTIONALISTS” have alleged for many years now, at least since the 1980’s or 1990’s that there was a “secret shadow Government” or a “secret black Government” behind the scenes in the United States of America that was running things, or manipulating events, applying or administering the Hegelian dialectic, Machiavellianism and using such tactics referred to as “divide and conquer” via agent provocateurs, to derive order from chaos, after they engineer the chaos thru man made events such as orchestrated wars and catastrophes, and other tragedies, etc., from which they seek to form a one world government of the elite, put in place by secret societies, headed by what is commonly refered to as the illuminatti, this clear admission by the President was real confirmation that those alleged conspiracy theorists were right all along, because the word ‘activiated’ used by the President means the Shadow Government already existed prior to that time, though the implication by the words of the President, “activated” imply it was officially inactive. This also indicates that those making accusations about the existence of the so called “Shadow Government”, who I clearly recall were labeled in the press and media as “conspiracy nuts”, “antigovernment extremists”, “radicals”, or even “paranoid”, were wrongly labeled and defamed for expressing their view, which has turned out to be right! This would give one pause to wonder if there is an emergency war on the first Amendment? The “SHADOW GOVERNMENT”WHICH WE ARE APPARENTLY NOW ALL UNDER HAS COME FROM THE “WAR ON TERROR”WHICH IS A WAR THAT WAS DECLARED BY ONE OF OUR PAST PRESIDENTS UNDER PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE EMERGENCY WAR POWERS ORIGINALLY GRANTED TO PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT, WHICH MEANS THE “SHADOW GOVERNMENT”WE HAVE BEEN UNDER SINCE WHO KNOWS WHEN, IS AN “EMERGENCY GOVERNMENT”CREATED TO FIGHT A WAR AGAINST THE EMERGENCY OF TERRORISM!!! READ THE BOOK BY ROOSEVELTS FRIEND REXFORD G. TUGWELL, TITLED: “THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE PRESIDENCY,”& PAGE 434, AS WELL AS FOOTNOTE 5 AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE, WHERE THE AUTHOR ADMITS THE “LIMITED EMERGENCY WAS “A CREATURE OF ROOSEVELT'S IMAGINATION”, THE ACTUAL LAW HAD NO LIMITING CLAUSE!!!

For more research and resources on Executive Emergency War Powers see 10 below.

10. There are many cases you can read between the year 1793 & the present time which will adequately inform you of the strict limits of the powers of the Federal Government under the document known as: “the Constitution of the United States of America”, WHICH INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: chisolm executor vs georgia, 2 dall 419 (1793); ex-parte milligan, 4 wall 2 (1866); hale vs hinkel 201 u.s. 43 (1906); myers vs united states (1926) 272 u.s. 52; home building & loan association vs blaisdell (1934) 290 u.s. 398; murdock vs pennsylvania (1943) 319 u.s. 105; west virginia state board of education vs barnette (1943) 319 u.s. 624; reid vs covert (1957) 357 u.s. 1; griswald vs connecticut (1965) 381 u.s. 479; miranda vs arizona (1966) 384 u.s. 436; new york vs u.s. (1992) 505 u.s. 144.
These are a good foundation (Though there are more). In this newsletter I will quote from two of the foregoing cases, which follow: IN THE CASE OF IN RE MILLIGAN; “DECEMBER 17, 1866, Mr. Justice Davis delivered the opinion of the court:” “No graver question was ever considered by this court” “If there was law to justify this Military trial, it is not our province to interfere; if there was not, it is our duty to declare the nullity of the whole proceedings. The decision of this question does not depend on argument or Judicial precedents, numerous and highly illustrative as they are. These precedents inform us of the extent of the struggle to preserve liberty, and to relieve those in civil life from military trials. The founders of our government were familiar with the history of that struggle; and secured in a written constitution every right which the people had wrested from power during a contest of ages. By that constitution and the laws authorized by it, this question must be determined.” “Time has proven the discernment of our ancestors; for even these provisions, expressed in such plain English words, that it would seem the ingenuity of man could not evade them, are now, after the lapse of more than seventy years, sought to be avoided. Those great and good men foresaw that troublous times would arise, when rulers and people would become restive under restraint, and seek by sharp and decisive measures to accomplish ends deemed just and proper; and that the principles of constitutional liberty would be in peril unless established by irrepealably law. The history of the world had taught them that what was done in the past might be attempted in the future. The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government within the constitution, has all the powers granted to it which are necessary to preserve its existence, as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority.” “It is claimed that martial law covers with its broad mantle the proceedings of this military commission. The proposition is this: That in a time of war the commander of an armed force (if in his opinion the exigencies of the country demand it, and of which he is to judge), has the power, within the lines of his military district, to suspend all civil rights, and their remedies, and subject citizens as well as soldiers to the rule of his will; and in the exercise of his lawful authority can not be restrained, except by his superior officer or the President of the United States . If this position is sound to the extent claimed, then when war exists, foreign or domestic, and the country is subdivided into military departments for mere convenience, the commander of one of them can, if he chooses, within the limits, on the plea of necessity, with the approval of the excutive, substitute military force for and the exclusion of the laws, and punish all persons as he thinks right and proper, without fixed or certain rules. The statement of this proposition shows its importance; for, if true, Republican government is a failure, and there is an end to liberty regulated by law. Martial law, established on such a basis destroys every guarantee of the Constitution and effectually renders the military independent of and superiorto the civil power”----“The attempt to do which by king of great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offense, that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish. This nation, as experience has proved, cannot always remain at peace, and has no right to expect that it will always have wise and humane rulers, sincerely attached to the principles of the constitution. Wicked men, ambitious of power, with hatred of liberty and contempt of law, may fill the place once occupied by Washington and Lincoln; and if this right is conceded, and the calamities of war again befall us, the dangers to human liberty are frightful to contemplate.”
“… it follows, from what has been said on this subject, that there are occasions when martial rule can properly be applied. If in foreign invasion or civil war the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of actual military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. A necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war.”

The Court in: HOME BUILDING & LOAN ASS’N VS BLAISDELL (1934); Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES: “Emergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the federal government and its limitations of the power of the states were determined in the light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. What power was thus granted and what limitations were thus imposed are questions which have always been and always will be, the subject of close examination under our constitutional system.
While emergency does not create power, emergency may furnish the occasion for the exercise of power. “Although an emergency may not call into life a power which has never lived, never the less, emergency may afford a reason for the exertion of a living power already enjoyed.”

Wilson vs New, 243 U. S. 332, 348.

The Constitutional question presented in the light of an emergency is whether the power possessed embraces the particular exercise of it in response to particular conditions.

Thus the war power of the federal government is not created by the emergency of war, but it is a power given to meet that emergency. It is a power to wage war successfully, and thus it permits the harnessing of the entire energies of the people in a supreme co-operative effort to preserve the nation. But even the war power does not remove constitutional Limitations safeguarding essential liberties.5.* When the provisions of the Constitution, in grant or restriction, are specific,
so particularized as not to admit of construction, no question is presented. Thus emergency would not permit a state to “coin money”or to “make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.”

IN 1973 THERE WAS A U.S. SENATE “SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE TERMINATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY ”, WHICH PRODUCED A 600 PLUS PAGE REPORT (WHICH I HAVE) IN WHICH IT IS ADMITTED BY THE COMMITTEE IN THE OPENING INTRODUCTION: “A majority of the people of the United States have lived all their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency.” Today the number of years under “EMERGENCY RULE” is 73 and counting !!! With the advent of federal legislation creating the numerous Emergency Institutions such as the National Security Agency, (N.S.A.); Department of Homeland * FOOTNOTE 5 QUOTED IN THE OPINION BY THE COURT CITES THE FOLLOWING CASES: SEE EX PARTE Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 120-127; U.S. v Russel l, 13 Wall. 623,627; Hamilton v Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co., 251 U.S. 146, 155; U.S. v L. Cohen Grocery Co., 255 U.S. 81, 88 . Security; and passage of the National Emergency Act; Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.); The Patriot Act, I and II; the Habeas Corpus Reform Acts, and the creation of the the Secret Court under the Foreign Intelligence Security Act, along with the numerous“Emergency”provisions adopted by the State Legislatures since the original 1933 Emergency Powers Legislation, there is a serious question as to whether we will ever get out from under Emergency Rule, to be free again. For further information on executive emergency power read :
“A SPECIAL REPORT ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”, TITLED “WAR AND EMERGENCY POWERS”, RESEARCHED AND WRITTEN BY Gene Schroder, AND 12 OTHER PERSONS WHO FORMED THE“AMERICAN AGRICULTURE MOVEMENT,”THE LAST ADDRESS I HAVE FOR THEM IS : BOX 130, CAMPO, COLORADO, 81029.

This Newsletter is the first in an ongoing series which will address the keys which I have discovered to the real problems that plague the people of this country and the whole world under the movement for empire and world government rule.
In the next volume I will cover some of the key, yet little-known changes and causes for the expansion of the emergency powers problem that is behind much of what troubles us. Included in the next volume will be the 1936 U.S. SUPREME
COURT ruling in the case of U.S. VS Butler, where the ROOSEVELT COURT ruled for the first time in our history that we are a HAMILTONIAN FEDERALISM FORM OF GOVERNMENT, and not the LIMITED REPUBLIC as previously adhered to in numerous SUPREME COURT RULINGS PRIOR TO THE BUTLER CASE, which I will address in a future volume. The impact of the BUTLER RULING should be clear after reading page 199 of the book “AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES,” originally published by CHARLES A. BEARD, in 1913, since republished numerous times.

THEY SAY DEATH AND TAXES ARE INEVITABLE, THIS MAY BE THE CASE IN OUR PRESENT WORLD, BUT, PAYING THE TAX IS STILL VOLUNTARY, EVEN IF IT IS A "FORCED LOAN”AT THE POINT OF A GUN, SO DON'T FORGET TO ASK FOR YOUR REFUND !!!

COMPLETE RESEARCH IS THE KEY,
Alan. ALANSLEGALRESEARCH@JUNO.COM.

For yearly subscriptions to this monthly newsletter contact me thru the email above or by regular mail at
540 N. Fulton Street, Box B, Fresno, California, [93728].

Send a U.S. Postal Money Order or personal check to the address above, made out to: N.A.H.L.S., c/o: Alan David, via mail for $ 180 Dollars which will include 1 year of 12 issues of the Newsletter and updates on cases and discoveries in our ongoing research, which we will soon be making available on the internet, or you can pay per issue at the rate of $ 15 dollars.

The proceeds will go to help the mission of the not for profit NORTH AMERICAN HISTORICAL LAW SOCIETY, (N.A.H.L.S) TO EDUCATE AND BRING AWARENESS TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE ABOUT THE TRUE NATURE OF THE STATE OF THE WORLD TODAY AND THE URGENT NEED FOR THE RIGHT ACTION AT THE RIGHT TIME.


FOOD FOR THOUGHT

“Seek the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”THE HOLY BIBLE. “It is not the truth that will set
you free, but your knowledge of the truth that will set you free”. FORGOTTEN RADIO SHOW HOST.
This is why you must seek. The Divine paradox is that knowledge is infinite from the standpoint of the all knowing, all powerful, omnipotent Creator of all, Yet however true this may be, ignorance, its opposite, abounds forever in the realms of the created, always engendering a need to know, which will only cease when creation itself ceases. Alan David.
“…nothing more can be attempted than to establish the beginning and the direction of an infinitely long road. The pretension of any systematic and definitive completeness would be, at least, a self-illusion Perfection can here be obtained by the individual student only in the subjective sense that he communicates everything he has been able to see.”George Simmel.