14 Apr: LJ Edit Re MLI-EB: Re: EBarnard 13 April and 07 April Emails.

* Marais Law Inc, Elizma Barnard, Charl Marais, Dawn Meyer, Marlise Steenekamp.
* 14 Apr: LJ Edit Re MLI-EB: Re: EBarnard 13 April and 07 April Emails.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: LJ v GME  / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMZA| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP  Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Religion / EoP v WiP Neg.

From: Lara Johnson [mailto:eop-leg-sub@tygae.org.za]
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2021 10:29 AM
To: ‘Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard’
Cc: ‘Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais’
Subject: Edit: 542/21: Re: EBarnard 13 April & 07 April emails


TO: Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard:
CC: Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:

Elizma Barnard:

Edit: 542/21: Re: EBarnard 13 April & 07 April emails

Correction Edits to my Tuesday 13 April 2021 09:18 [13 Apr: LJ Re MLI-EB: Re: EBarnard 13 April and 07 April Emails] reply to Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard’s 13 April 2021 and 07 April 2021 correspondence


Re: MLI-EB: 13 Apr: MLI-EB-MS: Re Reply Affidavit & Hearing Date: PDF: 3068; 13 Apr: MLI-EB-MS: Re: M Steenekamp S33 Roy Claim Written Reasons: PDF: 4377

MLI-EB 05: This is the last time we shall reply to correspondence from you that contains expletives.

EoP-LJ 05a: The 13 April 2021 09:18: correspondence to Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais, CC: Elizma Barnard, from Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty culture [eop-axis-oath: LJ] applicant; was the first time Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard had received correspondence from Lara Johnson that contain, what Elizma Barnard’s culture – whatever that culture may be – consider to be offensive expletives, however Elizma Barnard’s culture defines offensive expletives.

Ms Barnard has not yet clarified which words, were/are considered offensive expletives in Ms Barnard’s culture – whatever that culture may be – and what Ms Barnard’s cultures offensive definition is for those offensive expletive words.

In the absence of knowing exactly which words Ms Barnard’s culture consider offensive expletives, it is not possible to know which words to avoid using in order to avoid offending Ms Barnard.

If – please note IF – the alleged expletive words are relevant to the issues in dispute; it may be ethical legal services practices for the particular Marais Law Inc attorney offended by the particular alleged offensive words, to recuse themselves from the case; and request that the case be transferred to another attorney capable of providing their clients with impartial truthseeking legal services assistance related to the relevant expletive words in dispute; and/or if no such attorneys; to inform their clients that they lack attorneys with the required – not offended by expletive words of relevance to the issues in dispute between the parties – legal services skills.


Re: MLI-EB: 07 April 2021 14:58 [07 Apr: MLI-EB: Re: M Steenekamp & Others / Yourself: 3489 PDF.

MLI-EB 08: Our clients are willing to settle the matter on the basis that you withdraw the application and tender to pay their costs.

EoP-LJ 08: If your clients are able to clarify one question that any of your clients have asked me, that I have refused to provide a sincere ego literate [ego-literacy] voluntary cooperative active listening / reading [Edwin Rutsch: Empathy aka Active Listening Circle] transparent written answer to, I shall happily pay their costs as follows: (a) provide them with a sincere written apology for my negligent delay in answering the particular question; and denying them access to the particular information requested from me; and (b) provide them with my sincere ego literate voluntary cooperative active listening / reading answer to their particular question.

In the twenty years that I have been in South Africa, since my return to South Africa in 2002; there is not one South African who can say: Lara refused to answer my question.

As noted in McVeigh 2020 / EoP culture re questions footer, sometimes included in EoP MILED Clerk correspondence, as a footer:

McVeigh 2020 / EoP culture re Questions:

Grab an Able Reason Ego Ready Room Death Panel Rock: Draw a Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Ecocide Footprint Line

Marcus Luttrell: I was in bad shape, I was dying and I didn’t know what to do. I was lying against this tree and looking at the moon and feeling sorry for myself. I lay there and said you are being a bitch, get up, lets go. What was I going to do, lay down there and die? I was thinking I am still alive, so the mission is still on, lets go. So I reached out and I grabbed a rock, and I reached out as far as I could and I drew a line with it in infront of me. I said I am going to crawl to that line, if my feet hit it, and I am still alive, I am going to do it again. I did that for seven miles. [Lone Survivor: Trailer: Marcus Luttrell: Draw a Line] ……….  Gen James Cartwright: The speed of informing someone, of bringing key relevant information was so much quicker in a brutal no rank ready room, the downside that we have found is extremely small, the upsides are the intellectual capital, the speed to which you gain information; and context for decisions, and planning and execution. I have not found anything that comes even close. If you decide to enter into a conversation as a senior person, in at least rank, you can be globally stupid, and you can do it very quickly and if that bothers you, then you are going to have to toughen up the hide. In the military structure, that is something that is a paradigm shift. But if you can’t stand being globally stupid once in a while, this is not the space for you. [BizofGov: US Strategic Command: Gen James Cartwright 01.02.03].
» EoP Leg Sub: 20 Dec: McVeigh2020: Rep Dingell & Sen Graham: EoP Axis – If Hitler Invaded Hell – Q; 22 Mar: McVeigh 2020: EoP v WiP Law Re: Covid-19 Death Panels; IG: 17-08-05_genjcartwright-perfectinformation.

EoP MILED Clerk does not require a formal – service by a sheriff – legal process for any request for information. An email with questions, or for a request for particular information or evidence is sufficient. All emails with a request for information – irrespective of the race, class, religion, gender of the author, or the size of their country, or whether they have zero police wo/men, or nuclear weapons – are given the benefit of the doubt that they are an honourable request for information and responded to in accordance with EoP Ego/Eco literacy [ego-eco-literacy] communication policy. No lawyers or Sheriffs or Judges required to get a buck stops here [eop-rh-cult-info] answer to any question.  EoP Responsible Freedom represents ‘walk our sincere peacenik talk’ path towards smallest government in the world. When every citizen in a nation is a responsible freedom [responsible-freedom] oath [eop-axis-oath] citizen aka volunteer citizen militia / sheriff: Babylon Masonic War is Peace factory farm slaughterhouse [Obama Deception: False WiP Left Right paradigm; Stefan Molyneux: The Story of [WiP] Enslavement; Human Farming: Our Enslavement; PETA: Sunny Acre Farms; ELS Ref] government is effectively abolished.
» EoP Leg Sub: 18 Mar: EoP Re NZ Police Req to Kiwifarms re 15 Mar Christchurch Mosque attack

In the four or five years I have run the EoP TRC [eop-leg-sub] negotiations [tygae.org.za] website, there has not been one person – rich or poor, old or young, black or white, citizen or official, communist or capitalist, prisoner or judge, etc – who asked anything remotely resembling a reasonable stupid consciousness [Simon Sinek: Be the Idiot] question; whom I did not provide a sincere ego literate [ego-literacy] voluntary cooperative plain language active listening / reading [Edwin Rutsch: Empathy aka Active Listening Circle] transparent written answer/s to.

In South Africa, several Acts of government regulate the use of plain language in consumer communication: The Short-term Insurance Act, 53 of 1998; The Long-term Insurance Act, 52 of 1998; The Companies Act, 71 of 2008; and The South African National Credit Act, 34 of 2005, regulates that “information to consumers must be in plain and understandable language”. The South African Consumer Protection Act, 68 of 2008, not only regulates the use of plain language, but also define the concept for a South African context: “Right to information in plain and understandable language: (1) The producer of a notice, document or visual representation that is required, in terms of this Act or any other law, to be produced, provided or displayed to a consumer must produce, provide or display that notice, document or visual representation —  ..[..].. in plain language ..[..].. (2) For the purposes of this Act, a notice, document or visual representation is in plain language if it is reasonable to conclude that an ordinary consumer of the class of persons for whom the notice, document or visual representation is intended, with average literacy skills and minimal experience as a consumer of the relevant goods or services, could be expected to understand the content, significance, and import of the notice, document or visual representation without undue effort. ..[..]..

In The Plain Language Movement and Legal Reform in the South African Law of Contract, Esti Louw answers the question: What is Plain Language as follows:

The term ‘plain language’ is not a difficult one to grasp, since it conveys exactly what it stands for and what the plain language movement seeks to implement.     As regards plain language in the legal sphere, one should first look at what traditional legal language looks like and to what extent it differs from the plain language standards that are now trying to make their way into legal language use. This is especially true for its application in the realm of the law of contract, and, in particular, in commercial contracts.             There are many excellent definitions of ‘plain language’. One good definition was given by Cutts. He defines ‘plain English’ as ‘The writing and setting out of essential information in a way that gives a co-operative, motivated person a good chance of understanding the document at first reading, and in the same sense that the writer meant it to be understood.” …. Eagleson agrees with Garner that plain English is clear, straightforward expression… that avoids obscurity, inflated vocabulary and convoluted sentence construction. Writers who write in ‘plain language’ allow their audience to focus on the message instead of being distracted by complicated language. They ensure that their audience understands the message easily.              The above definitions are persuasive, and allow one to propose that ‘plain language’ is simply a way of writing so that the person for whom it is intended can understand it with ease. When a legal document is drafted in clear and understandable language, it improves communication, assists with the more effective sharing of information and generally has the effect that all relevant parties are informed of their respective roles.


EoP – OKC TRC – Axis Alliance [31 Mar: EoP Upd: Sergey Lavrov: Re: EoP Axis Alliance negotiations] Honest Lives Matter [29 Jun: EoP Axis Alliance is an Honest Lives Matter culture] Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]


Lara Johnson,
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529

Sent per electronic notice to:

Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard:
Marais Law Inc: Elizma Barnard (elizma@marais-law.com)

Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:
Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais (charl@marais-law.com)


Leave a Comment