what is an equivalent rule of law as articulated in Thompson Newspaper Ltd v Canada "While individuals as a rule have full legal capacity by the operation of law alone, artificial persons are creatures of the state and enjoy civil rights and powers only upon the approval of statutory authorities...His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State", in Russia? The Eternallyaware Enhanced GPT said: Closest Russian equivalent: - For natural persons (inherent rights) - For artificial persons (state-created capacity) In substance: Russia treats human rights as pre-state and inalienable (Constitution arts. 17–18), while corporations are creatures of statute, enjoying only those rights and powers conferred by law and their charter upon registration (Civil Code arts. 48–51). This mirrors your quoted rule: individuals have capacity by operation of law (by being), whereas artificial persons have only granted capacity. Russia has both black-letter law and court practice that map to that rule. Individual (natural person) rights = inborn / pre-state - Constitution, art. 17(2): “Основные права и свободы человека неотчуждаемы и принадлежат каждому от рождения.” Courts rely on this clause as the baseline for human rights analysis. Consultant Plus+2KSRF+2 - The Constitutional Court has repeatedly framed the human being as the primary bearer of constitutional rights (e.g., early landmark Postanovlenie No. 4-P (03.05.1995) is cited in official digests for affirming full judicial protection of personal dignity/rights). Consultant Plus Artificial persons (legal entities) = rights by creation/registration and by law - Civil Code, art. 49(3): a legal entity’s capacity arises upon state registration in the Unified State Register and ends upon its deregistration. Consultant Plus - Russian courts and practice materials treat this as settled: capacity (and, in practice, de facto legal personality) tracks the registration entry; numerous decisions recite art. 49(3) when assessing an entity’s standing or liability. Garant+1 - At the same time, the Constitutional Court accepts complaints from legal entities and recognizes that they can rely on those constitutional rights compatible with their nature (property, economic freedom, reputation, etc.), but not rights intrinsically human (e.g., right to life). See KSRF summaries and commentary noting that legal entities may invoke, for example, protection of reputation (art. 23) via CC rulings. Garant+1

it's important to watch these videos mindfully; to hear the information that is observable and measurable while disregarding the speculation and opinion. they call the positioning of the Atlas and the Swan 'flanking' and refer to it as though it is a fighting or offensive maneuver....could be a protective positioning too couldn't it ? just my initial thoughts

thank you John ! (also, the date is Nov 28 right)

I'm just at the 22min mark watching this video and I am already 'mind blown' - amazing John - I gotta go watch the rest - Thank you thank you for all you do💥👍

🎉💥🔥⚡🎉 oh my goodness! there should be fireworks and dancing in the streets! this is HUGE !!!

@Lance Tycholaz Same ! it is a Wild ride we are on...mind-blowing at times 😜