The Office of Citizen

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Little Brother 192

I have been looking for this thread.

Why?

To call someone names and pick a fight?

Vendetta?

Originally Posted by Codee 1,198,745,666.333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333..................................

All of this research is completely bogus, Bull****, evidence of crap like thinking skills.

PIECE OF CRAP ARTICLE! PATRIOT MYTH!

horrible piece of dung research

It's over a half year old.

[netwrkranger]

CIVIL. Originally, pertaining or appropriate to a member of a civitas or free political community; natural or proper to a citizen.

CITIZEN. A member of a free city or jural society, (civitas,) possessing all the rights and privileges which can be enjoyed by any person under its constitution and government, and subject to corresponding duties.

A member of the civil state entitled to all its privileges.

CIVILIAN. Also a private citizen, as distinguished from such as belong to the army and navy or (in England) the church.

CIVITAS. Citizenship; one of the three status, conditions, or qualifications of persons.


This one is interesting...

PRIVATE PERSON. An individual who is not the incumbent of an office.

- Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed.

[netwrkranger]

Yes, but military doesn't imply civil.
It is in contradistinction to it. Also, if "Office of Citizen" were military, we would all be privates, NCOs, or commissioned officers of military command. And if that were so, there would be no need for government. "Government" would become the chain of command. We would fall under the jurisdiction of Military Law which is mutually exclusive to Civil Law.

=D

[netwrkranger]

This brief by Aksis has me thinking....

I remember when I first came across this brief, I wasn't that interested (due to ignorance), but now I'm pouring over it and really thinking.....

If the United States is a federal corporation, would not "citizenship" in that corporation, in fact, be an office (employee)? I've never heard of a corporation having citizens.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Little Brother 192

It should be easy to see that the author of this piece of trash clearly stated and used as his example "voting" as a function of office.

It should be clear that voting is what makes an "elector" and not a "citizen."

It should be clear that electors and office holders are a special class of citizen.

If this is not clear to you... You are a freakin' retard.

DUUU-UUUH! What is an elector and what is a citizen?

Who granted special rights to the elector as opposed to the rights of citizens? Who are the members of this special class of citizen that you refer to as 'electors'? How many electors are there in the United States? What is the rate of pay for those 'electors'? Why do 'citizens' ,who are not 'electors', NOT have a right to vote? What is the 'social' status of those citizens who are not 'electors'?

Jerry Carlos

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Heeeeee's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!

Let me wrap it up for you in ONE citation from the codes.

Right there it says in plain English that a 8 year old could understand that Citizens cannot hold office unless they be an elector.

You should try to learn proper English sometime.

GOVERNMENT CODE

[Where is the definition of "citizens not electors?"]

[Where is the definition of "person(s)?"]

How many more/"other" "definitions" of "elector" are to be found in your "code?"

Is CALIFORNIA the whole of the states United?

Originally Posted by Honey, I'm Home!!! (Again)

Duh, Duh, Duh.

What a retarded argument.

The above speaks quite eloquently for itself, like his/her own mirror, except for the fact that those who are quite erroneously labeled as "retarded" by that same quite malignantly ignorant class of social miscreants are, in fact, in every way, shape, and form, far far above the "fingers" that typed that "intelligent" "claim."

[Jerry Pitts]

The attachment is a copy of the first page of a document much too large to attempt to post to this forum. However, the document can be downloaded in its' entirety (51 meg) at http://books.google.com/books?id=KKk...f+citizens&lr=

It is about the Duty of Citizens and a sundry of other subjects. Quite interesting, regarding the Citizens. Makes me wonder why some are called 'citizens' while others are called 'private citizens'. At any rate, it clearly shows that as citizens, the man or woman identified as 'citizen' are "bound" by the laws of that society to which the citizen has his/her membership.

Jerry Carlos

[aksis]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

This brief by Aksis has me thinking....

I remember when I first came across this brief, I wasn't that interested (due to ignorance), but now I'm pouring over it and really thinking.....

Netwrkranger;

Glad it inspired you to some independent thought and study. That is the way. Think for your self. Reason it out. Research.

The word "State" is somewhat high density information.

Someone can say the word "computer" and we may think, "Sure, I know what a computer is.", but then we start getting asked questions about how Random Access Memory works (on it's elemental level), or how to repartition the hard drive in an ext2 format rather then FAT32 or NTFS... and you find that you don't know what a computer really is, but, most can turn it on and use it and that is sufficient for most things that many want to do.


Some people want to know more and do more. The information comes to us (or we 'dis-cover it') when we need it and can comprehend it.

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

If the United States is a federal corporation, would not "citizenship" in that corporation, in fact, be an office (employee)? I've never heard of a corporation having citizens.

A review of the definition[s] of "UNITED STATE OF AMERICA" and "CORPORATION" from Bouvier's Law Dictionary, you will find that it is, in fact, a "political corporation".

You should also be able to see that you have actually heard of these types of corporations having citizens all your life. Most people just don't know what the State really is. They seem to imagine it, and have described what they imagined it to be, more like a "bubble" that they were born and live in.

Obviously since being in an "imaginary bubble" would be crazy, that can't be what is really ment by the phrase "in the United States"... it must be akin to saying one is "in the Army" or "in Office".

Like you, I can't say I have ever heard of a "private corporation" having citizens either. I hope it didn't come off like that's what I was saying.

Originally Posted by Jerry Carlos

Makes me wonder why some are called 'citizens' while others are called 'private citizens'. At any rate, it clearly shows that as citizens, the man or woman identified as 'citizen' are "bound" by the laws of that society to which the citizen has his/her membership.

Jerry Carlos;
I notice the "citizen" vs "private citizen" a while back as well, and did some speculating as well... just came to the conclusion that it is like the old joke about "military intelligence"...

There are so many paradoxes when we get into any particular Nation State's jurisdiction that I don't care to look to deeply into those 'rabbit holes'... 51mb of 'rabbit hole' is quite a bit of time and energy to find what we already know and has been proven to be true: Voting is a public function.

Originally Posted by mrg

Why?

To call someone names and pick a fight?

Vendetta?

mrg;

That's how it feels to me. I believe this is Codee as well.

It's very sad to see him have digressed over the years to such a crude, foul mouthed, neolithic kook.

After reading his first post, I was reminded of this:

Descriptive Introduction of the Silent Weapon

Everything that is expected from an ordinary weapon is expected from a silent weapon by its creators, but only in its own manner of functioning.

It shoots situations, instead of bullets; propelled by data processing, instead of chemical reaction (explosion); originating from bits of data, instead of grains of gunpowder; from a computer, instead of a gun; operated by a computer programmer, instead of a marksman; under the orders of a banking magnate, instead of a military general.

It makes no obvious explosive noises, causes no obvious physical or mental injuries, and does not obviously interfere with anyone's daily social life.

Yet it makes an unmistakable "noise," causes unmistakable physical and mental damage, and unmistakably interferes with the daily social life, i.e., unmistakable to a trained observer, one who knows what to look for.

...

[People] might instinctively feel that something is wrong, but that is because of the technical nature of the silent weapon, [many] cannot express their feeling in a rational way, or handle the problem with intelligence. Therefore, [many] do not know how to cry for help, and do not know how to associate with others to defend themselves against it.

When a silent weapon is applied gradually, [many people] adjust/adapt to its presence and learn to tolerate its encroachment on their lives until the pressure (psychological via economic) becomes too great and they crack up.

Therefore, the silent weapon is a type of biological warfare. It attacks the vitality, options, and mobility of the individuals of a society by knowing, understanding, manipulating, and attacking their sources of natural and social energy, and their physical, mental, and emotional strengths and weaknesses.

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/sw4qw/index.shtml#five

It's why he is going to remain on my ignore list. I have already wasted way too much time on the fools strawmen.

The only thing he has proven is that he doesn't love me, that he is not my brother, that he is not my friend, that he is not a co-worker in the Plan of Love and Light, that he is detrimental to the aforementioned, and that the only course left is to cast him out to gnash his teath and weep... as this door I am is now closed to him.


Most Sincerely, and with much Love,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

[netwrkranger]

... your brief there has really shaken me up...lol.

I am having to rethink many of ideas that I've currently held. It is also allowing me to make more ties between various areas. New theories are developing which I will need to vet out.

I am also stumbling upon information that I had considered or thought about such as peace officers, justice of the peace, and jural societies.

When it rains, it pours .

- netwrkranger

[aksis]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

... your brief there has really shaken me up...lol.

I am having to rethink many of ideas that I've currently held. It is also allowing me to make more ties between various areas. New theories are developing which I will need to vet out.

netwrkranger;

Kindly forgive me for that... only when people reach bedrock can they start building lasting foundation. I touch upon this bedrock by bringing to light the "state of Nature":

Originally Posted by Law of Nations

§ 4. In what light nations or states are to be considered.

Nations being composed of men naturally free and independent, and who, before the establishment of civil societies, lived together in the state of nature, — Nations, or sovereign states, are to be considered as so many free persons living together in the state of nature.

It is a settled point with writers on the natural law, that all men inherit from nature a perfect liberty and independence, of which they cannot be deprived without their own consent. In a State, the individual citizens do not enjoy them fully and absolutely, because they have made a partial surrender of them to the sovereign. But the body of the nation, the State, remains absolutely free and independent with respect to all other men, and all other Nations, as long as it has not voluntarily submitted to them.

http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm

Nice to see rangers can keep their footing during earth quakes... all part of the training I suppose.

You might find value in this prespective: The Office of Citizen is like a toolbox.

Various types of work require different toolboxes.

For example, you may have a toolbox that contains all the tools to do electrical work, or carpentry, or masonry, or surgery, or computer repair. We could even call a briefcase a type of toolbox and consider the vast array of different types of work were the people doing it carry a briefcase, and examine the contents of their briefcases and find broad categories to qualify each briefcase with like we did with the toolboxes.

The toolbox is not a bad thing. It is simply a question of usefulness. Is it useful or not?

If it is useful, is it useful in the particular work you are currently doing?

Is there a need to take your electrical toolbox on a walk to the store or swimming?

If you are not going to go voting or preforming some other public function, do you need to take your citizenship with you?

If you are not a government employee, do you need to appear in persona of Citizen? If so, other then voting, when?

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

I am also stumbling upon information that I had considered or thought about such as peace officers, justice of the peace, and jural societies.

I run into that as well. There is what those terms should mean, and arguably did and still do mean. Then there is what they have been distorted into meaning over the ages.

By the way, "police officer" would be better read as "policy officer" as they tend to enforce "public policy" more then keep the peace... tho I have to say I do know many that are good hearted people that are simply being mislead by corrupt attorneys (and just to have it said, I make a distinction between attorneys and lawyers - even if many of them don't).

As to jural society, take another look at the definition of "society":

SOCIETY. A society is a number of persons united together by mutual consent, in order to deliberate, determine, and act jointly for some common purpose.

2. Societies are either incorporated and known to the law, or unincorporated, of which the law does not generally take notice.

3. By civil society is usually understood a state, (q.v.) a nation, (q.v.) or a body politic. (q.v.) Rutherf. Inst. c. 1 and 2.

4. In the civil law, by society is meant a partnership. Inst. 3, 26; Dig. 17, 2 Code, 4, 37.

Note that not all societies are incorporated. The society called "We the People" would be one such society... tho this society did incorporate the society called the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA to protect and serve it, yet "We the People", of whom the United States of America came from, are not an incorporated society.

Another good example of jural societies that are not "incorporated" would be many of the particular religions (tho some have chosen to incorporate, like the Catholic Church, for example).


Sincerely,

Christopher Theodore: Rhodes

P.S.

You might also consider the topics of "self employment" and/or "independent contracting".

Many people run into the stumbling blocks of the misinformed population regarding various jobs and such (they try to require you to be a US citizen to exercise your unalienable right to work, for example). Those are 2 very viable options to sidestep those problems.