Stateless

Re: Stateless

Postby wanabfree » Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:28 pm

The problem is this is all based on a delusional perception of what a citizen is,

The basic definition of a citizen is a member of the body politic who bears an oath of allegiance in return for a duty of protection.

There are quite a few significant cases from the United States? were the supreme court has stated that there is no duty to protect.

in the UK ?, it's stated that there is no duty to protect an individual citizen, i.e. how then can there be individual citizens in the first place, the public is not a citizen correct ?.

So no matter were you are in the world, you cannot be a citizen, resident, freeman or any other label for that matter there are just people.

The public relations want you to believe there is something more to that, but there in lies the delusion.

The benefits I was relating to before were the perception they will have protection, legal rights ( privileges ) etc if they were citizens or were not stateless as mentioned, what it really means in my opinion is if they are not under the control of the people calling themselves government, they are to be outlawed.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Re: Stateless

Postby Akzle » Fri Aug 26, 2011 2:45 am

holy vehm wrote:But they have no entitlements to land or jobs etc or the states courts will not recognise their claims to such.
entitlements? i can only assume you mean entitlements as a government would provide..?

who is to say who can and can not work? who can or can not occupy land?
just because you pay rates believing that gives you the right to the land specified on some paperwork somewhere does not mean that is as it should be.
the courts will not recognise their claims? - they will not recognise the courts, they have not been born to believe in, or seek truth, rulings, instructions etc from a "court"
they are of the land and thus have a lawful right to occupy it.
Akzle
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:14 am

Re: Stateless

Postby holy vehm » Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:02 am

Akzle wrote:they are of the land and thus have a lawful right to occupy it.


And then along comes a man with a gun and forces his will upon you. If you are not recognised as a member of that states society, a citizen, that society will not recognise your claim to live on a certain piece of land and will, using force, remove you.
Your lawful claim will be lost on them, your pleas are not heard or considered, not by that state you happen to be in.
Why? because they do not recognise you.
You may have recourse to appeal to a higher authority, perhaps the United Nations to have your lawful claim heard, but then you are admitting that a higher authority exists, creating joinder and so on.

What we need to do is examine just what defines these people as stateless and who defines or recognises these people as stateless.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Re: Stateless

Postby huntingross » Fri Aug 26, 2011 9:08 am

Let me reinforce HV's point....Akzle and Wanab, this thread IS NOT about courts and citizens, its about Stateless people.

This point has been made by a fiction (the UN) about real people living in fictions (territories of recognised States) who ordinarily have no problem enforcing their will on people....They enforce their will under the pretence of being in the territory, that you consented willingly or unknowingly or my favourite, social contract....

Your points are not necessarily incorrect, they are off topic.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Stateless

Postby holy vehm » Fri Aug 26, 2011 9:58 am

http://www.trust.org/alertnet/multimedia/in-focus/statelessness/

The link is propaganda, but gives an insight into what they, tpb, class as stateless, its there picture of what is going on.
The impression is that these people are actually better off becoming citizens of a state.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Re: Stateless

Postby wanabfree » Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:03 pm

huntingross wrote:Let me reinforce HV's point....Akzle and Wanab, this thread IS NOT about courts and citizens, its about Stateless people.

This point has been made by a fiction (the UN) about real people living in fictions (territories of recognised States) who ordinarily have no problem enforcing their will on people....They enforce their will under the pretence of being in the territory, that you consented willingly or unknowingly or my favourite, social contract....

Your points are not necessarily incorrect, they are off topic.



if it's not about citizens then what exactly is it about, the argument on the propoganda websites is stateless people are not citizens and therefore lack basic human rights, the two words are being used to mean the same thing.

what i believe is going on can be explained this way, a group of people calling themselves a goverment is nothing more than a group of people claiming a monopoly and ownership over a given geographical area to control by way of force ( violence ) all the natural recources.

these alleged stateless people are just simply liveing within this geographical area without the permission of the people calling themselves goverment, and are not supporting goverment by way of forced taxation.

so in other words they are pissed at them for not being of any use, because they cannot be fully exploited and there energy used to feed and home the people called goverment, in other words they can't get blood from a stone and get any richer then they already are,and so they have nothing but contempt for such people,because they believe these people owe them a liveing.

the fact is if they were to suddenly become citizens and therefore not be "stateless"? anymore,would they as if by magic then have human rights and recieve fair treatment or be turned into a slave for someone elses benefit.

what do you all think.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Previous

Return to Land Claims

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron