Page 15 of 23

Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:36 pm
by iamani


"What does 'voluntary' mean...?"

...and is it important?

Well, when one considers that...

Paying tax is VOLUNTARY 

Getting a licence is VOLUNTARY  

Registering a vehicle is VOLUNTARY 

Paying a fine is VOLUNTARY

Attending a court is VOLUNTARY

Talking to police officers a-fishing is VOLUNTARY

Lock down compliance is VOLUNTARY

Unquestioning obedience to statute is VOLUNTARY

Applying for benefits is VOLUNTARY

Ignorance is VOLUNTARY

...just like:

Shitting in your hands and clapping is VOLUNTARY !!

(But i bet the sleeple would do it for the NHS if telly told them to. At least that would be funny...) i think that makes it a word worthy of a good understanding because what that makes us is 'voluntary-service-man/woman' and we do volunteer to immerse our selves in man's laws and assume holdings of corporate/national debt.

In a recent post on 'voluntary' attendance interviews i pointed out that the word 'voluntary' was being used as a noun and/or substantive instead of an adjective and that for man to be labelled as such might be an indicator of one's perceived status in law ie that of 'a military character' 'endowed with the faculty of willing'  -  aka 'man'...!

When i noticed that, my first thought was a 'marine-rating' as that fits in with the admiralty/maritime theme we are by now so familiar with, and after all, when there are several officers pressuring you to 'volunteer' it could be described as being press-ganged into naval service  -  but then i realised it could just as easily be a whole other jurisdiction ie land-forces stuff. Military. Soldiers are placed 'on a charge' all the time  -  as are we... and it might explain why one of the original members of this site was once - after successfully rebutting presumption of admiralty - subjected to a hearing under military jurisdiction in a mags court... i think the fmotl movement may have had the effect of causing T.H.E.M. to enable mags an ability to switch to... er... 'voluntary sector' jurisdiction? Round about the time Cameron was promoting 'the big society' (ie the civic (Roman military law) sector aka the voluntary sector). Read on and hopefully i will clarify that.

Is this the reason they could press on in mags court even though he successfully  claimed the status of 'man' and not the legal-fiction...? Because a man gives up his rights to become a soldier (and/or marine), and is thus contracted to the system by default...? So we can be recognised as man (or rather: as flesh and blood  -  more on that in another post) but subject to military rules/rule  -  ie the head of the armed forces aka the Crown of the monarch rather than the Crown of the corporation...? And whereas we are deemed to have 'volunteered' to contract to such a position, common-law is left behind of our own volition...?  Are we, then, also made subject to the Lieber Code of our own accord...?

Also, it seems that in legislation the common people might be referred to as 'the voluntary sector' and membership of that sector would render one a 'voluntary' by default.

So what is a 'voluntary'...?

The word 'volunteer' has a fairly large entry in the dictionary and it's derivatives occupy more than two thirds of a (big) page, and though it is now used in everyday language it is originally, and largely, a military term. The word 'voluntary' takes up most of that space, btw.

Turns out the term 'voluntary' is (almost) a word of art...

From OED ((brackets are mine)):

(i) Volunteer,    ...B, 1, (b) of persons: Serving as a volunteer in the army or navy 1649    3 Law.   One to whom a voluntary conveyance is made; one who benefits by a deed made without valuable consideration 1744

((So (b) tells us a volunteer is a member of the armed forces ie a 'military character' (see (ii)) while 3. begs the question: what is a deed made without valuable consideration? Well, how about every document you ever signed in agreement  -  you know, driving licence, bank loans/mortgages, credit cards, car log-book etc...? Basically every document that bears only one signature  -  ie. yours!))

(ii) Voluntariate, 1881; Voluntary service, specifically of a military character.

((This word instantly became more interesting when i couldn't find it on 'net. Closest i could find was 'volontariat' which is Romanian(?) for 'voluntary sector'... and please note it states "...of 'a' military CHARACTER", rather than "...of a military nature". Very revealing in its subtlety imo... also note that the definition does not clarify whether it is a noun or not. On referring to the suffix '-ate' it is same as either/both 'episcopate' which describes an (ecclesiastical) office and/or its function, or 'syndicate' which describes an organization and/or the individual members of which it does comprise.))

iii) Voluntary, ...A. adj. I. 1...d. Law: of documents, proceedings, etc 1625... (eg ) Voluntary conveyances of estates in land, that is, conveyances without any consideration, such as money or marriage 1875

((Now we get to the word of interest, in its familiar role as an adjective. Of particular interest is, again, the example used. What does it tell us? Well, i knew money was a lawful consideration - but marriage? Useful to know... but what's important is that it draws our attention once more to a transaction of 'no consideration'. i don't believe in coinkydinks  -  do you...?))

3. c. Entered into of free choice 1612... (eg) Voluntary association,.. a society which is unincorporated, but is not a partnership, in that the members are not agents for one another 1889 (!!!)

((Okay, still an adjective here, but it's happened again  -  look at the given example! It describes and defines an 'unincorporated association' which just happens to be what the ALLCAPS name/organisation is! They go on to rub our noses in it  -  ''members' (imo) refers to the two membrane-pieces of your birth ie you (the foetus) and the placental biomass (afterbirth). They cannot be agents for each other because they are ONE AND THE SAME FLESH!))

4... b. Law: of escapes: Deliberately permitted or connived at, 1660

((Bit of a stretch  -  could this refer to our apparent escape from prosecution for our trespass on Crown copyright property ie the ALLCAPS name/organisation...? Would put us permanently in dishonour...))

II. 2. Of persons: That is such of one's own accord or free choice; ...also, endowed with the faculty of willing, 1594

((This is a big one  -  there's only one type of person endowed with the faculty of willing, and that is one who breathes, which rules out the artificial/legal-person... ))

b. Serving as a volunteer soldier; that is a volunteer; also, composed of volunteers --1647

((Remember, still an adjective here so the noun 'voluntary' could possibly refer to both a 'man' and... a company?))

III. C. sb. I. ...3 An extempore, optional, or voluntary piece of writing or composition, 1690

((sb = substantive, ie describes a 'thing of physical substance' - getting closer to a noun. Note how they use the word 'voluntary' to define itself..., also 'extempore' means unprepared, offhand  -  which is what the police hope you'll be in a 'voluntary attendance interview'...))


iv) 2. n. Organist's solo in church...;... special performance left to performers choice.

((Ta-daa! A noun has finally arrived... but not what we were expecting. However, if we re-phrase it as 'an organ-ist's unprepared recital' we'd be getting close... but let's try again...))

From online Merriam Webster:

2 : one who participates voluntarily

((Eureka! No bullshit from this American tome, it straight-out tells us that a 'voluntary' is a man... why does the OED shy away from this definition of 'voluntary' as a noun...? Just have a look and a think about the examples given in the OED definitions given above, if you've been researching the B.C. it'll come to you...)) isn't that a bit weird...? The whole Oxford English Dictionary section on the words 'volunteer' and 'voluntary' uses examples that clearly define a man ie 'one endowed with faculty of willing' coupled with examples that would seem to refer to attributes of the organisation that is (erroneously) referred to as 'the strawman' ie the ALLCAPS name. Is that all i had to do  -  read a bloody dictionary...? D'oh!

It seems to me that we might have missed something when distinguishing public from private  -  there is a third player in town ie the 'voluntary sector'.

i loathe, detest and despise reading legislation  -  but for obvious reasons i decided to make the effort to read the new conjob19 2020 legs and some of the regs (S.I.129 and 350  -  very interesting/depressing) and noticed the following extract from the Explanatory Note to 'The Health Protection (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020; UK Statutory Instruments 2020 No. 129:

"An impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private or voluntary sector is foreseen."

It doesn't mention the public sector. This suggests to me not only that the instrument is intended to apply to the public but that the 'authorities' are not at all arsed about what impact it might have upon the public, which must mean they own the public, otherwise they would fear liability. They do, however, pretend concern for the private and voluntary sectors, though not overly so. Perhaps they are only part-owners of those sectors...? i refuse to believe that there are enough Red Cross or Salvation Army volunteers in this country to merit specific mention and consideration as 'the voluntary sector' in legislation/regulation and as such I believe that the term 'voluntary sector' actually refers to me and you in the sentient, willing and breathing flesh as (Christian?) soul diers... and i am beginning to suspect we volunteered to national-service, public-service and church-service and that when we suss-out one jurisdiction they simply change to another they have authority over us with...

Something else to note when considering the conjob19 2020 legs and regs is the focus on empowering a new 'emergency volunteer' employment status... very interesting indeed.

i suspect it is a little late to say "in short:" so... in summary:

The word 'voluntary' describes a man who has abandoned his rights in favour of a life in service...

...and yes, i think the word 'voluntary' is important.

Final question:

Would everybody resigning from the voluntary sector as a result of this bullshit constitute a 'significant impact'...?


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:29 pm
by iamani

64) Death is the shadow of life, as life casts a shadow of death,

And credit is the living of life, whilst life is the credit of debt...


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2020 3:43 pm
by iamani

65) Sometimes nothing us everything, and sometimes everything is nothing, but as long as there is something... life goes on.


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2020 4:24 pm
by iamani

i just found out that one of the reasons for manned Spacex launch was to gain a micro-gravity environment to enable 3d printing of human organs...

BULLSHIT! My feckin' arse! There is no way they have technology to do that! i might have believed such nonsense before i educated myself - but not now.

My question is this: how would we ever gain proof that an organ came from an Elesium-style space-station and not some poor unfortunate organ-harvest victim...? Given that they now have, or soon will have, a comprehensive database of nearly everyone's DNA as an inventory/shopping-list for the el-ites and zionists who require new organs, AND THE NEW OPT-OUT LAW FOR ORGAN DONATION, could it be a smokescreen for organ-trafficking and money-laundering...? Something to think about when they offer you a test for conjob...

Incidentally, do not refuse the offer of a free test-and-jab - accept the offer on condition you can pay the going rate for it... think about it, you'll get what i'm saying if you'very been at this for a while - but you won't get tested, they'll withdraw the offer rather than reveal what the NHS is paying for this crap. This test-and-jab could be the biggest money-laundering operation ever conceived - along with a few other interesting things they seem to be doing that i hope to cover in a later post.

Another thing - George Floyd murder is definitely some sort of psy-op. He may not even be dead! Why? Because they knew each other from working as security in the same nightclub for years. Nobody heard the victim saying 'hey Derek, it's me, George, from the nightclub - why you doing this to me?' and that would be the first thing i'd be saying if it were me, how 'bout you? Plus none of they perp's neighbours even knew he was a cop... CIA? It also happened at the same time CDC published the REAL conjob death rate of just 0.004% mortality. Not the predicted 3.6%. That's a massive difference. Conveniently the 'people' (yeah, right) decide to riot and miss those new CDC figures, and the MSM haven't the time to cover that coz of the riots... handy, that.

Oh, the times they are a-changin'...


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:19 pm
by iamani

66) Moonlight is energy travelling in reverse.


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:12 pm
by iamani

67) To now is to know not to morrow...


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:22 pm
by iamani

68) The father lies within the mother - there is the ram, there is the lamb, and there is... ewe (ewe know who ewe are now, don't ewe? Ewe are...)


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:32 pm
by iamani

Traditionally speaking:

"The King is dead..." verbal public notice of momentous change  -  and the people who hear such do stand with bated breath, hoping and praying that the crier does complete the refrain...

"...long live the King!"

...for until those four words ring out loud and clear (signifying an unbroken/unchallenged line of succession) there is no law upon the land, and life becomes subject to the will of the lawless!

Btw  -  has anyone seen the queen/prince philip/prince charles lately?

Are you sure...? i mean, assuming we've all seen the same recent pics/interviews, are you sure those currently being presented are not imposters? They do seem a bit off, to me - especially Charles...

...and no-one can deny the other oddities concerning the royals of late  -  the boarded-up palace, the damaged-and-missing crest, gurkhas on duty (gurkhas being the closest thing to foreign troops allowed on our land), not to mention their lack of ceremonial-garb-and-props whilst on the thrones at the state opening of parliament (which lack would, i'm told, indicate some epic dishonour or disgrace perpetrated by the monarch...)

...and let's face it, there's no shortage of rumours regarding the, er, "misdeeds" attributed to these people  -  could the rumours be true...? Is it possible they have been deposed... or worse? And is it possible they have been tried, sentenced and even executed...?

...or have they just made themselves scarce knowing something big and bad is about to happen to the capital, or even the nation?

i'm sure you'll agree, both stories may have merit and be credible given the current state of affairs - but i think the first one is the more interesting (and less depressing) so i'm going with that for now...

If... the rumours are true then Prince Philip died (with help) in March, shortly before or after 'lockdown' and its associated pantomime began. Again, if the rumours are to be believed the Queen croaked in April  -  would that explain the absence of all the national flags in front of the U.N. building on Wednesday 27th April perhaps? And all the coinkydinks with the mix-and-match symbology eg Floyd "i can't breath" at the same time as 'supposid19' is causing mass utterance of those very (last) words whilst various administrative bodies are clamouring for (killer) ventilators and at the same time terrifying the populace into voluntarily restricting their own breathing with slave-muzzle-face-nappies (which do not prevent them talking shit btw)  -  bated breath indeed... and when did they start the weekly sheeple-clap...? Wasn't it round about that time  -  so what or who were they really clapping for? There's a certain pretender to the throne (descended from nephilim six-fingered Annie B., no less), who might like it to be 'New Hallett Sovereign' but which might just as easily be 'NISI HABEA SOVEREIGN' (excuse my Latin). The only way he'll ascend the throne imo is as a patsy, a true strawman and a Beltane King  -  which reign runs from one May 1st to the next if i remember rightly... along with his claims of messianity (and we all know what is purported to have happened to the last messiah) i'm still not convinced he's thought this through... and then we have the symbolic kneeling  -  again, 'think' Floyd (who apparently died Osamabinladen-style i.e. three years before his big debut), (which makes for a nice pair) and which is a pose of submission, humility and feudal-pledge-of-fealty... but to whom...? A new monarch...? Trump...? ChiNA......?

So... a lack of law implies a lack of liability, and a corresponding lack of insurance, and of course a potential for end-days style pandemonium  -  or even a coup (or two... or three?). Which might explain the newly-imposed wide-berth shipping lanes that is 'social-distancing' and the newly-regulated and state-sponsored 'encouragement' to stay indoors, preferably alone and definitely no strange allowed... and the least possible use/transfer of Crown currency... and/or ideas...(?)... and of course it would be a perfect time for the introduction of 'The lawless one' of biblical prophecy... and another excuse to get rid of cash because in addition to being riddled with 'supposid19' it is all festooned with imagery of the now (allegedly) persona-non-grata Queen...

It is my suspicion (/belief) that 'supposid19' was: initially planned to be 'supposid(-tory)20'; to lead seamlessly into the full realisation of Agenda 21 in 2021; that full 5G coverage was (and is) expected to be in place towards end of 2020 which, if it is the kill-weapon it is suspected to be, would fully validate the dire predictions foisted upon us. Unfortunately for them, a spring-strong-light of day did shine upon their delicate bug and all but killed it...

So, even knowing the nice weather would hamper their efforts was the plan brought forward 6-7 months in a desperate attempt to forestall righteous actions of the politically aware amongst us that would show that the emperor wears no clothes? And is this why T.H.E.Y. are so confident of a '2nd (mexican) wave'  -  i.e. they are still going ahead with the original plan at the pre-determined time of autumn 2020?

So... does 'coronavirus' = Crown-virus ? Is it fatal to the Crown?

(...and are the lockdown-idle factories still making ventilators...?)

As usual, we'll just have to wait and see.


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2020 11:35 pm
by iamani

69) Is hope wholly ignorance...?


Re: food for thought

PostPosted: Sat Jul 18, 2020 2:35 pm
by iamani

i think this is the most interesting maxim i've seen so far...

Ficto cedit veritati. Fictio juris non est ubi veritati.

Fiction yields to truth. Where truth is, fiction of law does not exist.

...which imo clarifies why an affadavit is so powerful, and how important it is to rebut presumptions of the court.