4 votes

citizen - you owe your allegiance!

According to Webster's New World Law Dictionary 2010:


A person who, due to place of birth, naturalization, or other reasons (for example, citizenship of parents) is a member of a political community or of a civil state, such as a country or state, and is entitled to all the civil rights and protections thereof "and owes allegiance to its government". See also naturalization and resident.

You owe allegiance even if your allegiance is for greed, corruption, treason and theft...welcome to the newly defined America.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"and protections

"and protections thereof"

Protection? What protection? The gov't has no obligation to protect, so I guess that no one owes it any kind of allegiance.

Considering that "protection" is the entire reason for gov't, there obviously is NO gov't, and NO citizens. Only thugs and their victims remain.

Oh, you thought that gov't had an obligation to protect you? HA, that's not what the gov't says!!!


"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

Word Games :

I once had the pleasure of knowing the Dean of Constitutional Studies at Loyola Marymount University Law School. In one conversation he agreed that Webster's 1828 could be stipulated as the sole Language Authority in litigating constitutional matters. Just so you know.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Think In Newspeak

To think in NS Consult NS Dictionary.

To understand extra definitions consult NS dictionary No. 10

Because: Some animals are more equal than other animals. -Animal Farm-

What the? > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MTIwY3_-ks

...And for the opposing view....

.... We have the wise words of a Supreme Court justice:

"The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 47 (1905).

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."


As a noun, this term denotes a single person as distinguished from a group or class, and also, very commonly, a private or natural person as distinguished from a partnership, corporation, or association ; but it is said that this restrictive signi- fication is not necessarily inherent in tbe word, and that it may, in proper cases, include artificial persons. See Bank of U. S. v. State, 12 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 400; State v. Bell Telephone Co.. 30 Ohio St. 310, 38 Am. Rep. 583; Pennsylvania it. Co. v. Canal Com’rs, 21 Pa. 20. As an adjective, “individual” means pertaining or belonging to, or characteristic of, one single person, either in opposition to a firm, association, or corporation, or considered in his relation thereto.


In general usage, a human being; by statute, however, the term can include firms, labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in Bankruptcy, or receivers.

Whether you're an individual, person, party or citizen, you are acting under auspices of statutes, ordinances and regulations. When you contract, you assume commercial entityship and are no longer acting as a natural person or human being in contract because a human being cannot contract...you must sign in an authorized capacity to assume rights and privileges under statute, ordinance and regulation.

When you contract, you assume your commercial entity, your strawman.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

I disagree with your last

I disagree with your last paragraph. You have to have a "meeting of minds" and signatures of both parties to establish a valid contract.

Artificial "persons" have no mind and can't hold a pen. This implies that contracts can ONLY be established by natural persons. Artificial persons have to have an "agent" perform the work (that only natural persons can do) for them.

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."


I lost a civil lawsuit even though I never signed an original contract - there was no meeting of the minds because the credit card company never loaned anything - credit isn't money. Even though I did not sign an original contract I was the losing party.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

The point was that an

The point was that an artificial person can't contract, because it doesn't have a mind.

BTW, you entered into what is called an "implied" contract. It just so happens that taking the money....errrr, credit....showed yourintentions BETTER than simply scribbling some letters on a paper. You can always claim that you didn't understand, or where under duress, etc. to nullify your signature. Once you spent the money....errr, credit.... under no coercion, but under your free will, your intentions were known:

You intended to receive a loan, and take that money...err, credit... and use it to give your self REAL goods and services. You intended to exchange future consumption for present consumption. The problem, however, came when the future arrived and you decided that you wanted present consumption AND future consumption....all with no extra labor, no less!!!

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

I read ya...

however I believe the real problem began when the institution/bank loaned credit through Fractional Reserve banking standards (which isn't real money) to an artificial commercial entity without disclosing that your signature or lack of signature was creating a legal fiction entity subject to statutes and regulations and codes that have no bearing over a natural person or human being. There is no disclosure of the true nature of how and under what guise you have been setup to contract as...

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

I do feel your pain, though.

I do feel your pain, though. I've been through the credit trap, myself. The banks did, indeed, take advantage of my ignorance at the time. However, I feel my ignorance was my own fault. All of those amazing offers in the mail have a way of shortening our time-preferences, don't they?

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

Noah's 1828 :

Beat me to it.

My standard reference work for the meaning of all words Constitutional. The hard copy has much more info. I highly recommend one for any student of such things.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Most of us

Pledged our allegiance to it every morning in school.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

Bah! A socialist created that pledge

The pledge of allegiance was written by a socialist and approved for official use by Congress during the McCarthy era (see history below).

Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).

Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.

The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston.

In 1892 Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.'

His original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]

Dr. Mortimer Adler, American philosopher and last living founder of the Great Books program at Saint John's College, has analyzed these ideas in his book, The Six Great Ideas. He argues that the three great ideas of the American political tradition are 'equality, liberty and justice for all.' 'Justice' mediates between the often conflicting goals of 'liberty' and 'equality.'

In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.

In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change. He had been pressured into leaving his church in 1891 because of his socialist sermons. In his retirement in Florida, he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there.

“Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.” ― Mark Twain

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world."

Just for fun. Webster's 1828

Just for fun.

Webster's 1828 edition


1. The native of a city, or an inhabitant who enjoys the freedom and privileges of the city in which he resides; the freeman of a city, as distinguished from a foreigner, or one not entitled to its franchises.

2. A townsman; a man of trade; not a gentleman.

3. An inhabitant; a dweller in any city, town or place.

4. In general sense, a native or permanent resident in a city or country; as the citizens of London or Philadelphia; the citizens of the United States.

5. In the United States, a person, native or naturalized, who has the privilege of exercising the elective franchise, or the qualifications which enable him to vote for rulers, and to purchase and hold real estate.

If the citizens of the United States should not be free and happy, the fault will be entirely their own.

CITIZEN, a. Having the qualities of a citizen.

I enjoy opening up my Websters 1828

and just reading.

Debbie's picture

Yes, this is an excellent dictionary. Here is a link where you

can search it online: http://1828.mshaffer.com/