Transition Time - Just an update. I was surprised a week ago when I was informed that my position is being converted to Civil Service. After a pregnant pause, I was informed that I was being converted to a civil servant as well. Tuesday is my first day as a civil servan

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Just an update. I was surprised a week ago when I was informed that my position is being converted to Civil Service. After a pregnant pause, I was informed that I was being converted to a civil servant as well.

Tuesday is my first day as a civil servant.

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

It's hard for me to think of a time I've been serviced by someone working for government. They always serve themselves by screwing me over.

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society is an organization dedicated to educating the public as to their Common Law Rights, revealing government deception, holding government agents accountable for all their unlawful actions and helping to create a more free and just society by ensuring authority is not gained deceptively and that it is exercised with restraint, understanding , accountability and compassion.

As a human being acting as a government agent, you have a number of duties, obligations and responsibilities. As an agent, you have a duty to understand the source, nature and limits of your authority as well as the words which compose your mandate. As a public servant, you have an obligation to provide service to the public with respect to the legislative framework within which public service is provided. As a human being, you are responsible for your actions, regardless of your mandate or your understanding of it.

I could not have said it better myself, thank you Robert Menard, I think we need to show this to all of our servants, what do you think purp?

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Prior to passing judgement and casting aspersions on ALL civil servants, you should probably think that there are many many more than your municipal or state or even federal beureaucrat. Many more of us on "on the line". Whether the civil servant is a fire fighter, power station operator, programmer, pilot, writer, or such.

Do try to understand the ones you deal with in the public, be they police, officious paper pushers and such are SMALL sampling and not representitive of the entire system.

I used to be in the USAF, I used to be a police officer, I used to be a salesman, I used to be an on-air radio "personality". You know good and bad examples of each of those.

But to paint with the broad brush is to give up reason and truth and use only emotion.

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

I asked you a simple question, as a public servant you have a duty and obligation to give me clear, concise and accurate information. But you failed to do so. Why?
You don't think our servant government should be held to the legal limits of their power? You don’t think our servants should know how to properly serve? You don’t think our servants have a duty to us? You simply don’t think do you?

I have done everything you have, except I was Army and my on air was for them in two different positions. So your bragging has little effect here. The words purp, you cannot defeat the words.

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Munchie, I was responding to Shaun. Not you. You were playing your strawman setup-knockdown game by yourself. As a private citizen, I'm not required to answer you. I'm not required to provide you with opinion. If you were to be interfacing with me in my official position, then I would be required. However, we are not interacting in that capacity, and to be honest, we never will. It would be damn near impossible for you, or many others of the general public to interact with me in my official capacity.

Unlike the civil servants you generally think of, I have no public interface or exposure in the course of my duties. But, to respond to your points, before you started knocking down your own strawman, as a private citizen, I expect all civil servants act in a responsible manner. I expect them to be proper public servants when acting in their roles.

I know that there are civil servants that are not properly responsive to the those they have responsibility to. I know there are those that are almost criminal in their neglect of duties. And, I know there are those that are criminal in their activities. You often read about them in the newspapers. I also know that those few oftent set the view that the public has of civil servants. But, it is also very sad to see that someone of discernment would fall into the same trap as those of lesser ability and start painting an entire group with such a broad brush. I am hoping that wasn't your intent.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 8

Purple, it seems like you ended your comments apologizing to Munchie. I'm confused. Is he right or is he wrong?

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

Purple, it seems like you ended your comments apologizing to Munchie. I'm confused. Is he right or is he wrong?

Not apologizing, but giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was answering his concerns but taking him to task for his "broad brush" stroking and allowing him to say that he didn't mean to be so broad in his implications.

In discourse, there is give and take and rarely absolutes.

Positions are stated, discussed, evaluated, and even sometimes changed.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 8

"You were playing your strawman setup-knockdown game " is pretty strong negative critical language which is why I was a bit puzzled with what seemed to be an almost apologetic conclusion. Guess i just read too much into it...

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

"You were playing your strawman setup-knockdown game " is pretty strong negative critical language which is why I was a bit puzzled with what seemed to be an almost apologetic conclusion. Guess i just read too much into it...

Oh, that quote stands. He was. That's his modus operandi. He likes to ask questions, then say, since you didn't answer, I'll answer for you, and you have to challenge it. No, I'll let that one stand.

My giving him the benefit of the doubt is strictly for his broad brush implications and accussations. Nothing more.

Casting aspersions on all civil servants because your local police force has problems, or the permitting office doesn't like your garage, or because you think your taxes are too high or illegal is not the way, it is not mature, and it is not the mark of a critically thinking mind.

I'm giving him the chance to show he is not doing that.

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

I'm giving him the chance to show he is not doing that.

Oh, and unlike him, I will assume that unless he proves otherwise, then he is a mature, critically thinking person who chose intemperate language and mistakenly used the broad brush.

Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 9:31 pm

Anybody see the seething intrigue within the words of a disinformation agent
who is tap dancing like hell, because he cannot afford to be honest with anybody and just simply tell us the truth about himself, his job in government and his relationship with this group?

Have I not told you from the outset that these YAHOO disinformation agents are employed by government media, or satellite corporations serving government?

It is your conditioning which blinds you from seeing the obvious. Such conditioning is the source of you unawareness.

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

Well purp, when you blog and open a new thread, inject a comment or idea into that thread, you are inviting everyone that participates in the blog to offer comment, inject more ideas and even question you about your comments, thoughts and ideas. Because of that, answers to those questions are expected from your fellow bloggers. So by opening the thread and participating in said thread you do have an obligation to respond. Albeit a small one, it is just the right thing for you to do, or why be here at all?

I posted a statement made by Robert Arthur Menard of The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society, that I thought was relevant to your thread about civil servants. (Then stated) I think we need to show this to all of our servants, (and then asked for your thoughts) what do you think purp?

I’m still waiting for that answer, and now it seems so are a few others.

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

I’m still waiting for that answer, and now it seems so are a few others.

You've showed it to me. I've responded. Public servants are public servants when acting in their official capacity. When they are not, they are acting as private citizens. If a public servant, acting in their official capacity exceeds authority, misbehaves, commits fraud, or any other crime, then they should be held accountable. Just as any employee of any company should be held accountable.

Quote:

Because of that, answers to those questions are expected from your fellow bloggers.

As for that statement, you can expect all you want. Just as in discourse, in an open room, when you present yourself to make a question and turn it into a confrontation, or you don't get the answer you expected and become confrontational (in the space of a single reply cycle) if you are met with a blank stare, or a turned back, then you may surmise something from the body language. You may find it distasteful, but chances are, the trigger to the response was the way in which you presented yourself. In a bulletin board discussion, it can mean several things, including the above, but it can also mean that someone read the post above yours and responded to that and then when going back to the board, may have read no further.
As for "expecting"; You may expect all you want.

Quote:

So by opening the thread and participating in said thread you do have an obligation to respond.

I suggest that your have the forum rules rewritten then. There is nothing about an obligation to respond. However, yours is, I believe an attempt to become needlessly agumentative. I refuse to engage in that manner of fruitless non-dialogue. I will discuss. As, if you check my previous posts, I have done with Shaun and others.
I will say this, if you expect your civil servants to be civil with you in their official capacity, it would be good to remember that they are citizens and human beings as well, and topping it the employer-at-the-counter-demanding-explanations-from-the-clerk from the get go is not the way. If you order a burger at your local burger joint the same way, you're likely to find your food has extra ingrediants. Not that I condone, encourage, nor excuse the actions. But, when I order food, I do so politely. If the wait staff or the cook screws it up, I call the manager over, let them know, then leave (boycott if you will).
Also, if you are a civil servant it is good to remember to be civil to those who come to you. Those you service are fellow citizens. But, remember, there will be those times when someone you have never met, who has a chip on their shoulder and can't shake it, may introduce themselves to you as the world's greatest horse's behind. That person deserves your sympathy and probably pity. They feel that things are beyond their control and they need to take it out on someone and you are the most convenient target.
And remember, you will go to another civil servant at some point and you will know that treating them as a citizen, human, and gentle-person you will reap the rewards.

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

In case you misread anything:

I am NOT acting in my official capacity.

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

Would you mind acting in a private capacity and telling us what your new job is? Do you push papers, do you fix things, do you plunge toilets, what is it?

I'm not sure what kind of discussion you were hoping to start with this thread, by being so vague about everything.

If Ray's right about you being a disinformation agent, is that the job you were talking about that's been converted to "civil service" or is that a side job? Or is he wrong, and would you like to clue us in to who you really are and what you really do? My full name is posted here -- people know who I am. I'm not asking anyone else to do that. But when you don't, there isn't anything to back up what you say. Furthermore, if what you say seems to always confuse people or lead them the wrong way, you should consider changing what you post.

I would certainly love answers to any/all of these. You aren't required to answer, but now you're invited to. I haven't attacked you either, so please don't be defensive. Perhaps we can put all of these things to bed with one reply? Anxiously awaiting your reply...

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

If Ray's right about you being a disinformation agent...

Ray is wrong. But then, he's wrong about a lot. While conspiracies are real, most of what he sees as conspiracy is just a bunch of people that he polarized into not liking him. I guess when you piss off enough people, it's easy to imagine that there is something bigger going on to explain why you seem to be the only one to like you. It's easier to believe the conspiracy one makes up about themselves. Makes them feel important. This is all I'll say about Ray, he makes a lot of noise and tries to draw me in with wild statements and accusations.

Quote:

is that the job you were talking about that's been converted to "civil service" or is that a side job...I haven't attacked you either, so please don't be defensive.

Shaun, I appreciate that you haven't attacked me. However, the question you pose is loaded with the implication that you think I'm one of Ray's D.A.'s. So, no, it is not my job, and neither is it a side job.
As a participant in the forums, a sympathizer with the plight of Ed and Elaine, And someone who has cautioned others who seem to want to see Ed and Elaine go down in a "blaze of gunfire", I have tried to be civil and contribute. It is personal news about the job change/upgrade, but it is also a notice that not all in government share the idea that Ed and Elaine are outlaw.
Shaun, when we discussed my jury duty, you cautioned me on a few things. It was a civil exchange. (Oh, I'll post a side note on the jury duty, that I found very interesting.)
As for my work, it has nothing to do with what Ray says. Either you take that or don't. I won't name the agency. I'm an Analyst. I review, distill, compile, file, and report. I've worked very hard to get to this point. Working to keep the nation safe "from without".

Quote:

We put Country first and Agency before self. Quiet patriotism is our hallmark. We are dedicated to the mission, and we pride ourselves on our extraordinary responsiveness to the needs of our customers.

Quote:

We hold ourselves—and each other—to the highest standards. We embrace personal accountability. We reflect on our performance and learn from that reflection.

These two quotes are the words to live by in government service.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 8

I am new here but this Ray guy does seem to think that he owns the forum or at least he seems to think his job is to dominate it. Munchiewizard talks a lot too but he makes more sense to me. At least I can understand his logic.

Admin ban edit: No, he wasn't new here. He was evading a previous ban (user Letschacha) by creating this username. He is now banned server-wide.

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

Well purp you just don’t seem to understand so I will try again.

Statement borrowed from http://www.thinkfree.ca Thank you Robert-Arthur Menard. The statement follows.

“As a human being acting as a government agent, you have a number of duties, obligations and responsibilities. As an agent, you have a duty to understand the source, nature and limits of your authority as well as the words which compose your mandate. As a public servant, you have an obligation to provide service to the public with respect to the legislative framework within which public service is provided. As a human being, you are responsible for your actions, regardless of your mandate or your understanding of it.”

END of borrowed statement. My words follow.

Now, for better analysis I will try and rephrase my question to you for better understanding.

Should we teach this to all of our public servants before they start their employment to serve We the People?

I think we should, and I would even carry that a step further and have them all sign a declaration stating their understanding of that statement.

Caution! Regardless of your response or lack of it you may invite further discussion from others that may expect your response. It’s that net etiquette thing you know, the unwritten obligation to participate in what you’re participating in.

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Why not?

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Oh, and glad you finally put it into YOUR own words.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 8

I think a mandate would be even better than teaching it to them MW. And yes, a signature should be required.

Admin ban edit: A very short, typical reply from these guys. They agree with other users just to blend in. We see right through this BS, so give it up and leave the forum. You are not welcomed here.

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

Typical, answer a question with a question, you purp are not participating.

Purp said; Oh, and glad you finally put it into YOUR own words.

I gave credit where credit was due in my first blog on this civil servant thread of yours Maybe you were just being so analytical you missed it. I will concede I missed the quotes and may not have been as clear as I could have been, sorry not and English major, not an expert on the subject, just a person, a person concerned about where persons like you are taking our country. And I’m not afraid to stand up and tell you so.

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

ADMIN NOTICE

A user participating in this discussion has been banned. For more information on this please go to: http://www.makethestand.com/ftopict-51.html

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

Typical, answer a question with a question, you purp are not participating.

Well, munchie, aren't you playing mastabatory games with words? What is the accepted meaning of the phrase "Why not?"

It is a phrase denoting, wait for it...agreement.

Why you are trying to manufacture some sort of conflict is beyond me.

So, in the future, feel free to engage me, on a discussion level. Attack or try to just stir the pot, and I will ignore you. Fair enough.

Don't bother trying to spin it in the hopes of trying to get further response, you won't get it. I'm tired of your baiting and luring. You are only interested in argument, not discussion.

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

I've got some questions for you, purp, that I'll ask tomorrow. It's too late right now and I've got to go to bed.

Initiate Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 459

I love this sentence by the way. “Well, munchie, aren't you playing mastabatory games with words?”

Talk about masturbating words, really all I was looking for at the very beginning of this thread was “...agreement.” Thank you for your response. I respect that, I wish it had come a bit sooner, but I do realize the gravity of our forum and the position you are in, being sucked into equity and all. Are you sure that is where you want to be? How was the first day?

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Well, first day was good. It's odd, I was the contract manager, and I'm still working with the folks that I was managing, now I'm "lateral" to them. The government guy I was "lateral" to is now my manager.
I've seen government employees who are basically sitting around, waiting to retire, then ones that work and work and don't stop. Obviously, the first type are the ones that a lot of people think of when they think of government employees.
Without exception, my office is the second type. Probably a tribute management being careful about thier team selection.

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

Quote:

I'm an Analyst. I review, distill, compile, file, and report. I've worked very hard to get to this point. Working to keep the nation safe "from without".

Question 1: You are involved in some sort of "national security" operation?

Question 2: Do you review, distill, compile, file, and report on information about American Citizens? I know of some of the agencies and outsourced work being done -- tracking the moves of millions and millions, and sorting through it for "red flags." I'm confident that I'm on a few "red flag" lists Smile

Question 3: Have you reviewed any legislation that allegedly creates your position, funds your position, or delegates any authority (powers) to your position?

Newbie Joined: Apr 29, 2007 Posts: 46

Quote:

Question 1: You are involved in some sort of "national security" operation?

Question 2: Do you review, distill, compile, file, and report on information about American Citizens? I know of some of the agencies and outsourced work being done -- tracking the moves of millions and millions, and sorting through it for "red flags." I'm confident that I'm on a few "red flag" lists

Question 3: Have you reviewed any legislation that allegedly creates your position, funds your position, or delegates any authority (powers) to your position?

1. Yes.
2. No, unless a U.S. citizen suddenly becomes a piece of hardware in some far flung land. Smile

3. Yes. The legislation is solid. My position is not specifically mentioned but implicit in the operation of the organization. My position has no real authority or power except to do my job. I wield no sworn police or enforcement authority. My portfolio is as an analyst.