Create a new true Peoples Democracy...

PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE

 If only the British People knew the true importance of these four little words and knew how to use them; they could virtually at a stroke, end the domination of Parliament, by the political parties; and they could bring about a true “People’s Democracy”. Furthermore, they could end once and for all, the illegal way by which they are being governed today.

The motivation and intention of this report, is to enlighten all.

History

In 1688 the CONVENTION (Parliament) removed King James the Second from the throne for, “Breaking the original contract betwixt King and People”. The, CONVENTION, determined that by doing this he had abdicated the throne; and, they declared, the throne was vacant. Prince William of Orange became the next King.

Note: This ‘Original Contract’ is an unwritten contract, that, nevertheless, and, in spite of it being unwritten, is verified as being lawful, and, truly, a ‘precedent’ of English law; because, it was the very instrument, by which a living and lawful King, was removed from the throne.

 The very fact that King James the Second, was removed from the throne for ‘breaking the original contract’, verifies, the validity of this, ‘unwritten contract’, in British Law. This ‘contract’, although unwritten, derives from the earliest days of the creation of Monarchy. It, derives from the concept that, “Allegiance is given to the Liege Lord for the protection of the Liege Lord”. Thus, allegiance is freely given to the “Reigning Monarch”; in return, for the protection of the “Reigning Monarch”. There is no other reason, or, lawful validity, for ‘Monarchy’ at all. The one and only true purpose of Monarchy is to ‘protect’ the People; the, ‘Subjects of the Crown’; to protect them, from the tyranny of the ‘abuse’ and the ‘prejudice’ of Parliament.

 

Each “Reigning Monarch” is required by law, to honour the ‘original contract’; they are required by law to act as ‘Head of Government’, to monitor Parliament, in the interests of the ‘protection of the Subject’. And, in order for the “Reigning Monarch’s” to be able to carry out this role, they are provided with two legal instruments to make that possible. These two legal instruments are:

 The, ”Royal Assent”, and the, “Royal Prerogative”.

 

The Royal Assent provides the ‘Reigning Monarch’ with the right and duty to monitor the Bills passed by Parliament; providing the right to grant the Royal Assent; or, to refuse to grant it.

The Royal Prerogative provides the ‘Reigning Monarch’  with the right to ‘protect the subject’ by three specific legal provisions: (a), the Monarch may encourage Ministers of Government, (b), warn Ministers of Government, and, (C), whenever the wishes of the People are in direct conflict with the actions of Parliament; the Monarch may order the dissolution of Parliament.

Thus, it can be seen that these two legal instruments are solely designed to protect the People.

They have no other purpose at all.

So, in judging whether a ‘Reigning Monarch’ has complied with this ‘duty’ and whether they have honoured the requirements of the ‘original contract’, all that is necessary, is to determine, if the ‘Reigning Monarch’ has used these legal instruments correctly. Or, whether, they have been negligent, by providing no ‘protection of the people’ at all.

 In judging, ELIZABETH THE SECOND, as a ‘Reigning Monarch’; sadly she has been negligent in carrying out this role. There are two clear specific reasons where she should have ‘protected the people’; yet, she did not act at all.  Explanations for this are set out below. But, firstly, we must return to ‘History’ again.

 In 1688 when Prince William of Orange invaded the Kingdom, and, when King James the Second fled to France; William set up the CONVENTION (Parliament). It’s task was firstly, to find the legal way of getting rid of a living and lawful King, so that Prince William could take up the throne; and, secondly, to create a set of rules that would protect Parliament from a King; because, Parliament did not want the same troubles that it had experienced with James II; if and when William, became the next King. The CONVENTION appointed a ‘Rights Committee’ to accomplish this task.

 Therefore, this ‘Rights Committee’ knew, that when they took up this task, that in creating the ‘rights’ Parliament required of a King; any Act or Bill that they created to provide the protection of Parliament, was solely intended, only for a King; it was never created or designed, to protect Parliament, from the people. And, that is why, when the ‘Rights Committee’ produced the “Declaration of Rights”, (which subsequently became the “Bill of Rights of 1689”), they included in the Bill, the protection of the people. They set out in the Bill, directly below the 13 rights that Parliament was claiming from the King, the, proviso, that when Parliament ‘enacted’ or applied, any of these rights, that Parliament should not ‘prejudice’ the People. This paragraph within the “Bill of Rights 1689” is known as the “Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed”; and, this reads as follows:

 “And they do Claime Demand and Insist upon all and singular The Premises as their undoubted Rights and Liberties and that noe Declarations Judgements Doeings or Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People, in any of the said Premises, ought in any wise to be drawne hereafter, into Consequence or Example”

Therefore, when Parliament claims its “Supremacy”; afforded to Parliament by “Article 9” of the “Bill of Rights 1689”; when, it ‘enacts’ that “Article 9”, or, any of the other “Premises” of that Bill, Parliament may not ‘prejudice’ the People. And, when Parliament does ‘prejudice’ the People, the “Supremacy”, then becomes null and void. In which circumstance, anyone may test, question, and challenge Parliament, in a Court of Law. Which, the entire British Judiciary, has been denying the People; for more than three hundred years.

Where has Parliament ‘prejudiced’ the People?

1. The Offices, Procedures, and Practises, of the political party WHIPS in Parliament ‘prejudice the people’ by issuing political party ‘diktat’ and instructions to every Member of Parliament each week, instructing them how they must behave in Parliament, and, how they must ‘vote’. This, prejudices the people, because such diktat and instruction overrules and supplants all ‘rightful influence’ placed upon those Members of Parliament, by the constituent.
2. The present coalition administration masquerading as government was not elected by the People at all. The General Election of 2010 produced the “Peoples Vote” determining two things: (a), that no political party should have a majority in Parliament; and, (b), that there should be a “Conservative led Minority Government”. But, the leaders of the political parties elected to Parliament, in that election, did not like that result; and, they corruptly assumed to themselves that this result provided them with the opportunity, to create a new form of Government, entirely on their own. Accordingly, they ‘ignored the rightful democratic vote of the people’, in that election; and, they foisted upon the British People, a coalition administration that was not ‘elected’ at all. By ‘ignoring the peoples vote’ in this way; from within Parliament; they, ‘prejudiced’, the People.

Where has, ELIZABETH THE SECOND, failed to honour the, ‘original contract’?

1. Aware, as she must be, throughout her reign, that the WHIPS offices, procedures, and practises in Parliament ‘prejudice’ the People; and, also being aware, as she must be, that this ‘prejudice’ flouts and breaches the conditions placed upon Parliament for its ‘enactment’ of “Article 9” of the “Bill of Rights 1689”; she has done nothing at all about protecting Her Subjects. She ought to have used the “Royal Prerogative” to warn her Ministers and Parliament that the WHIPS, ‘prejudice’ the People; and, that, that was unlawful, as determined by, “The Said Rights Claimed”. In failing to protect the people in this way, she ‘breaks the original contract’. Thereby, abdicating the throne.
2. When, in the General Election of 2010, the leaders of the political parties elected to Parliament in that election, chose to ‘ignore the people’s vote’  and, they then proceeded, to create a coalition administration entirely on their own; excluding the people; this was a clear indication that the, “Wishes of the People were in direct conflict with the actions of Parliament” ; and, that she, as the “Reigning Monarch”, had the duty to intervene, She ought to have used the “Royal Prerogative” to order the immediate dissolution of Parliament. In fact, she did nothing at all. Her failure to act to ‘protect’ her Subjects; protecting them from an administration, foisted upon the People, without being elected, broke the original contract. Thereby, abdicating the throne.
3. In consequence of these two stark vivid instances of her failure to protect her People; she, both in reality and in law, abdicates the throne.

Where is the evidence that, ELIZABETH THE SEFCOND, has to honour the original contract?

The CONVENTION (Parliament) of 1688, prior to the removal of King James the Second from the throne, held a special debate on the 6^th February in the ‘Painted Chamber’ of the House of Commons, “Between the Lords and Commons”, to debate the words: “Abdicated” and the “Vacancy of the Throne”. The Speaker of this debate, HENRY POWLE, said this:

 

“It is from those who are upon the throne of England,(when there are any such), from whom the People of England ought to receive Protection; and to whom, for that Cause, they owe the Allegiance of Subjects; but there being none now from whom they  expect Regal Protection, and to whom, for that Cause, they owe the Allegiance of Subjects, the Commons conceive, The Throne is Vacant.”

 

At the conclusion of the debate both Lord and Commons agreed that King James the Second had abdicated the throne and that the throne was vacant. They determined that, he had ‘broken the original contract’ betwixt King and People; and, more importantly, and, in respect to the “Lineal Descent” (all other ‘Reigning Monarch’s’ occupying the British throne); the CONVENTION ruled this:

 “It is as binding upon the Successor as well as it was on the Deposed, if the Successor broke the contract, he too could be deposed.”

 This is the very proof by ‘precedent of law’ whereby ELIZABETH THE SECOND is obliged to honour the original contract. The corrupt arrangement brought about by both Monarchy and Parliament to relieve the ‘Reigning Monarch’ from this responsibility, and, deprive the British People of their rightful protection of the Crown; by creating a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY; does not relieve the ‘Reigning Monarch’ of England, from that responsibility. For as long as a British Monarch sits upon the British throne; they will always be held by the, ‘precedent of law’, of the original contract, to provide the protection of the Subject.

 So, how do the British People use the words: “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE” in order to reform Parliament and create a new true PEOPLES DEMOCRACY?

 

Very simply; by merely millions of people chanting the four little words “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE” and, also, “THE SAID RIGHT CLAIMED”. No more protests in the streets violent or otherwise. Just millions of people chanting out these two simple phrases at every opportunity; writing to their Members of Parliament, newspapers and Media, featuring just both of these four little words in letters or postcards; in order to force both Parliament and ELIZABETH THE SECOND, to comply.

 

Parliament, to give immediate recognition to the, “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE” and “THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED”, in ‘Law’. And, to abolish the political party, WHIPS.

 ELIZABETH THE SECOND, to realise and comply, that she is obliged to honour the original contract and provide the protection of Her Subjects.

 When the domination of the political parties in Parliament is smashed; every vote taken in Parliament will be a ‘Free Vote’; and, that will create a true PEOPLES DEMOCRACY.

 

The British People do not endure their subjugation to the ‘Reigning Monarch’ for as long as a Monarch shall reign, in order that that ‘Reigning Monarch’ shall open hospitals or other establishments, host garden parties, or travel the globe promoting British goods, products and prestige. There is but one purpose and intent of British Monarchy; and, that is, that each Reigning Monarch’ in the line of succession, must protect the Subject, from the tyranny of the abuse and prejudice of Parliament.

 

CHANT FOUR LITTLE WORDS, REFORM PARLIAMENT, AND, CREATE A TRUE PEOPLES DEMOCRACY.

 

Gordon J Sheppard

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE TOTALITARIAN STATE

FREDDIE STARR ARRESTED AGAIN...
Freddie Starr has been re-arrested charged with further sexual abuse. Yet, to date, not one word of evidence has been heard against him. Furthermore, his accusers have not even been named.

Freddie Starr, and others facing this plight today, have their names and reputations dragged through the mud for months, before any trial. During which, they are forced to endure all the public opprobrium; without one word of ‘evidence against them’ being heard.

Today, in Great Britain, everyone is perfectly free, to accuse, smear, and vilify anyone with impunity, hiding behind the 'cloak of anonymity'. Protected, by the State.

Britain, today, is the closest it has ever been to the,

TOTALITARIAN STATE.

Hillsborough...

HILLSBOROUGH FOOTBALL STADIUM DISASTER

 At, 9:00 PM on Wednesday 3^rd April 2013, the BBC transmitted the programme “Hillsborough – Never Forgotten”. It was a tissue of lies, distortions, manipulation, and deceit. The priority intent of the program was to blame anyone and everyone for this disaster; yet, wholly exonerate from any blame, both Liverpool, and, the Liverpool Football Supporters and Fans. But, irrespective of all this calculated obfuscating; the live TV cameras transmitted ‘evidence’, of that event, proves that it was the ‘Football Supporters and Fans”, that murdered ninety six people, in that stadium, on that day.

The massive waste of time money and resources that was required for all the ‘Inquiries” that took place. Were not necessary at all. To determine the cause of the tragedy, and, to apportion the blame, all that is necessary is to examine the ‘catalyst’, which created this event.

CATALYST : A person or thing that precipitates an event.

Every activity that takes place on Planet Earth, and, every activity of Humankind, is ‘precipitated’ by the ‘catalyst’, that creates that event.

So, in looking at the “Hillsborough Football Stadium Disaster” one only has to determine the ‘catalyst’; in order to find someone or something to blame. And, to determine, without any doubt at all; that everything ‘post’ the ‘catalyst’, has no relevance at all. This is because, if it had not been for the ‘catalyst’, occurring first; everything that happened thereafter; could not have happened at all.

The Truth

 "Open the door and see the Mountain"

A, proverb, probably, of Chinese origin; meaning, that the 'truth' is so momentous before your eyes; you need only open your eyes and, your minds, to see it.

The 'truth' about the disaster of Hillsborough, is, without any doubt, that, the hysterical Liverpool football fans were entirely to blame. Examine the 'evidence' provided by the TV cameras, present at that time. In a simple live TV transmission, the viewer was able to see the wholly disgusting and irresponsible behaviour of the football supporters at the ‘turnstiles’ and the ‘gate’ of the “Lepping Road” entrance to the stadium. Where, wildly and insanely, these football supporters were so crazed and hysterical as to shove and push themselves against the building and the ‘gate’; with such force, that some of them were getting injured and crushed. The police notified of this threat of serious injuries taking place; had no alternative but to ‘open that gate’. The very instant this gate was opened this wild hysterical mob of supporters, charged thru the gate. Forcefully, they thrust themselves forward through the ‘tunnel’ trying to gain access to the “Lepping Road Spectator Stand”. Yet, that stand, was already over full. The more this mob pushed and shoved their way forward thru that tunnel, the more the people at the front of that ‘stand’, were hemmed in and crushed.

This was the ‘catalyst’ of the disaster.

Consider the actions and circumstances of these two situations:

A. People visiting the Theatre or the Cinema.

B. Football supporters attending any Football Stadium in order to see a game.

In circumstance "A" the people going to the Theatre or Cinema, stand quietly and orderly in a queue until they reach the Box Office, in order to pay for admission. They, never, 'hysterically' rush or push forward, to forcefully enter the premises, at all.

In circumstance "B", (as, happened at Hillsborough), the, 'hysterical' football fans, did not queue orderly. At, Hillsborough, on that fateful day, they virtually charged their way through into the Stadium, then, they forced their way forward with enormous weight of their bodies, crushing everyone, at the front of the ‘Lepping Road’ stand. When they found that they could not go forward anymore, they did not stand there quietly, or, even attempt to retreat; they surged forward with even more enormous force into the tunnel leading to that spectators stand. The more they surged forward, the greater the 'crushing' of those at the front. And, from this criminal ‘catalyst’ 96 people died.

It was this lunacy and, this criminal behaviour, of these Liverpool Football fans, that killed 96 people at Hillsborough that day. It is solely, they, who must be accountable, for the blame.

The police may have made errors and mistakes in handling the situation, once it had got out of hand; but, the 'true' catalyst for the disaster, the very spark, that caused the loss of all those lives; must lie with the Liverpool Football fans.

Even before the police opened the gates to ease the crush at the turnstiles; these wild hysterical football fans, late, in arriving, and, desperate to get into the Stadium before the start of the game; were charging forward, climbing over both fences and gates, intent on getting into the stadium to see the start of the game. The TV cameras reveal, behaviour, of the very worst kind.

The TV cameras reveal this, 'truth', in all vivid clarity.

Irrespective, of any 'rigged' inquiry.

In the BBC2 transmitted program at precisely, 05 minutes, 18 seconds, into the programme one person present at this disaster says this:

“Just before the kick off we were walking down the tunnel and we were half way down the tunnel when something hit me, this wave of force hit us all and sent us careering forward faster than you could run; and, that was the huge swell of people behind who were trying to get into the ground. It started to get very uncomfortable and being very stricken I said “I can’t stand this” so I turned round and tried to go back. But at that moment I wasn’t going anywhere. I could not move.”

Look at any pictures of this disaster and it can clearly be seen where ‘spectators’ are desperate to get out of that ‘Lepping Road’ spectator stand. They can be seen desperately climbing over fences, and climbing upon each other in attempt at reaching ‘safety’ in the terraces above. They can be seen, being crushed, and collapsing, because they could not breathe.

This was the ‘catalyst’ that caused this tragedy.

Politicians, and those of vested interests, now lie in their teeth.

Gordon J Sheppard                                                                                            

 

 

KING RICHARD THE THIRD

Richard III

If the remains at the City of Leicester that were dug up and are now claimed to be the remains of 'King Richard the Third', are proved to actually be, 'King Richard the Third"; then there is only once place to bury those remains; and, that is, 'Westminster Abbey'; in London.

Proven to be 'Richard the Third'; those "Royal Remains" are, and, become, the property of the whole Nation. They then are part and parcel, of our entire British Heritage and our History.

No greedy 'Mayor of Leicester', (with his sights set on securing increased revenue from tourism), has the right to determine, that, just because these remains were "dug up" in Leicester; that they then become the 'exclusive property' of Leicester; in order, that they are buried there, to improve 'tourism' for that City. If these remains are indeed 'King Richard the Third'; he must be buried with other 'Kings and Queen's of the Realm' in Westminster Abbey, in London.

Far be it, that a British 'King of the Realm' should be 'used' as a commercial instrument, in order to improve the 'revenue' of just one City of this land: Leicester.

The 'Mayor of Leicester' has apparently said that, 'Richard's remains will leave Leicester over his dead body"

He should be immediately be advised that these 'remains' are not his property. He should have no say in the matter at all. It is not for him to decide where these 'remains' (If, they are 'King Richard the Third') are to be buried. That is for the 'entire Nation' to decide.

The, 'Reigning Monarch', ELIZABETH THE SECOND, must have a say in the matter; and, both, She, and, the Prime Minister, should decide.

I contend that there is only one place for that "Royal Burial" and that is Westminster Abbey.
The City of Leicester has no legal right of claim, to the 'exclusive ownership' of these remains.
If they are the remains of a, 'King of this Realm'; they are the property of the, entire Nation.
Gordon J Sheppard