Glorious
Revolution and, “The Said Rights Claimed”
My letter to KEITH
PORTEOUS WOOD of the Secularist Society.
Congrats
re the banning of prayers at Council Meetings.
I
agree, that both prayers in Parliament, and also in the ‘imposition’ in
schools, should also be banned in LAW.
For
your immediate attention and interest and in respect to The Speaker, JOHN
BERCOW’s pronouncement that prayers will still be said in Parliament,
because Parliament is protected by the “Bill of Rights 1689”,
From
all experience in this country, my country, sad to say, that it would appear
that I am practically the only one in the country that has read and researched
the period of “The Glorious Revolution” correctly. Because the ‘evidence’ is
abundantly clear that hardly anyone has interpreted the “Bill of Rights 1689”
correctly at all.
The
entire British Educational curriculum and establishment has abysmally failed to
teach this correctly. The majority of the People of the country know nothing of
Parliaments “Supremacy” and the way that they are being governed today.
Parliament
and the Courts (Judiciary) have been misinterpreting the “Bill of Rights 1689”
for more than 300 years. And, they both continue to misinterpret it, even
today.
You can
ask at random thousands of people in the streets and ask them to list the three
principal instruments by which they are governed; and, more than 90 per cent
would not know. Ask them to tell you about “Article 9”; and they would
be, bewildered.
Then
ask them to tell you about “The Said Rights Claimed” and they would
stand open mouthed before you not having a clue. Even Parliament and the
Judiciary know nothing of this “Statute” in the Bill.
Parliament
claims its lawful validity for its “Supremacy” relying upon “Article 9” of
the “Bill of Rights 1689”. This reads:
“The
Freedome of Speech Debates and Proceedings of Parlyament ought not to be
impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament”
And.
both Parliament and the Judiciary has interpreted that wording as though it was
a ‘stand-alone’ piece of legislation requiring no other considerations at all.
That is why the Judiciary has always denied the testing, questioning or the
challenging of Parliament, in their Courts.
But the
correct interpretation of “Article 9” and, the entire “Bill of Rights
1689”; proves that “Article 9” is not a ‘stand-alone’ Statute at all’.
Parliaments
‘enactment of “Article 9”, (And all the other, ‘Premises’, of that Bill), are
wholly dependent upon the conditions set out in another paragraph of that same
Bill: i.e. the paragraph: “The Said Rights Claimed”
And,
this reads as follows:
“The
said Rights Claimed”:
“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”
This makes it abundantly clear that as
a ‘precedent’ in English Law, that, Parliaments “Supremacy”, legally afforded to
Parliament by “Article 9” of the “Bill of Rights 1689”, is only
applicable, in LAW; providing Parliament does not ‘prejudice’ the People.
Whenever Parliament does ‘prejudice’ the People; the “Supremacy” of Parliament,
has no lawful validity at all.
So, when The Speaker, JOHN
BERCOW MP or any other Member of Parliament asserts that “Prayers will still
be conducted in Parliament” because Parliament is protected by the “Bill
of Rights 1689”; anyone can challenge that assertion, in LAW, relying on “The
Said Rights Claimed”.
If it can be shown and proved in a
Court of LAW that ‘prayers said in Parliament’ does ‘prejudice the
People’; the Courts will have no alternative but to rule that ‘prayers said
in Parliament', must cease.
Hardly any of the British People are
aware; that, even if we do not have a “written constitution” or a proper “Bill
of Rights”; and, even if we have no access to LAW to challenge Parliament in a
“Supreme Court” of LAW; the British are protected against the ‘prejudice’ and
the ‘abuses’ of Parliament; by, “The Said Rights Claimed”
This, has never ever been taught in our
schools.
People will never be able to
participate in a DEMOCRACY correctly, unless they ‘participate’ twenty four
hours of each day; and, unless they are aware of the precise manner by which
they are governed. The British have not the slightest conception as to how they
are governed. That is why today we are governed by a wholly illegal coalition
government; that was not elected by the People, at all. The People’s vote in
the General Election of 2010 verified that there should be a ‘Conservative led
Minority Government’; but the leaders of the Political party’s elected to
Parliament in that election did not like that result. So, they illegally
‘ignored’ the People’s vote; and, they then conspired with each other to foist
upon this nation, this coalition government. In ‘ignoring’ the People’s vote in
this way, they corruptly, ‘prejudiced’ the People. Which, was wholly prohibited
in ‘LAW’ by “The Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/“The Said Rights
Claimed”.
The British Parliament though elected
by The People; is not a Peoples Parliament.
Parliament is dominated entirely by the
Political Party’s; and, the political ‘diktat’ of those parties.
The only way this will ever change, in
order to create a truly, ”Peoples Parliament”; is when the entire
population of the country recognizes and respects “The Said Rights Claimed”.
When that is done, the Offices, Procedures and Practises of the WHIPS in
Parliament, (that does ‘prejudice’ the People), will be challenged in
LAW; and, will then be abolished. Whereby, every vote taken in Parliament
thereafter, would become a ‘free vote’.
Sincerely, Gordonj
No comments:
Post a Comment