A
Seething Burning Anger…
Sunday, 5 June 2016
19:19
I am seething with a deep burning
uncontrollable anger at all the bastards in my country denying 'OUR' access to
a true, DEMOCRACY.
In this document I shall be using (so
called) 'four letter' words or 'obscene language' that may offend; but, the
reader should not look upon these words as the beautiful and wonderful sexual copulatory
activities of both females and males in lust or in love participating in such
activity.
Such 'words' used here, should only be
looked upon as the 'thunderous best descriptive epithet' there is; to properly
depict my anger and frustration at the injustice we endure here. Just saying
the word "FUCK" here, somewhat appeases my anger and provides some
momentary relief.
So here goes:
I AM SICK AND TIRED OF LIVING IN A
"FUCKING" TOTALITARIAN REGIME.
I WANT A "FUCKING" TRUE
DEMOCRACY.
I WANT TO SMASH THE 'BASTARDS' THAT ARE
DENYING 'OUR' ACCESS TO THIS TRUE DEMOCRACY. THEREFORE,
I DIRECTLY ACCUSE ALL THE FOLLOWING,
1.
The "fucking'
government; that today creates LAWS and BILLS in our 'elected' parliament
wholly unlawfully; in the very same way in which ADOLF HITLER and the NAZIS
created their own law. Creating and causing such horrific consequences. Little
by little with 'OUR' corrupt governments, and, the wholly unlawful political
party activities of the WHIPS in parliament that they employ, we get closer to
'totalitarianism' every single day.
2.
I particularly
accuse, the entire "fucking" corrupt BRITISH JUDICIARY; that have
repeatedly and constantly, "CONSPIRED TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF
JUSTICE" by deceiving the British people, ruling, that "Article
9" of the "Bill of Rights 1689" is, 'ABSOLUTE'. When in truth
and reality, and, in law, this is a "fucking great lie".
"Article 9" is not, ABSOLUTE, at all. It
is merely, CONDITIONAL.
The "Bill of Rights 1689", in the
paragraph, "The Said Rights Claimed", makes it abundantly clear by
'precedent of law' that, anyone may test, question, or challenge parliament in
the courts; if and whenever parliament, "PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE".
Thereby, parliaments "Supremacy" afforded by "Article 9" is
only legally valid, providing parliament does not, "PREJUDICE THE
PEOPLE".
3.
I also accuse the
'fucking' rotten entire 'elected' British Parliament; of denying the People's
right of access to a true, DEMOCRACY; by parliament, corruptly complying with
the political party WHIPS and their unlawful 'diktat' instructing Members of
Parliament on how they must or should vote; which has no 'legality' at all.
This corrupt 'fucking' political party activity
overrules and supplants all rightful influence placed upon those Members of
Parliament, by the constituents; and, this does, "PREJUDICE THE
PEOPLE". Which is wholly proscribed and, unlawful, as determined by the
"Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed".
“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”
SO DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE WITH THIS TOTALITARIAN STATE
AND THIS TRAVESTY DENYING OUR ACCESS TO A TRUE DEMOCRACY?
OR, ARE YOU PREPARED AND READY TO DO
SOMETHING ABOUT IT. We must smash the unlawful overwhelming power of the
political parties; we must smash the rotten and wholly corrupt BRITISH
JUDICIARY; and, we must ensure in future, that every 'vote' taken in parliament
thereafter, is a, "FREE VOTE"
WE must scream from the rooftops:
"ABOLISH THE UNLAWFUL 'WHIPS' IN
PARLIAMENT"
"DITCH AND SACK THE ENTIRE ROTTEN
LYING BRITISH JUDICIARY"
Note: JEREMY CORBYN the leader of the
Labour Party is on record of 'refusing' to comply with the Labour Party WHIPS
on at least 50 occasions. This is interesting, he assumes and exercises, the
right to 'choose' whether to comply or not. So, what gives him the right, or
any of the other corrupt Members of Parliament; the right to repeatedly deny
'OUR' right, to choose, or, to have any say in the matter at all? Especially,
when the WHIPS political party activities in parliament has no 'legality' at
all?
No comments:
Post a Comment