THE SUPREME COURT
BREXIT - And, the leaving of the European
Community, as being debated in, “Miller
-v- Secretary of State”, at the hearing before the "SUPREME
COURT" today.
The British Supreme Court is naught but a
platform where the 'Cut, Thrust, and Parry' of legal brains, fight a legal
duel, demonstrating, how clever they are.
But, in all the waffle and 'hot air' in
respect to 'points of law' and 'precedents of law' taking place in that court today; every legal brain
participating there; has completely forgotten, or actually purposely ignored, "WHAT
'LAW' ACTUALLY IS ? "
"LAW IS NAUGHT BUT A MYTH, WITHOUT THE
CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, THERE IS NO LAW"
(Lord Hailshan, ex Lord Chancellor of
England).
Where, in all that 'waffle' and 'hot air'
are, 'THE PEOPLE’ today?
'THE
PEOPLE'
are not present or represented there, at all.
And why? Because in Great Britain by sheer wicked
imposition and skulduggery there are no 'PEOPLE' at all. In law, and,
classified by "LAW" - ALL BRITISH FREEBORN HUMANKIND -
are classified as mere, "Subjects of the Crown". Held in
imposed 'subjugation', without consent.
In Great Britain, FREEBORN HUMANKIND, have no
identity whatsoever and, furthermore, they have, no protection of, "LAW".
In the Appeal by Government in "Miller
-v- Secretary of State" taking place today and in all that legal
'waffle' and 'hot air', there is in reality only one question to resolve:
If, THERESA MAY and her TORY (unelected)
government are to have sole and exclusive domination and control of triggering
"Article 50" and negotiating the terms by which Britain leaves the,
"EUROPEAN COMMUNITY"; this will result in that leaving process, being
dominated by, TORY IDEOLOGY, and the vested interests of the TORY party.
This will inevitably result in very 'radical
changes' taking place, in the domestic lives and the living, of everyone in the
country.
"RADICAL CHANGES" AFFECTING THE
DOMESTIC LIVES OF E.U. CITIZENS, ARE NOT PERMITTED, WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE
E.U. HUMAN RIGHTS COURT.
Therefore, the 'Supreme Court" has only
one issue to resolve; whether THERESA MAY and an (unelected) government should
decide this matter? Or, whether PARLIAMENT representing all 'THE PEOPLE"
in the country, should decide?
A very simple matter to decide; and
especially when further considering this:
UNTIL BRITAIN, ACTUALLY, LEAVES THE E.U.;
everyone of, 'The People', now living in the country, are already legal 'Citizens’
of the E.U. They became ‘Citizens of the E.U.’ at precisely the very instant Great
Britain joined the E.U. Therefore, and thereby, they are protected by, the European
Human Rights Law; and, the E.U. HUMAN RIGHTS COURT.
Providing, everyone in the U.K.; with the
right to request protection of that E.U. HUMAN RIGHTS COURT; to
protect them, during the BREXIT withdrawal process. Requesting, that this
COURT should, and, must rule - that under E.U. Law, it's "CITIZENS"
cannot be protected; if THERESA MAY and her government, are
to have the sole and exclusive right to dominate and control; that, 'withdrawal' process.
to have the sole and exclusive right to dominate and control; that, 'withdrawal' process.
THE E.U. HUMAN RIGHTS COURT, must intervene.
Footnotes:
Were the E.U. Hunan Rights Court to intervene as described above, it would not be 'interfering' in sovereign parliament business and affairs; it would merely be the rightful 'duty' of this Court, to protect all British 'Citizens' of the E.U. To, protect them from having 'unlawful' radical changes, made to their lives.
In the Government Appeal in "Miller -v- Secretary of State" today, the words, "PREROGATIVE" and "ROYAL PREROGATIVE", are presented in submission in virtually every sentence uttered. Dictionary definition of "PREROGATIVE" reveals: "EXCLUSIVE RIGHT". Who gave Monarchy, Judiciary, Government, Parliament, or the Profession of Law, this 'exclusive' right? With, impunity, to, EXCLUDE, "The People" ?
Footnotes:
Were the E.U. Hunan Rights Court to intervene as described above, it would not be 'interfering' in sovereign parliament business and affairs; it would merely be the rightful 'duty' of this Court, to protect all British 'Citizens' of the E.U. To, protect them from having 'unlawful' radical changes, made to their lives.
In the Government Appeal in "Miller -v- Secretary of State" today, the words, "PREROGATIVE" and "ROYAL PREROGATIVE", are presented in submission in virtually every sentence uttered. Dictionary definition of "PREROGATIVE" reveals: "EXCLUSIVE RIGHT". Who gave Monarchy, Judiciary, Government, Parliament, or the Profession of Law, this 'exclusive' right? With, impunity, to, EXCLUDE, "The People" ?
No comments:
Post a Comment