Tuesday, November 7, 2017

PASSPORTS - and the DESPOTISM prevailing..


PASSPORTS – AND - THE TRUE PURPOSE OF THE PASSPORT.

 

The true purpose of the PASSPORT is to provide immigration officers and the security services of all nations with the ability to ‘identify’ the person standing before them; from the photograph displayed in their passport.

 

This is the sole purpose of the passport. It has no other purpose at all.

 

ONE MILLION PEOPLE could easily identify me from the passport photograph I submitted with my passport application; but the EXAMINER – wielding the power of despotism – blocks the issue of my passport because the ‘size’ of the facial features displayed do not meet his ‘bureaucratic’ requirement. The face displayed must be to an exact certain size. Both height and width.

 

My application was submitted to and received by the HM Passport Office at 7:29 am on 26th October 2017. I have not received ‘one word’ from that office since then. The EXAMINER rejects the photo’s submitted; but neither he or she has not even had the courtesy to notify me, why?

 

IT IS THIS DESPOTISM PREVAILING IN THIS COUNTRY THAT RUINS SO MANY LIVES. TIN POT ADMINISTRATORS; WIELDING THE POWER OF MONARCHY AND THE ‘CROWN’; IN ORDER TO EXERT ‘POWER’; FOR POWERS’S SAKE.

 

THESE ARE THE BASTARDS TO BE FOUND IN EVERY ‘ADMINISTRATION OF AUTHORITY’ THROUGHOUT OUR LAND.

THESE ARE THE SAME BASTARDS THAT RUINED THE LIVES OF ‘EDWARD and WALLACE SIMPSON’; and PRINCESS MARGARET and PETER TOWNSEND.

 

THESE ARE THE SAME ‘BASTARDS’ THAT TODAY WIELD AND GRANT THE “ROYAL ASSENT”, IN THE NAME OF THE QUEEN.

THESE ARE THE SAME ‘BASTARDS’ THAT CONTROL MONARCHY; AND ALL OUR LIVES TODAY.

The DESPOTISM prevailing in Britain now,,,,,


When despotism has established itself for ages in a country, as in France, it is not in the person of the King only that it resides. It has the appearance of doing so in show, and in nominal authority; but it is not so in practise, and in fact. It has it’s standards everywhere. Every office and department has it’s despotism, founded upon custom and usage. Every place has it’s Bastille, and every Bastille it’s despot. The original hereditary despotism resident in the person of the King, divides and subdivides itself into a thousand shapes and forms, till at last the whole of it is acted by deputation. This was the case in France; and against this species of despotism, proceeding on through an endless labyrinth of office till the source of it is scarcely perceptible, there is no mode of redress. It strengthens itself by assuming the appearance of duty, and tyrannizes under the pretence of obeying.

 

-------------------------------------------

 

O! Ye that love mankind!  Ye that dare oppose not only tyranny but the tyrant, stand forth!  Every spot of the old world is overrun with oppression. Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia and Africa have long expelled her. Europe regards her as a stranger, and England hath given her warning to depart.

O! receive the fugitive and prepare in time an asylum for mankind!


 

Thomas Paine       “RIGHTS OF MAN”    (published in England 1791)

 

Saturday, November 4, 2017

SEXUAL ABUSE: BRITAIN IS LIKE A SEWER TODAY.


Wild Hysterical Allegations of Sexual Abuse

 

“He touched my knee”

 

This mere flippant allegation was sufficient to destroy a man’s life and destroy his, well earned, political career.

 

I am sick and tired of the power seeking feminist brigade always persuading women that they are not “sexual objects” and, persuading them to resist, the ‘unwanted’ sexual attentions of the male.

 

This politically correct brigade, and, everyone else in the country, merely needs to only to look at the population of the World; to see how ridiculous this assertion is. If, the female of the species was not, ‘sexual objects’; that, population of the World, could not exist.

 

From the very instant a human being is born to planet earth, with a vagina and not a penis, for the very ‘life’ of that being, until their demise, they will always be available for the ‘sexual attraction’ of the male.

 

When the male ‘touches a woman’ he pays her the compliment that she is ‘sexually attractive’ to him. He does her no harm. There has been no “Sexual Abuse”. However, were the male go further and aggressively force his intent to grope or fondle the woman intimately or, force ‘penetration’ when the woman says “No” - then that is both ‘sexual assault’ or ‘rape’.

 

But, the mere “touching of a woman” is not ‘sexual abuse’ at all. Because the woman only has to, ‘brush the hands away’, and, indicate or demonstrate, that the ‘touching’ was unwelcome: or possibly offensive to the woman.

 

NO HARM HAS BEEN DONE

 

The male merely exercises the ‘natural instinct’ inherent in his genes; to constantly explore or pursue sexual conquest.

 

In every instance of ‘touching’ the female always possesses the ‘right’ to say “No”. SHE MUST SIGNIFY OR DEMONSTRATE THAT INTENT. It is only the ‘politically correct’; for their own vested interests; that always and purposely exaggerates the mere, ‘touching’; as “Sexual Abuse” or, RAPE.

 

THE WILD ‘SEXUAL ABUSE’ HYSTERIA PREVAILING IN GREAT BRITAIN NOW; IS TURNING ‘LIFE’ IN THE NATION, AS THOUGH WE ALL LIVE IN A ROTTEN SEWER. IT GETS MORE ‘FILTHY’ EVERY DAY.

 

Gordon J Sheppard.   4.11.2017

 

Thursday, November 2, 2017

PARLIAMENT "QUESTION TIME"


 Question for the Prime Minister

Letter sent to Helen Hayes MP.

Dear Helen Hayes MP

In considering whether to ask the Prime Minister this question, or not. Please consider this:

 

I have no protection of LAW.

LAW today in my country is looked upon by the 'elite' of Monarchy, Judiciary, Government, and Parliament, as being only 'something' that the common people must obey. Whilst they, repeatedly flout and breach LAW all of the time.

HM Queen has not once honoured the "Original Contract" throughout all of the time she has occupied the throne; she has frequently granted the "Royal Assent" to corrupt LAW.

The Judiciary "Conspires to Pervert the Course of Justice" and deceive the British people by ruling that the "Supremacy of Parliament" is ABSOLUTE; thereby denying access to the courts to 'question' Parliament irrespective of any circumstance.

When, the very correct reading of the "Bill of Rights 1689"; actually verifies that anyone may 'question' Parliament in the Courts, if and when ever Parliament, "Prejudice the People".

Parliament today creates and passes 'LAW' in precisely the same way as HITLER and the NAZIS created their own law. By 'diktat' of the political parties and not by democratic consent.

 All, ACT's, MOTIONS, and BILLS created and passed in Parliament today, "UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE POLITICAL PARTY WHIPS" is, CORRUPT LAW. Because, the 'WHIPS' in Parliament, has no legality, whatsoever.

'LAW' TODAY IN GREAT BRITAIN IS NOT PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.

"LAW IS A MYTH WITHOUT THE 'CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE' THERE IS NO LAW"

The words of LORD HAILSHAM an ex Lord Chancellor of England.

 

Thus, it is the "People's consent to 'live by the rule of law' that is, "LAW"

Thereby, all that give their consent to live by law, are entitled to four specific rights:

A. They are entitle to 'participate' in the creation and framing of law.

B. The are entitled to 'equality' in law.

C. They are entitled to the 'protection' of law.

D. All LAW created must conform to, TRUTH, FREEDOM, JUSTICE, INTELLIGENCE, LOGIC, and RATIONALE.

Today in Great Britain all, 'A' to 'D' above, is denied.

Dear Helen Hayes, this is why this question must be asked of the Prime Minister. FYI. Whether you 'ask the question' or not; I shall publish this 'question' on all social media; in case you decide to decline.

Regards, and, with sincere respect, 

Gordonj
 

Question for Prime Minister

​Prime Minister please clarify for all Members of this Parliament, and for all the people of the country;  the true legal status of the SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT.

This is vitally important now; because, with all the complexities and the confusion created by BREXIT, and both Government and Parliament creating both ‘Laws’ and ‘Regulations’ that may affect the very lives of everyone in the country; it is imperative that the true ‘legality’ of the “SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT” is properly explained.

 My constituent, MR GORDON SHEPPARD of West Dulwich asserts. that the offices and political activities of the WHIPS in parliament has no legality at all.

He asserts and claims that he can prove by ‘precedent of law’, that the WHIPS instructing Members of Parliament on how they should or must vote in Parliament; actually creates the “Prejudice of the People”.

 MR SHEPPARD asserts, that this causes the “prejudice of the people” by overruling and supplanting, the Constituents right to ‘influence’   their Member of Parliament; and, he asserts; that this flouts and breaches the, “Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed”.

 Yet, MR SHEPPARD cannot test this ‘abuse’ by the imposition of the WHIPS in Parliament; he cannot test or ‘Question’ Parliament in, ‘LAW’ and, from within ‘LAW’; because the JUDICIARY refuse to allow any ‘questioning’ of Parliament in the Courts. The JUDICIARY ruling that the “SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT” is ABSOLUTE.

 


But, MR SHEPPARD asserts that by, ‘precedent of law’, he can prove that “Article 9” of the “BILL OF RIGHTS 1689”, is not ABSOLUTE; He asserts and claims that, “Article 9”, as well as, all the other “PREMISES” of that Bill, are wholly dependent upon the conditions set out in the paragraph of the Bill; known as, “THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED”.

 MR SHEPPARD claims that this paragraph, "The Said Rights Claimed" within this Bill; is the over-all ‘authority’ of the entire Bill. He asserts and claims this, because he says, that the very text of that paragraph in the Bill, verifies that, ‘within its text’, it specifically instructs Parliament; and, all reading that Bill; that it has the ‘authority’ over, “ALL THE ‘PREMISES”, of the Bill.

“THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED” specifically instructs Parliament; that in Parliament applying or ‘enacting’ any of the ‘PREMISES’ of the Bill; that nothing, “OUGHT PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE”.

Thus, PRIME MINISTER, it is imperative that you clarify the true status and legal validity of the “SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT”; right now.

IS THE “SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT” ABSOLUTE? Or not?

DO THE WHIPS IN PARLIAMENT HAVE TRUE LEGALITY? Yes of No?

 

 If ‘YES’ is applicable and asserted to either of the above; then both Government and Judiciary must produce the ‘evidence’ - the legal and lawful instrument - proving that this is so.