USE 'LAW' TO DESTROY AND SMASH THE MYTH OF BREXIT.

USE ‘LAW’ TO DESTROY THE MYTH OF BREXIT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

 

With THERESA MAY heavily losing her “E.U. Withdrawal Deal” in the ‘meaningful vote’ by 230 votes against her and with 118 Members of her own TORY political party also voting against her; and, with her also narrow winning of the ‘no confidence’ motion tabled by JEREMY CORBYN, by only 19 votes, out of the total of 611 Members of parliament participating in that vote. THERESA MAY has hardly any ‘mandate’ to govern at all.

Yet, in sheer blatant arrogance the very instant the ‘no confidence’ vote was declared; she then stood at the despatch box ‘lecturing’ parliament that the, “People’s decision re BREXIT declared in Referendum of 2016”, must be honoured by all the Members of Parliament.

 

This now requires the ‘destruction’ of the myth of BREXIT once and for all. It is now IMPERATIVE that the legal validity of BREXIT be tested in, ‘LAW’

PARLIAMENT MUST NOW CALL UPON THE JUDGES OF THE ‘SUPREME COURT’ TO VERIFY THE ‘LEGALITY’ OR THE ‘ILLEGALITY’ OF BREXIT; ONCE AND FOR ALL.

 

PARLIAMENT MUST SUBMIT TO THE JUDGES OF THE ‘SUPREME COURT’ THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS FOR THEM TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY ARE ‘LAWFUL’ OR NOT.

 

1. The ‘Ballot Paper’ provided for the voters in the Referendum of 2016.

2. The ‘Triggering of Article 50’ Statute; passed by parliament, under the influence of the political party Whips.

3. The paragraph of the ‘Bill of Rights 1689’ known as, “The Said Rights Claimed”.

The ‘SUPREME COURT to decide whether they are all, lawful or not.

 

A.The ‘Ballot Paper’ – However, it is vitally important and imperative that the ‘SUPREME COURT’ Judges, test and examine the ‘Ballot Paper’; ‘as-it-is’; as it exists; and, not as the VOTER, may have been told, or, what they believed it to be. Or, anyone, who might have ‘assumed’ or ‘speculated’ what it was ‘meant’ to be. The Judges must examine and test that ‘paper’ for the legality; without any other outside ‘vested interests’ at all.
    CONTENTION: When the 'voter' ticked the box 'LEAVE', all they actually voted for was only the 'INTENTION' to LEAVE the E.U.; But, they didn't vote for anything required, that had to happen next; nor did they vote to provide any MANDATE for any actual procedure required, in order to actually LEAVE the E.U.

B. The Judges, however, must take into account, the wicked influences that were bombarded upon the VOTER in order to persuade them to vote, ‘LEAVE’. The wicked ‘LEAVE CAMPAIGN’ lies that were told; IN ORDER TO INFLUENCE THAT VOTE. Listed as follows:

1. Trade and travel will continue to and from Europe as ‘normal’; if the People voted to LEAVE.

2. Trade with the rest of the WORLD would be enhanced. Yet, not providing one import or export order, to prove.

3. £350,000 per week would no longer have to be paid to the E.U.; SO THAT MONEY, WOULD BE AVAILABLE; for the National Health Service.

4. Hordes of Romanians and Turks are just waiting as ‘immigrants’ to come to the U.K. to get our ‘housing’ and ‘benefits’.

5. In the few weeks leading up to the actual Referendum date, and during throughout that date, the right-wing Press and Media mounted and kept up a vicious ‘anti-immigrant’ campaign. Newspapers and TV News was inundated with scare stories about ‘immigration’ – and ‘immigrants’ flooding the country. This, ‘anti-immigrant’ wild hysteria promoted by Media; proved to be the most successful for the ‘objectives’; of the LEAVE CAMPAIGN.

6. This was wholly established; because, just after the ‘vote’ of the Referendum was declared; TV camera reporters asked the People in the streets, why they had voted to LEAVE the E.U. They, repeatedly proclaimed on live TV, that they voted to LEAVE to get rid of the immigrants. This attitude was most prevalent in Hull, Grimsby and Dover; but especially so in READING. When the People were asked this question in READING; they screamed and shouted the response; “To get rid of the bloody Poles in Reading. Reading is full of polish people getting our free housing and benefits. We have just visited a Polish shop and we told the owner we voted LEAVE so we could send him back to where he came from.”

7. That was the wicked ‘anti-immigrant’ tactic that the LEAVE CAMPAIGN used.

 

C.  The “Triggering of Article 50” Statute.

1. This debate and vote in Parliament was finally passed by parliament ‘under the influence’ of the political party Whips.

2. CONTENTION: The Whips political activities in Parliament are wholly unlawful. In instructing ‘elected’ Members of Parliament on how the should or must vote; this overrules and supplants all rightful influence placed upon those Members of Parliament; by the Constituents. This therefore causes the, “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE”. Yet, “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE” is wholly proscribed by the, “Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/ in the paragraph,” The Said Rights Claimed”. Thus, verifying that the Whips in parliament; has no LEGALITY at all.

 

D.                       The document, the, “Bill of Rights 1689” and the paragraph, “The Said Rights Claimed”

1. The SUPREME COURT must rule whether the paragraph “The Said Rights Claimed” has true LEGALITY or not.

2. CONTENTION: This ‘paragraph’ inserted into the “Bill of Rights 1689” by the ‘Rights Committee’ of the CONVENTION (Parliament) of 1688; was specifically created by that Committee with the precise intention of ‘protecting the people’ against any mis-interpretation or misuse of the Bill. The sole importance of the Bill was to protect parliament from all interference of a King. It was never ever intended to protect parliament, from the People. Thus, anyone and everyone is entitled to ‘question’ parliament in the Courts, if and whenever, parliament, “PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE”.

3. CONTENTION: Therefore, the Judges of the “Supreme Court” must decide if their present ruling that “Article 9” is, ABSOLUTE; and, thereby, parliament may not be ‘questioned’ in the Courts, under any circumstance; still has the ‘authority’ and the ‘legality’ to overrule, “The Said Rights Claimed”. Which, specifically contradicts that present ruling of the JUDICIARY, that parliament – ‘under no circumstances’ – may not be ‘questioned’ in the Courts. And, determines that, "Article 9", is not, ABSOLUTE.

4. CONTENTION: This is vital. Because if, “The Said Rights Claimed” does have true LEGALITY; the “Triggering of Article 50” passed by parliament under the influence of the Whips; wholly establishes that all the BREXIT legislation passed and negotiated with the E.U. by government; will have no LEGALITY at all.
   Therefore, the ‘myth’ of BREXIT is destroyed. Resulting, in the country, having to REMAIN in the E.U.; UNTIL SUCH TIME; Britain, still wanting to LEAVE the E.U., sets up a new referendum; and re-triggers ‘Article 50’ all over again.

5. CONTENTION: If the “Supreme Court” rules that, “The Said Rights Claimed” does have true LEGALITY; and, overrules “Article 9” and the “Supremacy” of parliament; if and whenever parliament, “Prejudice the People”; this would mean that the Government could no longer rely on the Whips; in order to force through parliament the corrupt Acts Motions and Bills, that both Government and parliament, do now. This will establish a TRUE DEMOCRACY; replacing the present, Totalitarian Regime.

NOTE: "The Said RIghts Claimed" is the over all 'authority' of the "BILL OF RIGHTS 1689"; including the "SUPREMACY" of parliament; for it states within its text that it is the 'superior authority' over all the "PREMISES" of the Bill. This means, everything written in the Bill.

 

“LAW”

CAN RESOLVE ALL.

Read my book "DEMOCRACY"
A guide for the British on how to properly participate. Two formats available: Kindle down-load £1.19. Paperback £3.50.
Get it here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00KGZT5DW