BREXIT – The Sheer chaos prevailing….

And, a possible remedy.

With all the chaos confusion and corruption taking place at this time in trying to resolve the BREXIT E.U. ‘Agreement’ problem, only three options are being proposed,

 

1.            To accept and agree, THERESA MAY’S final deal.

2.            To LEAVE the E.U. Without any agreement at all.

3.            To have a “Peoples Vote” in a second referendum.

 

These are the only options being proposed now. But, there is a 4^th and far better option available, that will resolve this problem,

 

4.            Test the LEGALITY of the 2016 Referendum ‘ballot paper’, in a Court of Law.

The ‘ballot paper’ was wholly unlawful because it failed to provide the voter with the full information required, in order to vote.

The ‘ballot paper’ provided only two boxes to ‘tick’ to either vote REMAIN or to LEAVE. It provided no other information at all.

Therefore, when the voter, voted to LEAVE; this only indicated, the ‘intent’ to LEAVE; It did not agree any ‘mandate’ for the ‘mechanism’ involved and required, for the actual LEAVING process.

Further, the ‘ballot paper’ failed to provide the voter, prior to voting; the information required; that when Great Britain signed up to join the E.U., it actually agreed and signed a  ‘TREATY’. Therefore, in now ‘intending’ to LEAVE the E.U.; that Britain would be required to activate and trigger  “Article 50” of the ‘TREATY’; and, then negotiate with the E.U; in order to LEAVE. Furthermore, if, Britain, on LEAVING the E.U., still intended to continue normal relations with the E.U. in respect to ‘trade’. Negotiations for that; could take as long as two years.

 

None of that information was conveyed to the voter, prior to their submission, of their vote. The ‘ballot paper’ was wholly corrupt in failing to provide that information.

 

THERE IS NOT AN HONEST COURT OF LAW ANYWHERE ON PLANET EARTH THAT COULD UPHOLD THE LEGALITY OF THAT ‘BALLOT PAPER’.

In consequence, when the Courts eventually and finally rule that the ‘ballot paper’, was and is, CORRUPT; the entire present BREXIT problem; will be resolved,

 

Merely, by relying on the ‘status quo’; REMAINING, in the E.U.

 

THERESA MAY AND THE ‘SEVENTEEN MILLION’ WHO WANTED TO ‘LEAVE’; WILL BE VERY DISAPPOINTED; AND THEY WILL NOT LIKE THAT; BUT, THE ‘PROMISES’ THAT THEY WERE GIVEN, IN THAT FALSE PROSPECTUS; WHEN THEY VOTED TO ‘LEAVE’; JUST COULD NOT BE DELIVERED.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

 

BREXIT

“LAW” ALONE

CAN RESOLVE THIS NOW.

 

1.          Test in ‘LAW’ the legal validity of the 2016 Referendum “Ballot Paper”. Which was, CORRUPT.

2.          HER MAJESTY, the QUEEN, now to do her duty and use the “Royal Prerogative” to order the immediate dissolution of Parliament.  

“The “wishes of the people” are in direct conflict with the actions of the legislators.”

The “Royal Prerogative” and, her duty complying with the "Original Contract", requires her to ACT.

3.          The Country faces the greatest peril since World War II; and both Government and Parliament are in absolute chaos.

4.          No one in the country knows precisely; what is going to happen, NEXT..

 

ONLY “LAW”

CAN RESOLVE THIS NOW

 

H M QUEEN FAILS TO CARRY OUT DUTY

BREXIT & THE NEGLIGENCE OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN…

 

In a democratic referendum held in the year 2016 deciding whether to LEAVE or REMAIN in the E.U., the declared peoples ‘vote’ of that referendum determined, that the ‘majority’ wanted to LEAVE.

 

THIS THEN WAS THE DECLARED 'WISHES OF THE PEOPLE'. DETERMINED BY THAT REFERENDUM VOTE.

 

The very instant that vote was declared, THERESA MAY, and her government immediately seized the right to arrange all negotiations with the E.U. in order to leave. She declared, “BREXIT IS BREXIT”     and took charge of everything in carrying out those negotiations.

 

This was wholly corrupt because the REFERENDUM was a DEMOCRATIC procedure; and therefore all or any ‘negotiations’ required to carry out the Peoples declared wishes to LEAVE the E.U.; ought to have been DEMOCRATIC as well. Thus, Parliament should have taken charge appointing an ‘all party’ BREXIT committee, to carry out those negotiations.

 

However, TERESA MAY CORRUPTLY SEIZED CONTROL.

She negotiated with the E.U.; and she has now produced to parliament, for approval, her final agreement approved by the E.U. for ‘ratification’ by Parliament. In a speech she made to Parliament she presented this ‘agreement’ for Parliament to approve; but, in the DEBATE that followed, virtually the majority of the Members of Parliament indicated that they would not support that, Agreement. They clearly indicated that when it came to the ‘VOTE’ they would not give assent to that, AGREEMENT.

 

Thus,

 

1.  The Peoples ‘wishes’ are to LEAVE. But,

2.  Parliament will not approve the LEAVING as negotiated.

3.  THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE ARE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE ACTIONS OF THE LEGISLATORS.

4.  THERE IS ONLY ONE REMEDY, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ‘REIGNING MONARCH’ TO INTERVENE.

 

NOTE: By ‘precedent of law’; every ‘REIGNING MONARCH’ sitting upon the English throne, is bound to honour and comply with the “Original Contract”, which requires, the ‘protection’ of all Subjects of the Crown. This ‘contract’ although unwritten, is nevertheless wholly entrenched in English law.

It was the “Breaking of this Contract” by KING JAMES II which provided the actual legal ‘instrument’ whereby the CONVENTION (parliament) of 1688, was able to remove him from the throne.

The CONVENTION charged KING JAMES II of “Breaking the Original Contract Betwixt King and People” and,

In a huge debate named the, “DEBATE AT LARGE” held in the ‘Painted Chamber’ of the House of Commons; held between both ‘Commons’ and ‘Lords’ they debated the words “ABDICATE” and “THE THRONE IS NOW VACANT”.

During that debate the ‘Speaker’ HENRY POWLE declared this,

 

“It is upon those on the throne that the People of England look to for their protection and to which Cause they owe the Allegiance of Subjects but there being none now to whom the People can look to for Regal protection and to which Cause they owe the Allegiance of Subjects the Commons conceive the throne is Vacant.”

 

In respect to the next King and the ‘line of succession’ the EARL OF CLARENDON declared this,

 

“The contract is as binding upon the Successor as well as it was on the Deposed if the Successor breaks the contract he too may be Deposed”.

 

The CONVENTION thereby resolved that KING JAMES II had indeed “Broken the Original Contract”; that he had failed to protect the People and their religion; and that he had ‘ABDICATED’ the throne. The throne was declared ‘VACANT’; and, PRINCE WILLIAM OF ORANGE, became King.

 

THE DUTY OF THE ‘REIGNING MONARCH’ SITTING UPON THE ENGLISH THRONE.

“ALLEGIANCE IS GIVEN TO THE LIEGE LORD FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE LEIGE LORD”

 

All English, “REIGNING MONARCHS” are thereby bound; to honour the “Original Contract” and, to provide protection, of all ‘Subjects' of the Crown.
In order to carry out this duty each King or Queen is provided with two ‘legal instruments’ to assist them in carrying out that role. These instruments are, “The Royal Assent” and the “Royal Prerogative”.

 

The, “ROYAL PREROGATIVE” provides the following options;

A.  The right to ‘praise’ Ministers of Government.

B.  The right to ‘warn’ Ministers of Government.

C.   The right to order the dissolution of parliament whenever the ‘wishes of the people’ are in direct conflict with the actions of the legislators, (Parliament”.

 

Here, in the current utter confusion and chaos in respect to BREXIT and, the sheer peril facing the country now; it can clearly be seen that the ‘wishes of the people’ are being overruled and flouted; by the actions of the legislators; Yet, ELIZABETH THE SECOND, has not yet ‘lifted a finger’ to intervene.

She just sits in her Palace enduring all the privileges and benefits of MONARCHY; YET SHE FAILS TO CARRY OUT HER ‘DUTY’, every day.

 

The, “PEOPLE”; even though being, FREEBORN HUMAN BEINGS, CITIZENS OF PLANET EARTH; they are wickedly classified, in law, as being mere “Subjects of the Crown”; and, they are held in ‘subjugation’, to give ‘Allegiance’ to each ‘Reigning Monarch’, for as long as a Monarch shall reign.

 

But, if MONARCHY fails to carry out its DUTY; then, the precedent of English LAW getting rid of KING JAMES II in 1688; must still be valid in LAW, today.

 ELIZABETH THE SECOND, FAILING TO DO HER DUTY, MUST BE KICKED 'OFF' THAT THRONE.

CONCLUSION

THE 'REIGNING MONARCH' TODAY FAILS TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTY. THERE IS NO PURPOSE OR RELEVANCE FOR MONARCHY AT ALL. PRESENT DAY MONARCHY IS ABSOLUTELY USELESS AND OF NO VALUE WHATSOEVER.

GINA MILLER & THE HIGH COURT & THE ARROGANCE OF THERESA MAY

BREXIT – GINA MILLER - & - THE HIGH COURT

 

GINA MILLER secured in the Courts that parliament would have the final say in approving or disapproving the final “E.U. Withdrawal Agreement” negotiated by government.

 

The government has now presented that final agreement to parliament, in a speech made by the Prime Minister, THERESA MAY.

 

Parliament then set the date for that debate and for when that VOTE should take place. But, in the debate in parliament following THERESA MAY’s speech; parliament overwhelmingly indicated that it would not approve that agreement.

 

THERESA MAY and her right-wing of government; then faced with the certainty that their negotiated ‘Agreement’ would not be approved by parliament; and, recognising that parliament, would undoubtedly refuse to pass that legislation; immediately stopped that debate and that, ‘meaningful vote’, from taking place. THERESA MAY now persistently refuses to ‘name and allocate’ a date, in parliament, when that debate and vote could be held.

 

MOST URGENTLY NOW; GINA MILLER MUST RETURN AGAIN TO THE COURTS, DEMANDING THAT THE COURTS IMMEDIATELY INSTRUCT THERESA MAY TO COMPLY WITH THE PREVIOUS ‘RULING’ OF THE COURTS’; “THAT PARLIAMENT MUST HAVE THE FINAL SAY”.

 

THEREFORE, THE COURT MUST URGENTLY INSTRUCT THERESA MAY TO ARRANGE, FOR THAT DEBATE AND VOTE TO TAKE PLACE IMMDIATELY.

IT IS FOR PARLIAMENT TO SET THAT DATE; NOT THE GOVERNMENT. THIS PREVIOUS HIGH COURT RULING OVERTURNS AND OVERRULES THE 'NORMAL' BUSINESS PROCEDURE OF PARLIAMENT. WHERE, THE 'MAJORITY' PARTY DETERMINES THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

 

THE COURTS MUST RULE ON THIS IMMEDIATELY, WITHOUT ANY DELAY.

 

BREXIT BALLOT PAPER

BREXIT: E.U. Referendum Ballot Paper…

 

To every request in parliament of Members of Parliament to the Government for either a new referendum or a ‘Peoples Vote’, THERESA MAY and her right-wing Members of the Tory party have always responded by saying this,

 

“Parliament gave the People a referendum to decide whether to remain or leave the E.U. and the results of that referendum determined that they wanted to leave, therefore every Member of Parliament must now accept that decision and honour that decision.”

 

The Prime Minister and all her right-wing Tory Members of Parliament, all say this so frequently, in reply to questions, that it is almost like a ‘religious mantra’ that they always rely upon.

 

Well, the very long term precedent criterion in General Elections, whereby the Majority vote ‘Wins’ the election and the Minority vote, in a spirit of friendship and democracy, accept that decision, Can only apply ‘lawfully’ if the ‘ballot paper’ was free of corruption; and, provided full and proper information.

In the event that the ‘ballot paper’ was deficient in failing to provide ‘full and proper’ information; whereby the voter could properly understand all  issues involved, prior to casting their vote; the ‘ballot paper’ would be corrupt; and, ‘legally’, the final vote result declared; would have no true validity at all.

 

In the case of the “2016 E.U. REFERENDUM” ballot paper, this was highly deficient in failing to provide that information,

 

1.  It provided for the voter only two options, two boxes to ‘tick’, to select “LEAVE” or “REMAIN”.

2.  It provided no other information at all.

 

The ballot paper was specifically designed in this way in order to deny or obfuscate the proper information that should have been provided; furthermore, in support of the “LEAVE” campaign, the following wicked lies were told,

 

Voting to “LEAVE” would provide that “£350.000 per week would be available to the National Health Service.

Trade with the rest of the World would be enhanced and trade with the E.U. would continue as normal.

 

The ballot paper, failed to advise,

 

A.  That in being a Member of the E.U. Great Britain had agreed to a “TREATY”; and had signed that TREATY.

B. For Great Britain to ‘LEAVE’ the E.U., it was necessary to, ‘Trigger Article 50 of that Treaty” and then negotiate with the E.U. all future relations with the E.U. Including, ‘Trade’.

C.  That, the negotiating process, could take as long as two years.

 

NONE OF THAT ‘important information’ WAS PROVIDED ON THAT BALLOT PAPER.

 

CONCLUSION

 

THE BALLOT PAPER WAS CORRUPT.

IT THEREFORE HAS NO LEGAL VALIDITY AT ALL.

THE DECLARED VOTING RESULT OF THE “2016 E.U. REFERENDUM” THEREFORE, CANNOT ‘LAWFULLY’ STAND.

 

THERE IS NO ‘HONEST COURT OF LAW’ ANYWHERE ON PLANET EARTH THAT COULD UPHOLD THE ‘LEGALITY’ OF THIS CORRUPT BALLOT PAPER.

 

THAT “BALLOT PAPER” MUST NOW BE TESTED IN LAW.

BREXIT - TORY CORRUPTION....

THE SHEER CORRUPTION, OF THE TORY PARTY

At 5:00 PM tonight, Wednesday 12^th of December, many Members of the Tory Party will cast their vote in a secret ballot, to give their support to THERESA MAY, as the Prime Minister; for just one more year.

 

Yet, in that “NO CONFIDENCE” vote they will wholly be aware that Parliament will not support her final Brexit Agreement legislation; Parliament has clearly indicated, that it will vote that 'Agreement', down. Thereby indicating that PARLIAMENT has no confidence WHATSOEVER, in THERESA MAY at all.

 

How then can these TORY Members of Parliament give their support to her, as the Prime Minister, responsible for that legislation?

There is only one answer to that; That is that TORIES don’t give a fuck about the peril and plight now facing the country; corruptly, they only care about the fucking TORY PARTY.

The People of the country now need to take very careful note of this; and, bear it fully in mind, at any future General Election.

GOVERNMENT CANNOT BE TRUSTED; AND NEITHER CAN YOU TRUST, ANY FUCKING TORY.

 

BREXIT – Question for the Attorney General.

 

Yesterday, (3.12.2018), the Attorney General, GEOFFREY COX MP, made a profound statement to parliament in which he said,

 

“I stand ready willing and able to answer any questions of law in respect to the “European Withdrawal Bill”

 

Here is my question,

 

Can the Attorney General produce the actual evidence verifying the true legal validity for the use in parliament of the, Political Party Whips?

 

I claim assert and contend that the “Political Party Whips” and their political party activities in parliament have no true legal validity at all.

When the WHIPS instruct elected Members of Parliament on how they must vote, this overrules and supplants all rightful influence that might have been placed upon those Members, by the Constituents.

This therefore causes the, “Prejudice of the People”.

Yet, “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE” is specifically proscribed by the ‘precedent of law’ set out in the,

“STATUTE IN FORCE/BILL OF RIGHTS 1689/THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED”

This paragraph within the Bill of Rights 1689 specifically instructs parliament; and all reading the Bill; that parliament may have its “SUPREMACY” afforded to parliament by “Article 9” of the Bill; or, parliament may ‘enact’ any of the other “PREMISES” of the Bill. But only on the conditions as determined by, “THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED” – Which specifically instructs parliament that nothing, “OUGHT PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE”.

 

The Attorney General cannot produce the evidence that somewhere in the history of parliament, parliament approved the use of the political party WHIPS in parliament,

Because the mere proposition could not even be ‘put’ to parliament for a vote; without causing the, “Prejudice of the People”, and removing the ‘protection’ of the People, provided by, “THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED”.

 

“THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED” therefore is one “Rule of Law” that is, “Written in Stone”.

It can never ever be amended or even abolished by parliament, without causing the, “PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE”

 

I THEREFORE, ASSERT, CLAIM, AND CONTEND; that as the "Political Party Whips" in parliament have no legal validity at all; the WHIPS even being in parliament must be UNLAWFUL.

It must then follow; that all the BREXIT "Withdrawal Bill" legislation passed by the WHIPS. Must be UNLAWFUL as well.