[patriots] FW: 21st Anniversary of Treason charges explains Scottish crisis
- From: annette rose smith <annette-rose-smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ECG <ecg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 21:12:39 +0100
From: ashley.mote43@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: freenations@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Fw: 21st Anniversary of Treason charges explains Scottish crisis
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:54:38 +0100
PRESS RELEASE
21ST ANNIVERSARY OF THE MAASTRICHT TREASON
CHARGES
Embargo: 00.01 9th September
2014.
Ring 01668 214636
SEE THE VIDEO ON THE NEW FREE NATIONS WEBSITE www.freenations.net
1993 TREASON CHARGES PREDICTED TODAY’S CRISES IN
MASS IMMIGRATION, THE SCOTTISH CRISIS, THE EURO, PARLIAMENT’S POWERS, EU
TAXES AND REGULATION, CITIZENSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS
On 9th September 1993 Rodney Atkinson and the
late Norris McWhirter laid before the magistrates court in Hexham,
Northumberland under the process known as “Misprision of Treason” 7 counts of
treason against the British Constitution and people by two Ministers who had
signed the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. Some weeks later in Scotland Norris
McWhirter laid a further case. The Crown Prosecution Service took 4 months to
consider the charges but, headed by the political post of Attorney General (who
acted in contravention of the legal principle of non judex in re sua) the
CPS refused to address the specific charges and declared that the treason at
the
signing in 1992 was made legal by the passing of the European Communities
(Amendments) Act 1993. The treason of 1992 had been legalised!
But treason was committed in 1992 and that act
remains a crime since British law recognises it was the law at the time.
THE SCOTTISH REFERENDUM
The de facto overturning of the 1706 Union
with Scotland Act by the 1992 Treason and the surrender of UK self Government
by
Ministers on a daily basis since 1972 mean the contract with the Scots was
broken. The occupiers of Scotland including those who are not Scots at
all now vote to destroy the United Kingdom.
The 1993 Treason cases showed that 500m people
could move to and vote in any EU country’s national elections. The Government
denied this. But it is happening in the Scottish National
referendum.
So the aim of the treason committed at Maastricht
by British politicians was the destruction of the United Kingdom - now within
10
days of realisation.
The Crown Prerogative is the power of Her Majesty's
Government to act on the authority of the Queen and without the authority of
Parliament. It is impossible for the Government of the day to undermine the
constitution when signing treaties with other countries under Crown Prerogative
powers.
So no Treaty which contradicted the Act of
Settlement, the Coronations Oath Act, the Union with Scotland Act, the Treason
Acts, Constitutional Case Law (R v Thistlewood 1820) and Magna Carta and
confirmed the permanent superior power of European Union Law could justify the
use of undemocratic Crown Prerogative Powers.
The end results of our treason cases were
statements from the Crown Prosecution Service in England and the Lord Advocate
in Scotland. They refused to address the specific charges at all and both
countries declared that the treason at the signing in 1992 was made legal by
the
passing of the European Communities (Amendments) Act 1993.
The treason of 1992 had been legalised! But
treason was committed in 1992 and that act remains a crime since British law
recognises it was the law at the time. And since the 1993 Act could not
overturn the British Constitution that Act was nul and void.
The Cases therefore remain unanswered - because they
were unanswerable. But they remain a marker even today since they can be picked
up and used by a British people slowly awakening to the deceitful and covert
destruction of their democratic sovereignty on the altar of the European
State.
Case 1:
It is an offence under Section 1 of the Treason Act
1795 “within the realm or without…to devise…constraint of the person of our
sovereign…his heirs or successors.”
Article 8 of the Treaty of Maastricht which Her
Majesty the Queen becomes a citizen of the European Union and therefore
“subject
to the duties imposed thereby”, subject to being arraigned in her own courts
and
being taxed and thereby effectively deposed as the sovereign and placed
in a position of suzerainty under the power of the “European
Union”.
Case 2:
Whereas it is an offence under section 1 of the
Treason Act 1795 to engage in actions “tending to the overthrow of the laws,
government and happy constitution” Article 8 of the Maastricht Treaty says
“every person holding the nationality of a member state shall be a citizen of
the Union” with the right to move and reside freely and vote within the
territory” and “the question whether an individual possesses the nationality of
a member state shall be settled solely by each member state.”
So the British people and Parliament have no right
to determine the numbers or identity of non British nationals to whom other
European states can give residence rights and voting rights in the United
Kingdom.
Case 3:
Whereas it is an offence under the Act of Settlement
(1700) for any “person born out of the Kingdoms of England, Scotland or Ireland
or the Dominions thereunto…shall be capable to be…a Member of either House of
Parliament”
And whereas according to R v Thistlewood 1820 “to
destroy the constitution of the country” is an act of treason.
according to Article 8b of which “Every citizen of
the Union residing in a member state of which he is not a national shall have
the right to vote and stand as a candidate in the Member State in which he
resides.”
Case 4:
And whereas, according to the Act of Settlement 1700
S4 “The laws of England are the birthright of the people”
And whereas according to R v Thistlewood 1820 to
“destroy the Constitution” is an act of treason.
according to Article 8 the British people, without
their consent have been made the citizens of the European Union with duties
towards the same and the british people can be taxed directly by that European
Union without further process in the Westminster Parliament and according to
Article 171 of which the British State can be forced to pay a monetary penalty
to the European Union.
CASE 5.
Whereas, in accordance with the Coronation Oath Act,
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II swore at Her Coronation in 1953 that she would
govern Her subjects “according to their laws”.
And whereas it is an offence under Section 1 of the
Treason Act 1795 “within the realm or without…to devise…constraint of the
person
of our sovereign…his heirs or successors”
The Treaty extended the powers of the European
Commission, the European Court of Justice and the European Parliament in the
new
“European Union” to make and enforce in the United Kingdom laws which do not
originate in the Westminster Parliament. And that this loss of democratic
rights
was without the express consent of the British people.
CASE 6.
Whereas it was established in 1932 that “No
Parliament may bind its successors” (Vauxhall Estates v Liverpool Corporation
IKB 733)
And whereas according to R v Thistlewood 1820 to
destroy the constitution is an act of treason.
According to Article Q the Maastricht Treaty “is
concluded for an unlimited period” and from which there was no right of nor
mechanism for secession
CASE 7.
Whereas it is established by a statute in force, the
Magna Carta (Chapter 29) that:
“No freeman may be…disseised…of his
liberties
or free customs…nor will we not pass upon him
but by the law of
the land.”
The “Treaty of European Union”…etc..which disseises
all free men of their liberties and free customs under the law of this land by
subjugating their Government to the extension of the powers of the European
Commission, Court and parliament (in which latter the United Kingdom members
form a minority of 87 of 567 voting members).
Under Article 192 of the integrated treaty our free
men are open to be taxed without further process of the United Kingdom
Parliament
Under Article 8 of the Treaty free men are required
to become citizens of the European Union “subject to the duties imposed
thereby.”
CASE 8 (IN SCOTLAND).
Whereas it is an offence per S1 of the Treason Act
1795:
“to enter into measures tending to the overthrow of
the laws, government and happy constitution of the United Kingdom”
and whereas to destroy the constitution per R v
Thistlewood 1820 is an act of treason.
This treaty is contrary to and inconsistent with the
Union of Scotland Act 1706 whereby the people of the United Kingdom be
represented by the one and the same Parliament and none other and per Article
XVIII that no alteration be made in laws which diminish the rights of
Scots
Under the treaty, the rule of a Parliament other
than that of the Parliament of the United Kingdom is established whereunder,
subjects within Scotland become subject to laws made in an assembly in which
their representatives form a minority seven fold more slender than in the
parliament of the United Kingdom established by the Act of Union.
Therefore the said Rt Hon Douglas Hurd and the said
Rt Hon. the Hon Francis Maude are guilty of treason.
The book Treason at Maastricht was published in
1994 and remains in print, published in physical form by Compuprint Publishing
and as an ebook by Amazon.
Rodney Atkinson can be contacted on 01668
214636
His website www.freenations.net contains his
internationally praised work and testimonials from Heads of State, Cabinet
Ministers, politicians, academics and journalists.
A video by Rodney Atkinson filmed partly at
Runnymede, will appear on the freenations website in the next 48
hours.
Other related posts:
