Just for clarity I wrote my bit about Magna Carta before reading this. I agree
with everything Albert has written below.My circulation was only speculation.
JohnT
From: albertburgess@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: annette-rose-smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; r.poulton1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
davebarnby@xxxxxxx; lincspatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; birkby370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
senorburrito@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; johntimbrell@xxxxxxxxxx; jennalouca@xxxxxxxxxxx;
jkelly8543@xxxxxxx; rogerarthur12@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: parliament
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 12:59:44 +0000
Please circulate
The
Origins Rights and Authority of Parliament
The Origins of parliament are shrouded in the midst of time,
we can only go back so far in time and know for certain how ancient people
governed them selves. However it seems sensible to assume the family unit was
governed by the will of the father of the family unit. Where several family
units lived together it is reasonable to assume that they would select one of
their number to run the small unit of family's working together for their
mutual benefit. Some times this leader would be leader not by choice but
because he was bigger and stronger than the others so he took what he wanted
and the rest served him. In a pride of lions the strongest male runs the pride
he is the one who fathers all the lion cubs born to the pride the lionesses
choosing to have the biggest and strongest lion to mate with.
Humans are no different Genghis Khan fought and defeated his
father and promptly had sex with his mother. The Norman French maintained the
practice when a couple on the Barons estate wanted to get married the Baron
claimed the right to sleep with the bride on her wedding night. This is the
rule might is right.
We know that the ancient people of these Islands
elected their Kings and the King who could rule on his own only rarely did so
preferring instead to discuss policy with the wise men of the Kingdom. I
believe it was common for women to be included in these councils. The Anglo
Saxon Kings called these meetings Witan which was simply a meeting of the
wisest men the King could find to help him govern.
The Norman Kings sought advice from their Barons it was our
early Norman
Kings who included the Knights and Burgesses in these meetings. At Runny Mede
the Common man was included in the meeting with King John which was a meeting
of the estates of England
the highest law giving body in the land with authority to fire and hire Kings.
The Estates of England comprise the Lords Spiritual ( the Bishops) the Lords
Temporal ( the Barons ) and the commonality of England ( as many of the freemen
of
England
as can attend ) The Bishops representing God the Barons as our natural leaders
and the people of England.
At Runny Mede the Barons were in full
armour and the common man was armed with weapons to suit his need King
John was left in no doubt if he did not agree to rule us according to our
ancient laws he would not leave the field alive. Magna Charta was not new law
but a restatement of our ancient law given to us by King Alfred and reissued as
the Charter of Liberties in 1100 by King Henry I.
King Edward I included the Knights and Burgesses as full
time members of Parliament in 1297 since when the common man in Parliament has
been on a power grab. A properly constituted Parliament consists of the House
of Commons who originate legislation, the House of Peers who look at this
legislation and send it back for amendment, reject it or accept it in
accordance with their collective conscience. If the House of Peers accepts it,
it goes before the King who will ask for amendments accept it or reject it in
accordance with his conscience. It is not until the King accepts it that it
becomes law.
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas William Beresford
1306-1326 ruled “there is no such thing as a bad law for if it is bad it is not
law”. Chief Justice Stonor of the Common Pleas 1329-1331 ruled “law is that
which is right”. Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke of the Kings Bench 1616-1628
ruled
“Parliament may pass a law which is beyond common right and reason is repugnant
or impossible to perform in which case the common law will intercede and strike
it down”. I would like you to remember these rulings of these Chief Justices it
will become clear later on.
Parliament was formed at first informally by the King
seeking advice from whichever wise men were available later it was put on a
more formal basis with the Witan and finally with Edward I in 1297 on its
finished form as it should be today. I said should be because from day one the
House of Commons has been on a power grab in 1420 in exchange for voting a tax
in they were granted the right to originate all legislation, in 1609 they wrote
to the House of Peers claiming to be the Knights Burgesses and Barons of the
high court of Parliament. The House of Peers correctly replied that they would
never accept them as Barons and without them they were no court at all. In 1667
the commons told the Peers they could not amend a money bill a ten year
argument followed when in 1677 the Peers for some reason not based on reason
agreed not to amend any money bills. In 1909 Asquith a Fabian put forward a
budget part of which gave the working man a pension. The Peers knowing what the
working man was earning knew the extra 3 pence in the £ tax imposed on what was
already being taken was more than the working man could afford, believing they
could not amend it they rejected the bill. Asquith told them he was putting a
bill forward to stop them rejecting a bill. The Peers said they would not pass
it, so Asquith said he would put 500 new Peers into the house and they would
vote for its abolition. The Peers gave way and passed the Parliament Act. King
Edward VII refused the assent on
the grounds it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects.
The King ordered Asquith to go to the country. Asquith and his ministers went
around the country
telling the people those bastard Peers on their big estates would not let the
working man have a pension. The Peers felt it was beneath them to go round the
country explaining their reasoning. Asquith was returned and King Edward VII in
his speech at the opening of Parliament said
when referring to the Parliament Act the
only point Parliament by removing the authority of the House of Peers to reject
a bill became constitutionally an unlawful assembly. Before the bill could be
presented to King Edward VII who
may well have refused the assent again he fell ill and died. I did write to the
police commissioner and say I would be interested in the post mortem results on
King Edward VII he did not reply.
On coming to the Throne King George V was told by a minister
he keeps all his prerogatives but may not use any of them unless he has the
backing of a minister. This of course means he has no prerogative powers. King
George V gave the assent to the 1911 Parliament Act or did he. According to a
report put out by the House of Commons library the Royal Assent has not been
granted in person by the Sovereign since 1854. King George V after a long reign
fell ill and was murdered by his Dr who gave him a massive over dose of drugs
so that they could make the morning edition of the times with the announcement
of his death. Ask yourselves who has the authority to kill the King. Queen Mary
his wife would never agree, Prince Edward might being the next in line and a
spoilt brat. But only a high ranking minister could pose the question Dr will
you murder the King for us. According to government the last time the Royal
assent was refused was by Queen Anne in 1707 over the Scottish Militia Act. But
that is a lie Queen Victoria
refused the assent to a bill on homosexuality because it mentioned Lesbians she
did not believe women would do these things to each other. The bill had to be
rewritten removing all reference to women. We have dealt with King Edwards’s
refusal of the assent.
Now I want you to remember those ancient rulings of our
Chief Justices. Parliament today say they are omnipotent they can do anything
they like they evidence this by the blue eyed baby rule. They say they can pass
a law saying all blue eyed baby boys born in June must be killed and they would
have to be killed. Chief Justice Stonor ruled law is that which is right. No
one in their right mind would say this law was right. Chief Justice Beresford
ruled there is no such thing as a bad law for if it is bad it is not law. No
one in their right mind would think this law was in any way good law it is bad
so it cannot be law. Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke ruled parliament may some
times pass a law which is repugnant against common right and reason or
impossible to perform in which case the common law will intercede and strike it
down. No one in their right mind would find this law anything but repugnant,
every one would find it was against common right and reason. And it would be
impossible to perform because when they came for your son you will fight to keep
him your family and friends and neighbours will fight with you soon the entire
country will be at open war with Parliament and Parliament will loose so it is
impossible to perform.
You have all heard about the new Bill of Rights what you may
not know is that it will have a clause written in it that by passing a bill
Parliament
can remove any or all of our normal rights and freedoms, they are creeping this
removal in because you are no longer to speak the evidence of your eyes for
example by saying Islam is an evil cult which encourages rape and murder. Oh
dear I wonder how many laws I have just broken. Parliament have also been
having what they refer to as an interesting discussion on whether by passing a
bill they could remove the rule of law. Now let us look at that. If they remove
the rule of law your 12 year old daughter or son could be dragged of the street
into Parliament and gang raped and it won’t be a crime. Your old mum can have
her door kicked in be beaten and gang raped murdered and all her property
stolen and it wont be a crime. This Ladies and Gentlemen is what the House of
Commons have in store for us. Why else would they want to disarm us, why else
would they dress our police in black and reduce the entry standards to employ
people who are prone to thuggery they are still only a very small number of
officers at the moment the bulk of our police are good. Look after yourselves
boys and girls. Albert
