Where Britain stands today

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
Where Britain stands today
« on: June 05, 2014, 08:56:29 PM »
From the archives,written in January 2013

..........................and where do we stand now almost 18 months later?

Any social organisation that is large enough to require an administration needs a chain of command to ensure administrative coordination and social cohesion. At every level there must be a person that can be held responsible for the carrying out of the administrative responsibilities of that level.


Ultimately there has to be a person at the top of the chain who is responsible for the actions or non actions of those down the chain of command.  Nations are no exception. Western countries have political structures responsible for their national administrations. In the USA the person at the head of their national administration is their elected President. In the United Kingdom it is the people's elected Monarch who holds the top political office as it has been since the Bill of Rights 1689.


The claim that the Monarch is above politics, is as false as the claim that Parliament is sovereign. Two lies fabricated by the Fabian movement designed to deny understanding that the Monarch has full responsibility, by sworn obligation, for the governance of the nation - and secondly to create the impression that Parliament, despite its sworn subordination to the Monarch and the people, is lawfully over-arching and all powerful, even over and above the people, who constitutionally hold the supreme power in the land.


This deceitful ploy was simple enough to create and implicate as few people understand the subtle difference between national politics and party politics, the latter being totally subordinate to the former over which the Monarch presides.


According to the Coronation Oath, the Monarch as supreme Governor of the nation, swears to uphold our laws and customs. The government of the day is no more than a temporary delegated authority and as such, subordinate by oath of allegiance to the Monarch and the British people.


It is the sworn obligation of the Monarch, to ensure her subordinates fully uphold their oaths to uphold her in her sworn obligation to the people who elected her and placed their trust in her.


Past Monarchs have dutifully not allowed their delegated governments to ignore their oaths, or set aside the people's law and constitutional constraint. Queen Elizabeth II however has irresponsibly declined to exercise the powers vested in her by the people at the time of her coronation, to ensure that her governments upheld her in her oath and abided by constitutional constraint and the rule of law.


Claims that the Monarch cannot challenge unlawful procedures by democratically elected governments cannot be sustained, as our wise forebears, particularly those of the seventeenth century, knew only too well how duplicity, deceit and treachery can be created in both party and national politics and they made full provision to enable the Monarch to overcome such dangerous situations, not least by making the Monarch the supreme head of the people's armed forces, accountable by oath only to the Monarch and through the Monarch to the people.


Regardless of the people's choice of government, if that government chooses to act unlawfully, it is the sworn duty and obligation of the Monarch to remove it. To that end the Monarch has the power to terminate a Parliament at any time in its short life, at the Monarch's digression, as any such circumstance could jeopardise national security, the overall responsibility of which rests with the Monarch..


Such is the Queen's neglect of sworn, statutory and moral obligation one might well be suspicious that the Queen has been willingly acquiescent in the treason that has been committed.  Clearly Parliament has assumed power over the people and seemingly with the Queen's endorsement.


Parliament boasts that it has lawfully surrendered the peoples sovereignty to an alien foreign power and obviously with it, the supremacy of the people's Crown, being the symbol of their lawful sovereignty. This being so, as Parliament draws its legitimacy from the people's Crown, Parliament no longer has legitimacy and accordingly must be an unlawful assembly. By the same token, the office of the monarch no longer exists, as there can be no sovereign head of a nation which is no longer sovereign.


Clearly there is no point of having a monarch that refuses to enact and carry out the duties of that office, or indeed a government that pretends to govern on behalf of the people, but in reality, only act as an agent and administration for a foreign political power.  So, where do we go from here?


The nation state has now reached the stage where all its offices, from that of the Monarch down, are so corrupted we are on the brink of either total anarchy, or marshal law imposed by foreign intervention.


To those of us who knew this Kingdom before its leadership was placed in the hands of Elizabeth II it is obvious that she has led us to this perilous position, but even her removal would at this stage be of little use. We now have a substantial army of foreigners within our shores who have no understanding of what we believe to be civilised behaviour.


From my understanding of what happened during the last civil war to be fought in this country, that led to the drawing up of our Bill of Rights of 1689, it would seem sensible for everyone to start arming themselves and stocking up with supplies, for such events can escalate very quickly, and those foreigners we will have to face on our streets and doorsteps come from lands where civilised rules are unheard of, let alone such rules laid down by the Marques of Queensberry.


We do have police forces of course.


Always best to end with a joke. 





Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk