show/hide profile info
Register to take part
email

21ST ANNIVERSARY OF THE MAASTRICHT TREASON CHARGES

  • 0 Replies
  • 1152 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 3562
  • +75/-0
21ST ANNIVERSARY OF THE MAASTRICHT TREASON CHARGES
« on: September 10, 2014, 10:14:51 PM »



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.



email
 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)



COMODO SECURE

Powered by EzPortal
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 
Comodo SSL