Since 1714 the House of Commons has been on a power grab

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
Since 1714 the House of Commons has been on a power grab
« on: September 20, 2015, 10:02:16 PM »

Albert Burgess

16 September at 18:02 ·


In the light of Corbyn not singing the national anthem I think it is timely to remind you why he feels this is beneath him, and to all those who call Her Majesty a fraud which she most definitely not she is England's legitimate Queen, or a benefits scrounger which she most definitely not. She donates the profits from the Crown estates her personnel money to be spent as she wishes to the exchequer, Of just why she feels powerless to influence government.
 The Queen
 What exactly is her job

Queen Elizabeth II is supreme governor of England, all her other titles supremacies prerogatives and superiorities stem from the fact she is first and foremost the Queen of England.

Constitutionally the sovereign is head of state and has the final say on all laws passed by parliament, the sovereign has the absolute right to accept a bill passed by both houses or to reject or return the bill for amendment. The sovereign is the fount of all law in this Kingdom. There is no other Kingdom or person on the face of this planet to whom the Kings of England take 2nd place. Not now not ever.

Or at least that is the constitutional position, the facts as they are today are very different, since 1714 the House of Commons has been on a power grab, they claim as the elected house sovereignty lies with them and not the Crown.
 THEY ARE WRONG. Sovereignty lies as it always had with the Crown. This was confirmed after a vote in the house after King George III had fought a 20 year running fight with the commons as to who was sovereign him as King or the commons as the elected house, the King won the vote and was confirmed as a fully sovereign King by the House of Commons who withdrew their claim to be sovereign. Indeed any other result would have hanged them all for high treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act.

We are told by parliament that the last time a bill was rejected by the sovereign was in 1707 when Queen Anne rejected the Scottish Militia Act. This is far from the truth Queen Victoria refused a bill on homosexuality because it contained references to lesbians on the grounds she did not believe women could engage in such activity, the bill had to be rewritten with all reference to lesbianism removed before it received the assent. King Edward VII refused what became the 1911 Parliament Act because it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects.

Since 1960 the Royal Assent has been granted by a committee of 5 Barons appointed by the government of the day to give what has become known as the automatic assent.

How did we reach this sorry state?
 It started a long time ago in 1609 when the House of Commons first tried it on when they wrote to the House of Lords claiming to be the Knights, Burgess's, and Barons of the High Court of Parliament. The House of Lords replied saying they would never accept the commons as Barons and without them they were no court.

Next in 1667 the House of Commons told the House of Lords they could not amend a money bill a ten year argument between both house ensued until in 1677 the House of Lords agreed not to amend any money bills, this was the start of the problems we have today.

In 1714 Queen Anne died and King George I came to the Crown he spoke no English and so unlike all previous Kings and Queens he did not attend parliament or cabinet meetings so the government of the day in the commons were left to do as they liked. King George II spent his entire reign complaining that his ministers were Kings in his Kingdom and he was discouraged from attending parliament or cabinet meetings, we know that King George III fought back and in part reversed that trend. On the 8th March 1784 a vote was taken in Parliament and the King won the vote, so Queen Elizabeth II is the fully sovereign Queen of England.

We have dealt with Queen Victoria and King Edward VII. When King George V came to the Throne he was told by a government minister that he kept all his prerogatives but could not use any of them unless he had the backing of a government minister, when the King accepted this it was the final nail in the coffin of England. At the same time Asquith put through the 1911 Parliament Act which purported to remove from the House of Lords their ability to reject a bill, so we now have a situation where Asquith a Fabian prime minister had usurped the Royal Prerogative a clear act of high treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act and a clear act of the subversion of the constitutional arrangements of Parliament with the 1911 Parliament Act a clear case of high Treason against the Constitutional arrangements of Parliament at English Common Law. As was the 1999 House of Lords Act which removed the hereditary Peers from their rightful place in Parliament. Every Parliament since 1911 has been an unlawful assembly and all laws passed by it are void under English Common Law.

This is why our work of pursuing the police into prosecuting those who purport to be government ministers over the last 40 years for high treason is so important to us and our children and their children add infinitem.

Our object to get England back under the rule of English Common and Constitutional Law.

Our means the bringing to justice those traitors in the Palace of Westminster past and present.

Our intention to hand England back to Queen Elizabeth II and to see she is educated into the English Constitutional and Common Law.

To reconstitute Parliament as our forefathers intended it to be with all its checks and balances in place for our protection.

To reject all foreign interference in England to dump the EU and cease all payments to the EU. To stop all foreign aid at least until we can afford to give money away, and rebuild our infrastructure and armed forces.

To redefine the roll of our police from an army of occupation back to our traditional English bobby. We do this by going back to a tradition uniform and loosing the cs sprays and tazars which are turning our police into thugs, who would rather beat the common man to a pulp than arrest the real criminals in parliament and banking. It will be a priority for our police to round up all illegal immigrants and foreign criminals who will have British nationality removed from them prior to them being deported, this will include anyone who threatens our national security or the safety of our children through the rape of our children.

This is a Christian Kingdom and only Christianity will be taught in any of our schools as religious education, other faiths can be taught but as a geography lesson whilst learning about foreign countries, The teachings of Islam particularly in their treatment of women is alien to our entire belief structure and will not be allowed. To this end all equality and human rights laws will be declared void as English law already gives more than enough protections for the individual. Mosques which are breeding grounds for terrorist activity in a number of cases will be banned as a serious threat to our internal security.
 The Queens law and only the Queens law will be permitted in this Kingdom Sharia law is alien to our religion and culture and will be outlawed and any use of Sharia law by a British National will be a treason against the English common and Constitutional law, and will be prosecuted according to law.


Phillip Townley -Where did the Royal family get all there money  from ?

16 September at 18:12 · Like

Albert Burgess - When the first Kings were elected the people decide the King should have the trappings of Kingship to set him above his subjects, so our ancestors gave him vast estates and money so he was visibly superior. William I claimed the entire country as his as did those who followed him, but after four Norman French Kings the line went back to Anglo Saxon Kings and the system of the Kings wealth reverted to that supplied by the people.

19 hrs · Like

Phil Inniss It could be argued Albert Burgess, that the Queen is not legitimate, due to the settlement Act 1701. If you can get past that, then you are correct.

12 hrs · Like

James Isaac - Why is the Queen handing over our sovereignty ? You say it is the house of commons but I feel if the Queen disagreed with the house of commons then the Military would have to defend her wishes and the house of commons would become irrelevant ! There would be no civil war because the Queen is who the people should be looking to ?

10 hrs · Like · 1

Scott Taylor - Once again Spot on Albert . she is the head of state Regardless of what anyone says or believes today even if she was not the true heir she is now She was duped from the word go not taught constitutional law and one or two other things . Albert is as always 100% Correct .

8 hrs · Like

Kernzy Arkadian - she is getting 40 million this year, all taxed from poor people.
no real head of state would do this. no decent person would either.
a Nazi would, though.

4 hrs · Like

Sonia Finch - I don't see monarchies in our future or politics. It's all so corrupt and has to go. People don't need government. And money is a con.

3 hrs · Like

Kernzy Arkadian - and the richest woman in the world is???? and money is the root of all "what"??

3 hrs · Like
Annette Rose Smith - Cameron wants to scrap the Royal Prerogative

Just now · Like

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

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk