TAX RISES WILL JUST BE SQUANDERED ON ARMIES OF PARASITES
CLASS WAR: Is waged by Gordon Brown
Thursday September 3,2009
By Leo McKinstry
LIKE an alcoholic hooked on the bottle, Gordon Brown is addicted to grabbing our cash.
On his very first day back at work after his summer holiday, he warned that further taxes rises are on the way for Middle england.
To pay for soaring public debt, he said, “tough and difficult choices” will have to be made, which means that an ever larger number of Britons will soon be forced to hand over more than half of their income to Labour’s authoritar- ian regime.
This is Brown’s default mechanism. An instinctive control freak, he has built his whole political philosophy on the expansion of State power and the seizure of private earnings.
The gloomy Scot is now pursuing a strategy of un diluted, dogmatic socialism. State- organised larceny is dressed up as fairness, vicious class war as a public duty.
Though he likes to pose as a well- read intellectual, Brown has learnt absolutely nothing from history. in every nation on earth where socialism has been tried, it has resulted in economic catastrophe and State oppres- sion.
Winston Churchill once wrote that “socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy,” a judgement borne out called the Laffer Curve, named after the American Arthur Laf- fer, by which increasing rates of taxation actually result in lower tax revenues because the affluent move elsewhere or use complex accounting to avoid payments, while overall economic activity declines.
Alternatively, tax cuts can stimulate the economy, enhancing revenues.
The greatest injustice of wealth redistribution exists in moral terms. The idea of a Robin-Hood style transfer of cash from the rich to the poor is mere childish socialist propaganda.
What really happens is that ordinary, hard-working, tax-paying Britons are punished for their productivity,
forced to hand over an ever larger part of their earnings to subsidise two armies of para- sites who are systematically wrecking our country.
The first of these groups is the huge nexus of over-paid bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers, quango managers and
consultants that clog up the public sector. Their number includes the greedy barristers in the £2billion-a-year legal aid system, the useless pen push- ers in the £2.2billion Regional
Development Agencies and the diversity neurotics in the £70million equalities and Human Rights Commission.
Only recently, the Government announced a typical addition to their spendthrift ranks by creating a new post of Director of Digital engagement on £160,000 a year.
These subsidised officials have dismally failed to meet genuine public needs, such as protecting us from crime, educating our children properly, or providing clean hospitals, yet we are compelled – on pain of imprisonment – to underwrite their bullying determination to impose their ideological agenda on us, whether it be indulging in finger-wagging lectures about multi-culturalism, or fining us for putting out our rubbish on the wrong day.
The other group of parasites is the growing horde of spong- ers who exploit the feckless generosity of the £193billion-a- year benefits system.
When Lord Beveridge announced the creation of the welfare state in 1942, he promised that it would not provide “some-thing for nothing” but that is precisely what it does. Those who receive the most in hand- outs, like teenage single mothers, have contributed the least.
The system provides per- verse incentives to irresponsibility. Under Labour, we now have six million living on benefits, while 60 per cent of council tenants pay no rent.
This epic laxity also acts as a magnet for immigrants who, contrary to socialist propaganda, freeload off the British taxpayer.
It is a moral outrage that Britons in work have to fork out for the housing benefits of Afghan single mothers or the legal aid of Somalian asylum seekers.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive,” wrote CS Lewis. That is exactly what we are now sliding towards under Brown
http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/124731
MAKE NO MISTAKE WHAT FABIANS ARE UPTO!!
NOBODY IN POLITICS OR MEDIA IS GOING TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH!!
Blair has been Chairman, or in politically correct terms ‘Chair’ of the Fabian Society. He unveiled George Bernard Shaw’s ‘Fabian Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing’ stained glass window at the London School of Economics in 2007. But what is the true nature of the Fabian Society? It’s image is that of a socialist ‘think tank’, but its influence worldwide since 1884 has been enormous. In his paper “Communist” Councils in New Zealand John Christian describes the Fabian Society thus — “a mixture” of Fascism, Nazism, Marxism and Communism all bundled together. However, it is much more deadly because it is much more clever and subtle. The only difference between Fabian Socialism and Communism is that Communists take your house by directly sending in the “secret police” to knock your front door down ? Fabian Socialists do it much more subtly and cleverly ? by “gradually” taking your individual rights away, by “gradually” increasing property taxes and rates, and finally, when you can’t pay them, they send in their regional “council tax inspectors” to take your house away ? but the end result is the same’. It has long been a Fabian aim to incrementally downgrade the Monarchy of Great Britain but they are too subtle to overtly push for abolition. Their approach is to promote ‘debate’ about the necessity for ‘modernisation’ of the Monarchy and that it should be operated more economically etc. They always attempt to change the climate of opinion as a prerequisite to the slow, incremental achievement their aims. This is achieved by operation of the Hegelian Dialectic, the use of which was perfected by Fabian co-founders George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. It is usual to find Fabians on both sides of a discussion, however their debates are carefully managed. What Fabians never mention is the Constitutional role of the Monarch. The constitutional settlement in this country, and in the others in which the Queen is Sovereign has evolved after centuries of struggle. The agreement reached is that we the people entrust the power to govern us to our Sovereign, who in turn promises to govern us according to our laws and customs. If the Sovereign’s role could be incrementally diminished and finally eliminated, the way would be open for powerful interests to corrupt our government virtually at will.
http://eurorealistnewsletter.blogspot.com/2008/10/elizabeth-becketts-submission-august.html
YOU’VE SURELY NOTICED THE TURMOIL IN THE FINANCIAL MARKETS- YOU SURELY KNOW BANKERS= FABIANS-THE ROTHSCHILD VARIETY- YOU SURELY UNDERSTAND THE SO CALLED WORKING MANS LABOUR PARTY-ARE FABIANS TOO?
BOTH MILIBANDS-MANDY-BALL-STRAW-BROWN-DARLING- McSHANE- HARMAN-JOHNSON-PRESCOTT ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC–MARXIST/COMMUNISTS’ WITH NO X INVOLVED!!
TOO SCARED TO FACE THE TRUTH——AFRAID THAT ACTION IS REQUIRED—WELL- KEEP WAITING- THEIR MOTTO – WHEN WE STRIKE-WE STRIKE HARD–DOESN’T TEND TO LEAVE THE IMPRESSION THEY ARE ANY DIFFERENT TO OTHER SOCIALIST MADMEN–HITLER-STALIN-LENNIN-A LONG LIST OF THE MASS KILLERS!!!
EXACTLY WHAT WE SEE FABIANS ACROSS THE GLOBE ACHIEVING…
The nature of Fabianism might best be illustrated by prominent Fabians themselves. On the 19th November 1937 the Fabian Nicholas Murray Butler addressed a banquet in London with the words, “Communism is the instrument with which the financial world can topple national governments and then erect a world government with a world police and world money”.
ASK YOURSELF- WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT ORDER A MEDIA BLACKOUT ON THE STORY OF ELIZABETH BECKETT – IF NOT FOR THE FACT- SHE WAS IN THE RIGHT- SHE KNEW AND ACCUSED THE FABIAN GOVERNMENT OF TREASON TREACHERY AND SEDITION!
HOW’S THAT FOR A FREE PRESS-FREE TV ETC?
THATS’ WHAT TOTALITARIAN STATES DO- NEWS BLACKOUTS—WHAT ELSE DO THE SHYSTERS HIDE FROM YOU!
THEIR POPULATION STATS ARE LIES’–IMMIGRATION STATS ARE LIES-CONFIRMED BY AN EX HOME OFFICE WORKER OF TEN YEARS…………….
February 09, 2009
As an example of her long fight for the restoration of the Sovereignty of the British people and this nation’s restored independence AND in recognition of the sturdy fight she waged for her fellow countrymen and women, I reproduce below a letter she sent to Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls dated 10th October last year which confronts recent constitutional outrages not least in the matter of the banks! Please circulate this as widely as possible in tribute to this fantastic Lady.
Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls
From Elizabeth Hibbert Beckett 10 October 2008
Dear Sir Anthony – your Lordship
I write to you in your position as Master of the Rolls and in view of your article on Magna Carta in The Times.
Churchill, writing on Magna Carta, said, that there will come a time when government, inflated with power, will try to overrule it, but it will come into use again.
I write with deep and serious concern about the present actions by government on using taxpayers money for their debts, apparently due to their encouragement of hysteria since there is “plenty of money around” (said by speakers on Today and Newsnight).
- The safeguards that need immediate action are:
a) that the debt should be made under the Nordic system
b) that it should be safeguarded as belonging legally to the Taxpayers NOT the Government.
b) a national government of convention should hold the fort. (The Queen was unfortunately taught about the constitution by Sir Henry Martin who became a Fabian in 1921. She has apparently not grasped the significance of her position and her Coronation Oath and imagines that she is subordinate to her ministers.)
c) I consider that as Master of the Rolls in this terrible time it must be for you to try to disabuse her of this and hold chapter 61 of Magna Carta to her notice. (Various people have suggested Princess Anne as Queen in her place since Prince Charles has not grasped the Christian importance of our constitution in Magna Carta and throughout our history – our early Christianity, starting from c. AD 50, has been central to wars from without and within against ‘this dear land’; Magna Carta as a defence against William of Normandy’s laws. Llanfranc was the imposed archbishop of Canterbury and the invasion was inspired by Papal direction.
d) I write to you since Lord Faulkner acted unconstitutionally in putting before Parliament that the Royal Prerogative belonged to himself and the Prime Minister in the Constitution Reform Act of 2005. You will know Sir Edward Coke’s clear description that the prerogative could not be taken from the monarch – even by act of Parliament, agreed by Halsbury.
a) I have laid Information with the court lawyer at Newcastle, Mr. Brown, that by making the Queen sign the Lisbon Constitution, Mr. Gordon Brown, acted treasonably against various Acts, his own Oath of Allegiance, and his Privy Councillor Oath. (This perjury should legally remove him from Parliament.)
b) With the help of a friend, a retired policeman, I e-mailed the Speaker of the House of Commons that by passing as law the Bradford & Bingley takeover, being called ‘nationalisation’ by Statutory Instrument without mention of the name of the monarch Mr. Brown and Mr. Darling acted unlawfully and should not be allowed to take up their seats in the Commons. I quoted the basis of this illegality as the 1661 Praemunire in which the punishment of a Praemunire is outlawry, the loss of property and land and possibly death.
Harold Wilson repealed Praemunire which goes back to 1392. But since when he did this it would have been in defiance of the 1795 Treasonable and seditious practices act para 2, 36 Geo III c.7, his oath of allegiance and his Privy Council oath, it was not lawful. And this valuable act of George III was made permanent in 1807, 1817 and 1848, so was given strength and longevity even against Mr. Blair’s endeavour to repeal it in the Criminal Justice Act 1998.
b) VAT which leans very heavily on small businesses – or at least Mrs. Thatcher’s VAT rebate. It is merciless, politically motivated and costs the nation £20 Billion annually with no benefit to this people.
c) Tax on fuel should be reduced since its effect is arbitrary by any taxable logic. - a) The Queen should be asked to prorogue parliament immediately as a temporary arrangement until there has been an election.
- Your position as effectively deputy Lord Chancellor gives you authority to support us, the people of England and Scotland. On the other hand, government has shown a lack of constitutional restraint and even lack of knowledge of the laws of this country both in the Constitution Reform Act and further acts that have forced me and others to ask you to use the strength of your position acting as the executive guardian the people of this country and contracted to the monarchy by law. As the substitute Lord Chancellor, when the other appointee betrayed his position a by treasonous claim initially defined by the 1351 Treason Act.
- I have take two steps in the defence of our position
- On The Borrowing
a) I doubt whether the government has the power to borrow to this extent for a national government. The 1911 Parliament Act which gives the majority power in the Commons without the Lord’s right to amend had already been sent back as unconstitutional by Edward VII. It was accepted by George V under the impression that automatic assent of Asquith (another Fabian) was correct like the Statutory Instruments the present Government laid on the table at the time of Northern Rock. It was made on the false basis that no Bill has been sent back by a monarch since Queen Anne in 1707. (i) There is no trace of discussion in Hansard or anywhere else. (ii) Bills had been sent back by William III, George III, William IV, Victoria and Edward VII, as Asquith well knew. Such a claim of automatic assent paralysed our constitutional laws and is probably the basis of the Queen’s behaviour. - If the people are to be helped at this time, three means of taxation should be changed.
a) Mortgage relief should be reinstated.
- So Mr. Blair altered legal aid so much that even people on my income (less than £9,000 pa) cannot get it and treason needs a very narrow certificate from the lawyers. I therefore ask you to take the steps necessary under 2a) above if it is by any means within your power.
- I am taking a case on the illegality of some aspects of council tax in the high court: I was granted oral review, but thought it wiser to have counsel rather than act on my own and Leolyn Price CB QC has kindly agreed to represent me.
- The lowering of trust apparently intentionally has led to loss to shareholders for whom legal protection is needed. The people in Parliament seem to have little knowledge of the law nor the legal protection of the people, only the desire for power and in this case globalisation. William Blackstone said, “Law is not a matter of opinion.” This, our representatives seem not to have learnt.
- The House of Lords is the Curia Regis to advise the Monarch. The suggestion that a man who has twice been asked to leave the government for malfeasance should be given a position in the Lords tends to further distrust of government at a time when trust is essential if the nation is to come together and rise above the present discomfort and lack of trust in this government and the Curia Regis. It gives an impression of irresponsibility in government which is outside our principles and traditions. But apparently fits in with the teaching of five-year-olds that they are part of a wider community without being based in their own. Mr. Blunkett, Mr. Brown and others have published books paid for by the tax-payer effectively dispersing any concept of our Christian heritage. Mr. Brown, as an example, in his white paper has said he intends to give the Royal Prerogative to Parliament or even to the people in one sweep of the pen without recognising the meaning of the prerogative removing our history and our constitution for which our ancestors fought.
- I now put before your Lordship the grounds of high treason against those presently governing this nation.
a) Firstly so that the so-called removal of the prerogative power from the Queen comes directly under the 1351 Treason Act since the Act of Constitutional Reform by taking the prerogative from the monarch, the power being in Sir Edward Coke’s words a part of the monarch and cannot be taken from the monarch even by act of parliament and removal, therefore, comes directly within the phrase “if a man compasses or imagines the death of the sovereign . . .” it is treason: “if a man levies war against the sovereign …” and by taking over the position of the Lord Chancellor and turning it into something else this comes into “slaying the Lord Chancellor …”. And as head of constitutional affairs and the justices by false laws that treason is further laid and supported in later treason Acts and backed by the 1351 Treason act in the words, “… and because that many other cases of the like treason may happen in time to come which a man cannot think or declare at this present time; it is accorded, that if any other case of supposed treason which is not above specified…” is to go before the justices and the king to be judged treason or felony
b) Under this heading I name the imposition of automatic into “the Royal Assent”. for this has been claimed “as to the status of convention that the Royal Assent is not withheld from Bills which have been passed by both houses of parliament the Prime Minister is in doubt …” (quoted from 1972 letter from 10 Downing street) This conflicts with the statement in Rogers Walters, “How Parliament Works”, Pearson and Longman fourth edition which is in use in the speaker’s office and in most county libraries where the Royal Assent is clearly defined: “A Bill presently before both houses needs the Royal Assent as the third element of Parliament before it can become law.” Rogers and Walters add the concept of the assent being ‘automatic’ and it is relevant to the treason that the phrase was inserted in 1911 for King George V to be persuaded to pass the Parliament Act and other legislation against our constitution. under the framework of the Treason and Felony Act of 1848, ‘any person who compasses or imagines devises or intends to depose … in order to force constrain or compel her or they to change their measures or courses … shall be guilty of felony”, conviction being transportation for not less than seven years with hard labour.
In the book on the constitution by Nigel Knight, tutor in Law at Cambridge University, a further aberration and compelling of the mind of the monarch on the Home Rule Bill for Ireland was given against the wishes of George V.
That this chicanery has continued to be used does not make it less heinous and it is relevant that the claim of 1972 from Downing Street connived with the entry into the EC and hence the EU.
- I write now, in view of the danger, after the attempt of Michael Foot to nationalise banks, now being effected under the same intention, but with the camouflage of a world economic crisis, to ask your Lordship to declare the automatic assent void and illegal under the constitutional statute including that of 1795 made perpetual in 1807, 1817 and 1848 and only repealed under the automatic assent, Rogers and Walters claim the assent by convention had become automatic since Queen Anne was the last monarch to send a Bill back. In fact, William III, George III, William IV, Queen Victoria and, as Asquith well knew, Edward VII (because the Bill had been handed to him), had all returned Bills.
- Most of the ordinary people of England such as myself and my friends, know the principles of our constitutional laws for which the freemen and barons of England fought and forced on John with the help of the bishops and arch-bishops at Runnymede.
The cruelty, despite constitutional constraint, which successive governments have forced on us involves a mercilessness that has to be held as treason against the sovereign people and augurs badly for such people having the power over our money. I fought for ‘the man on the shop floor’ when I gave Lord Hailsham the concept of the conscience clause against the Foot Bill (Trades Unions and Labour Relations Amendment Bill). Lord Hailsham was unable to get that clause through and it had to wait until Mrs. Thatcher and yet this is central to our spiritual existence as a Christian nation. These politicians could see no relevance in the freedom of the spirit of man.
- We, the ordinary people of Britain, the freemen, ask for you to take the steps needed to free our constitutional laws and customs giving us protection against the hideous and treasonous servitude under which we are presently held and free our sovereign from the Fabian thrall or, failing that, under chapter 61 of Magna Carta, replace her with someone able to honour their Coronation Oath. The present situation is worse than that under King John.
(signed) Elizabeth Beckett
NOT FOR FUN DID ELIZABETH TAKE ON THE STATE- THE POOR OLD DEAR WAS DYING-THE STATE TRIED TO BANKRUPT HER AND TAKE HER HOME–BUT SOME DID NOT TURN AWAY AND CAME TO HER AID………….THATS’ YOUR GOVERNMENT—IN ALL THEIR FABIAN FASCIST GLORY!!!!
THE FABIAN WRECKING CREW- WRECKING BRITAIN-RIGHT UNDER YOUR NOSE!!
Centurean2\'s Weblog 
Most of us know that whatever goes on in England usually finds its way here, and visa-versa. The English have been told they do not have a Constitution, but further study would prove otherwise, and that our Constitution is based on theirs, to a certain degree.
England is being thrown into the EU, but because England is a sovereign nation, that move should be illegal. The United States is headed toward the NAU and, being a sovereign country, that should be illegal, as well.
The outcome of the following story, which is still infolding, is of the greatest importance, as this elderly lady, an expert on the English constitution, is fighting for her country, almost single-handedly. We, in the US, should follow her example and realize that no one will do this for us. We must take heed from her plight and example and understand that the English outcome will more than likely reflect on US and our sovereignty and ability to remain an independent nation. Our forefathers did not sacrifice all they did for us to succumb to another country, the UN or join the NAU.
IT IS ILLEGAL-MAKE NO MISTAKE!!
Elizabeth Beckett:
Her Untold Story Media Blackout- Why?
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
By Elizabeth Beckett
Student of the British Constitution –
83 year-old Elizabeth stands alone against our Treasonous Government
Will you look the other way?
By The Namaste Team
http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk
This is an update concerning Mrs Elizabeth Beckett’s legitimate Constitutional stance against an illegal tax system and treasonous government. A story that should be on the front page of every newspaper, but has remained unreported! This amazingly selfless lady has studied British Constitution in great depth. Her initial interest in the law began when she was a District Officer’s wife in India where her father, a High Court Judge for many years, was party to drawing up the 1935 India Act of Independence.
Since our last issue, Elizabeth was summoned to appear in court at Carlisle on the 24th July, a distance from her home of approximately 55 miles. Without hesitation or complaint, this remarkable 83 year old lady, who in her own words is lame, (she cannot walk very well without aid, due to a painful hip), took a taxi on her own, to the court where a judge listened to her appeal against a threatened bankruptcy order by her local council, for refusing to pay her Council Tax. Her refusal was based on the following objections: “It is illegal to pay a tax to destroy my country.”
Later she discovered just how illegally councils are acting.
Elizabeth has received very little mainstream media reporting, the little she has had has only been at local level. Nationally, the BBC televised 30 seconds on the Politics Show. Even though she was intereviewed by a reporter, the BBC editor refused point blank to broadcast her interview. It was withdrawn. We ask, could this be because of the influence of Common Purpose?
We at Namaste have tried to present Elizabeth’s story to various national newspapers: They were not interested. In fact the News Desk of the Daily Mail in Manchester thought our information about Elizabeth’s Constitutional Rights and the Act of Treason committed against the people of the British nation, was far fetched! We put it to the News Desk that we do indeed have a Constitution. This was also dismissed.
We ask, could this be because of the influence of Common Purpose?
It is quite clear that we are dealing with mindset which is at best totally ignorant and, at worst, working deliberately to subvert our ancient Constitutional history – The Birth Right of the People of England, (1700). This is still the law of the land today! How could this happen? The plan has been carefully contrived. The journalist Stewart Alsop wrote: “Knowledge is power and power is the most valuable commodity in government. So whoever knows the secrets controls the knowledge and therefore holds the power…”
This would help to explain why Harold Wilson removed the teaching of the Constitution from the British education curriculum, in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Today, Britain’s universities DO NOT teach treason laws, the greatest crime against a nation; hence today, we find our nation and our freedom in the most critical situation. How could this happen you may ask? The answer to this can be found in the descriptively accurate words of Cicero Marcus Tullius, born on 3 January, 106 BC and murdered on 7 December, 43 BC:
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
This is so precisely true of what is taking place today, not only in Britain, but other countries of the Commonwealth, and the USA – this is the Common Purpose. Unmasking Common Purpose (page 36)
We and our colleagues both in the UK and USA, are deeply concerned with the direction that both our nations are heading, yet so many seem woefully ignorant. This is not because people are stupid but they lack time and interest to inform themselves, largely because of the education system and mass media control with mind manipulations. We see and hear people acting like sheep, unheeded by the ever emerging totalitarian state, unquestioning, unwilling to research and blindly accepting lies and half-truths from those who can only be best described at misinformed and in the main, deliberate liars.
Part of this disinformation relates to our Council Tax in the UK. For the benefit of our overseas readers, Council Tax is a tax on domestic property collected by local councils in the UK. The council is supposed to use this revenue to pay for local services such as schools, rubbish (garbage) collection, roads and street lighting, etc.
Elizabeth felt driven to research the issue of Council Tax accounts, having observed various related, supicious news articles in the press one of which involved the North West Regional Council of the UK purchasing a house in Brussels, a totally inappropriate action in view of the sufferings of the Cumbrian fishermen and farmers. This alarmed her to the fact that she might well, as a law abiding honest Council Tax payer, be assisting in the potential breakup of her country. We must enphasise that Constitutional Law is not a matter of politics, whether one votes to drive on the left or the right, but a matter of law like the dividing of Britain into ‘Lander’ such as the county of Kent becoming part of France, and Wales becoming part of Ireland etc. That is against our law and Elizabeth said she could not pay for the destruction of the sovereignty of this country. She then asked for full disclosure of how her Council Tax is being spent. This has not been forthcoming because of the liability order against her; the order is an executive order and in Britain alone is governed by the Royal Prerogative. The Enforcement Officer and people in charge of the courts refused to admit that the Liability Order could be challenged in any way. According to the Petition of Right of 1627 all taxation should be honoured by Parliament, under the Royal Assent and Parliament cannot pass acts that are against our Constitution.
Elizabeth further discovered a covert plan to do with the regional assemblies. These are voluntary bodies that are designed to break up England, e.g. Northumberland up to Carlisle will became part of Germany. This was not mentioned in the Labour Party manifesto.
Amongst the papers she handed to the judge at her trial, were the details of Common Purpose and their assemblies, which have increased by 500% since the year 2000. Taxation emanates from the Chancellor’s Office and these are illegal under what is known as the ‘fiscal prerogative’ and the ‘Petition of Right’. Because these assemblies are voluntary bodies, they are not available for funding by the taxpayer. Our Constitution states that ‘all laws’ that go through Parliament ‘must have Royal Assent, in order to become law.’ Instead, they are now validated on a false claim that the Royal Assent is automatic. However, the power to grant this is part of the prerogative, which it impassable.
The automatic assent was invented by the Fabian Prime Minister Asquith who gave the qualification based on the premise that Queen Ann had been the last monarch to send back a bill. The implication being that the monarch could not send back bills, whereas in fact, their power lies in the support of our Constitutional Laws by refusing to give Assent to bills that are unconstitutional.
In fact Edward VII had refused to pass the Parliament Act in 1910 and as such Asquith had to go to the country for a vote which he lost. A plan was devised to get this bill back, so he invited 40 Fabian Socialists and 82 Sien Fien to join his party in order to destroy the House of Lords which had been holding on to the fiscal prerogative and in so doing he set out to destroy the British Constitution.
The Parliament Act is actually illegal under the Constitution and the 1848 Treason and Felony Act, which states that neither House, Lords nor the Commons has power above the other. The 1911 Act altered the ‘fiscal power,’ which according to our Constitution cares for all taxpayers, as stated under the Petition of Right (part of the Constitution – No taxation without representation). This puts taxation illegally into the hands of the majority political party in the Commons, and without any amendment allowed from the House of Lords.
At the time of the French Revolution and the American Independence, political parties weren’t fixed as in the Masonic Constitution of America, which is based on the principal of divide and rule. Whereas in Britain, the British Constitution was made by the People for the People and the monarch holds them together according to our Constitutional laws. In relation to this fact, Elizabeth put forward to the judge the question of Brussels acting illegally under European Laws which invalidated the court itself. e.g. the 1988 Mercantile Shipping Act in relation to Spaniards fishing within the British 12 mile limit. Brussels overruled it and fined the British £300,000. In doing this Brussels claimed rights over our Sovereign and Parliament who had passed the Act. She pointed out to the court under this ruling it had no validity. At which point the judge shut her up and said, “I am under contract to make a liability order against you since the order allowed no exception.”
This is entirely against our constitutional laws. Elizabeth then asked for leave to appeal. The judge replied, “You can do what you like.”
Elizabeth explained to the judge that Queens Council has given her his opinion, “Technically under the Rules of Erskine May, it is stated the Automatic Assent, if not complied with, would invalidate ALL laws since 1911”.
Elizabeth’s Plaint lays the ground for important legal and Constitutional constraints which are being side-stepped and their legal validity is being denied by our present legal system and government. The fact they are still part of our British Common law is undeniable, Sir Edward Coke said, “The Royal Prerogative is part of the Personality of the Monarch and could not be taken from them even by an Act if Parliament” which the Law Lords Halbury and Jowitt agree. (Halbury’s Laws, The Birth Right of the People of England (These are legal reference books of great prestige).
Since the Assent is given under the regal ‘Prerogative Power,’ it is invalid if it is given to an unconstitutional act. So in a different way, both Counsel’s opinion and Elizabeth’s lead to the same conclusion. Therefore, she says that one can conclude that ALL of the bills that have been made law since 1911, which includes 1972 entry into Europe, and all that follows, together with the Civil Contingencies Bill, the Constitutional Reform Act, Equality Act and the Immigration Act ARE VOID.
It is clear that our entry into the European Union is INVALID, ILLEGAL and against our Constitution. (see article page 31)
Since our last issue, Elizabeth has spent many weeks preparing for her appeal to the Royal Courts of Justice. As we write today 16th November, her leave for Judicial Review has been granted. Furthermore it has arrived just in time to save her house from being taken over. Elizabeth heard her news whilst in hospital with an embolism she is unbelievably grateful to all those readers who have been kind enough to send donations.
She says: “It has been so heart warming and encouraging to know people are supporting me”.
It came as such a surprise to her and beyond her expectations to receive donations from our readers.
Elizabeth is determined and optimistic as ever. The money we sent to her she says has enabled her to pay for the court application, photocopying, postage, telephoning and travel in order to put together her appeal to the Royal Courts of Justice.
Elizabeth’s Plaint is clear, Treason has been committed and should be remedied.
Abbe Talleyrand de Perigord said to Mme Recamier in the early nineteen hundreds :
“Understand this, if the English Constitution is destroyed so will be the civilisation of the world”
If the Supremacy of Parliament is to rest on treason, it will help no one.
As of the time of writing this article, Elizabeth has still not received a date for her appeal in the High Court. We ask readers to please continue to check the Namaste website http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk for an update with details. As MANY people as possible should attend. We ask if people would try their best to attend the hearing, and to invite others. If anybody knows of any contacts who might help in funding for a good legal counsel, we implore you to let us know. Your freedom and that of future generations hangs in the balance. Elizabeth cannot do this without the support of the people – your support. Her stance is for everyone. Will we support her, or has it become our custom to turn our heads and look the other way? If we think that we British have no need to be concerned and our lives are just fine, we have our holidays, we have work, if not we get benefits and above all we are entertained, so why should we bother with all of this? Well, the zombification of Britain is well in place and the future is not as pretty as people think. Do not be detered, our freedom hangs by a thread! BEWARE, by 2009 it will BE TOO LATE.
Why are you making this potentially dangerous and difficult stance at your time of life?
Elizabeth:
“I do it for my children, grandchildren and for all our ancestors – all those who have died for our freedom. Do you want to see your children in chains? I was in India during the war and knew about the fight against the Japanese and I knew about the earlier war and I quote John Edmonds…
‘When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say, For Their Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today’” ~ John Maxwell Edmonds (1875 -1958)
Namaste: What can readers do to help you?
Elizabeth: “Talk about the Constitution. Research it. Know it. Know that it exists and help to keep it alive against the evil forces dedicated to its destruction. Please send donations however small, to Namaste Magazine for the Elizabeth Beckett Constitutional Legal Fund”
Please support Elizabeth in taking her case for judical review to the High Court in doing so you will be supporting the Constitution send cheques payable to Elizabeth Beckett, Constitutional Legal Fund, C/O Namaste Publishing, PO Box 127, Shrewsbury SY3 7UP.
Readers that have previously sent cheques to Namaste Magazine before December, Elizabeth has asked if you would please stop those cheques because although she sent them to her bank, they have now informed her that they have not been received. Would you be kind enough to check with your bank to see if the cheque has been drawn if not, would you please reissue your cheque and resend it to Namaste Publishing for Elizabeth as per the appeal details. Thank you so much!
Elizabeth has further suggested the following: Readers should consider raising the following points as set out below, with their local council. Bear in mind that it is probable that Common Purpose is operating in you area. Councils cannot take taxes for an organisation that cannot achieve an audit. It is illegal under the Local Government Act 1972, which is still used for auditing local government accounts. All those who pay Council Tax should write to their local council and quote section 239 of the 1972 ACT.
1). You as the Council have the right to oppose or depose acts in Parliament.
Under your oaths of allegiance, the laws in the Bill of Rights of 1689 make clear this country CANNOT be ruled by ANY foreign power: “No foreign Prince, person, Prelate, State, or Potentate, hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction, Power, Superioity, Pre eminence, or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm.”
They also added two codicils at the end of the Bill of Rights “Any amendments to the bill after the 23 October 1689 shall be void and not lawful, and this bill is for all time”.
2). This law and its oath are not subject to Parliament because they were given to Parliament by the People whose WILL is supreme over Parliament.
This means Parliament may not allow any part of the aforementioned oath to be breached side-stepped or ignored. This Bill of Rights precludes and effectively forbids Parliament from passing any bill like the 1972 EEC Act, the Treaty of Rome or any other European legislation which gives them any say at all in the governance of England. It also precludes Parliament from passing any laws contrary to the spirit of this Bill of Rights.
Chief Justice Beresford said; “You must look on the spirit of the law not just how it is written.”
The Scots have their own version of this law. Indeed the people and Parliament were told the 1972 EEC Act was a purely trading agreement with no Constitutional impact at all!
3). Since you use the Local Government Act for your audit, I wish to draw your attention to another services’ misdemeanour and that is you have been paying my council tax in to an unaudited administration (this is the 13th year).
4). If I were to pay my Council Tax I would be complicit in this illegality. Even more seriously, I would be allowing without complaint, the present Government’s intention to herd this country over to this illegal administration.
5). Under the powers given to you under section 239 you have the power to refuse to agree this and would be acting illegally if you did not.
6). This applies to any council, PRESS them to ACT under these laws.
Do you want to be like the judge acting illegally under European law? Or do you want to do something about it? We must never forget, our Constitution was made by our ancestors (often with their lives) not by Parliament.
Elizabeth gave the following information for our American readers: As far as the American Constitution is concerned, Jefferson and co made a Masonic Constitution, but they did not wipe out the existing British Constitution on which the colonies had lived for two hundred years. This is the basis of your law and customs.
The English Constitution includes:
1). Magna Carta, (which the Supreme court used for the release of the people in Guantanamo Bay
2). The Petion of Right 1627
3). The Bill of Rights of 1689
4). The 1700 Act of Settlement
These legal statutes were made by the people from whom the colonies are decended, only rubber stamped by British Parliment, (governing the colonies at the time) until independence. It is the bases of your Law and your Constitution. The United States Constitution is subject to the British Constitution.
The only elements of the US Constitution that differer fron the British Constitution is the royal prerogative and Christianity. The prerogative can exceptionally be used by the President, but is not part of the law as it is with us.
However, the people of the USA cannot reley on the ‘prerorgative’, all they can do is find the relevent phrases that can fight orders. These can be found in the Bill of Rights 1689 and chapter 29 of Magna Carta. Good luck
“Please remember that to possess INFORMATION, you must sift through mountains of disinformation (lies), misinformation (mistakes), and nonninformation (distractions).
But first, you have to want to.”
~ Harold Thomas (late)
A Search for the Truth is a Dangerous Thing For readers to understand. KNOW THIS.
The ‘prerogative power’ is given to the monarch by the PEOPLE, under the Bill of Rights of 1689 and Magana Carta. The monarch agrees to protect our laws and customs under the Coronation Oath and the Constitution. Failure do so is TREASON against the people! We are protected from GESTAPO type (executive) law by the ‘prerogative’. This is what the New World order is trying to take away from us. This is our ancient law. Therefore, why has the monarch signed FIVE illegal treaties taking us into a crimalised organisation -the EU which is completely against our Constitution??
STOP PRESS
Elizabeth has now applied for an interlocutory injunction to stop Brown and his associates taking us, the People of the UK further into an illegal administrative situation. (Anyone can and shoud do this). It is illegal for a government to be financially involved with an organisation that cannot even audit its own accounts. The EU has not audited its accounts for the past 13 years.
Elizabeth, has informed us that recently, a local council representative had spoken to her by phone, they said they will block her High Court Appeal on the grounds it applies to the whole of England.
OPEN LETTER TO PRIME MINISTER BROWN
Dear Mr. Brown,
It appears that you are acting under the Constitutional Reform Act of 2005, imagining that you, as a Prime Minister, hold the ‘prerogative power.’
Are you sir, aware of the meaning of the ‘PREROGATIVE POWER’?
Have you taken constitutional legal advice on this very serious action of entry into the EU?
If so from whom have you sought such advice?
Are you aware that this is a serious crime against the People of Britain? It is TREASON.
Yours Sincerely
Mrs Elizabeth Beckett
THE ABOVE QUESTIONS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ASK MR BROWN BECAUSE – UPON TAKING OFFICE HE MADE A OATH OF ALLIGENCE WHICH INCORPORATES OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND FAILURE TO ABIDE BY THE SAID OATH OF ALLIGENCE IS ALSO TREASON.
We ask readers to please to copy the above letter and replace Elizabeth’s name with their own name and send to number 10 Downing Street and see what response they get. All letters received from number 10 Downing Street to the above letter, if any, will be placed on this website. Please send to: Namaste Publishing, PO Box 127, Shrewsbuy SY3 7WS.
Update:
24th December 2007
There is a delay in the appeal for judicial review because the court in now informed Elizabeth that since a certificate of service has not been received by the court the case can’t move forward. The fact is the certificate of service was faxed to the court on 1st December by a government employee on Elizabeth’s behalf. She also has a letter from the local council dated 8th December, confirming receipt of the certificate of service and she has sent copies of the said letters to the court. Thus Elizabeth has asked the court for an upgrading of her case which has been delayed because they claimed they had not received the certificate of service.
A notice is about to be served on Elizabeth for a court hearing in February 2008 to implement the bankcruptcy order made against her in March 2007. The hearing will take place in Carlisle.
Interestingly, the interlocutory injunction filed by Elizabeth to stop Brown and his associates taking us, the People of the UK further into an illegal administrative situation, seems to be delayed lost in the system. How unusual!
The hearing for the implementation for the liability order against Elizabeth will take place on the 6th February at Carlisle Court, Rickergate at 2.40pm. Anyone who can attend would be a very great support.
Further updates on Elizabeth’s situation will be posted as and when we have more information.
Namaste Magazine Vol 10 Issue 2
PO Box 127, Shrewsbury SY3 7WS
Email: info@namastepublishing.co.uk
Tele: + 44 (0)1743 341303
http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
THE WORLD KNEW—BUT THE BRITISH WERE KEPT IGNORANT!
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/beckett1-22-08.html
7th February 2009
The Passing of a Great Lady – Elisabeth Beckett (1924 – 2009)
I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you,
that you have broken your oath to us your people.”
~ (Elisabeth Beckett’s last letter to the Queen, 21st January, 2009)
“It is with great sadness that we share the news of the passing of Mrs Elisabeth Beckett after her fight against leukemia. Elisabeth was the daughter of a High Court judge. The fact she managed one last shot across the bows of the nation’s ever-dwindling sovereignty, says so much about her steadfastness… http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Tribute%20to%20Elisabeth%20Beckett.htm
http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Elisabeth.htm
http://www.ukcoloumn.org
Above:
Mrs Elisabeth Beckett handing over a letter to a Police Sergent in Penrith, Cumbria, asking the Chief Constable to protect her rights under the Constitution.
Her Majesty The Queen
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA
21 January 2009
Madam
Unconstitutional reign
Giving careful consideration to the mode of address in this letter, although in courtesy I have addressed it in conventional manner, it is clear that having, in effect, abdicated by failure to perform your coronation oath you leave the people of this nation without effective titular head to whom we may address our petitions. I write to you only in your pre-eminence in Common Law.
I write on Edmund Burke’s remark that for evil to flourish it is sufficient for good men to do nothing.
At your coronation you swore on oath to rule this country according to our laws and customs. This contract with us was written clearly in Magna Carta and replicated by Edward I in 1274. After saying that he would give no such oath, the archbishops, bishops, barons and freemen said that, in this case, they would get another king.
In Magna Carta it was made clear that if the monarch went against this oath then chapter 61 would apply, the contract would be broken and the monarch would have to give up his position and possessions. You have, throughout your reign, disregarded our laws and customs in the legislation that has gone through Parliament.
I believe that you have done this on the basis of the Fabian inspired Parliament Act of 1911 which argued untruthfully that since royal assent had never been denied by a monarch since 1707 (when Queen Anne sent back a Bill) the use of the royal assent had fallen into abeyance. This claim was untrue and treasonable. Only the year before, Asquith had been forced to go to the country by Edward VII who sent back the same Bill to Parliament. And indeed monarchs had refused assent on at least six other occasions since 1707. On each occasion this refusal of assent was because the Bills concerned breached our constitution.
In other words, the 1911 claim, is incorrect and the monarch’s assent was never and can never be deemed unnecessary or automatic, even though George V chose to accept that the royal assent was now a formality and that the monarch could not, in reality refuse assent – as in the Northern Ireland Bill.
Despite all the long years of your reign this method of agreement, either forced on you, or under “automatic assent” nevertheless cannot be upheld as lawful.
Many people who have written to you on constitutional matters have received replies from your secretary (most recently, Sonia Bonici) saying that their letter had been forwarded to the government department misleadingly called the Department of Constitutional Affairs and Ministry of Justice. Your compliance with this has permitted the judiciary under these government departments to claim, as in the Chagos Archipelago appeal, that our fundamental liberties do not exist and that the peoples of these islands have no rights under our law.
I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you that you have broken your oath to us your people.
The 1911 act purports to permit taxes to be levied on us merely by a majority in the House of Commons and without reference to the upper chamber. This again is against our constitution and specifically not permitted by our Petition of Right of 1627. The most serious instance of this is the use of our taxes to fund the banking system of this country: this is being explained to the electorate as a step which will in some way make us rich, whilst in fact it is not only unlawful, but a most serious abrogation of our rights and your duties under our constitution.
Your contract with the people of this country and the colonies and dominions cannot be destroyed by the chicanery of the Fabians in the 1911 Act, nor by subsequent legislation. If you have the courage to fulfil your contract, however belatedly, you could prorogue Parliament now and have a free election with or without party divisions so that this country can go forward in a proper and united way to remove us from the difficulties that have ensued since the 1911 Parliament Act.
Yours Faithfully,
Elisabeth Beckett
Copy to:
The Archbishop of Canterbury
Return to News- That Is Not In The News
Namaste
GET THE MESSAGE THIS CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT IS SENDING YOU–AND WHY HER STORY WAS BLACKED OUT?
The 1911 act purports to permit taxes to be levied on us merely by a majority in the House of Commons and without reference to the upper chamber. This again is against our constitution and specifically not permitted by our Petition of Right of 1627. The most serious instance of this is the use of our taxes to fund the banking system of this country: this is being explained to the electorate as a step which will in some way make us rich, whilst in fact it is not only unlawful, but a most serious abrogation of our rights and your duties under our constitution.
THE QUEEN BE DAMNED!!
ASK YOURSELF WHY ARE ALL THE REST SILENT ON THIS ILLEGALITY?
ALL PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE ANSWER—-THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR STATUS——THE RULERS—OVER THE SERFS!!
WAKE UP!!!
BRITAIN ON THE BRINK…VID
http://mulberryharbour.ning.com/video/britain-on-the-brink
JUST ANOTHER LABOUR/FABIAN PORN STORY………….
Britain’s ambassador for schools in Europe sacked over child porn chargesBy Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 3:23 PM on 04th September 2009
A deputy headmaster who represents British schools in Europe has been sacked after he was arrested on child porn charges.
Ken Browne, of Dorothy Stringer High School in Brighton, was arrested over the summer holidays on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children, police confirmed.
Chair of the school governors Reg Hook confirmed that Mr Browne, also head of languages at the school, had been axed after his arrest on July 24.
Ken Browne, pictured at the gates of Dorothy Stringer High School in Brighton, has been arrested on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children
Mr Browne was one of 25 teachers in the UK selected by the Foreign Office as an ‘ambassador for British schools in Europe’ – a pupil exchange project launched in 2007.
Mr Hook said in his letter: ‘A member of school staff, Ken Browne, was arrested on July 24, 2009 on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children.
‘I am able to advise you that he no longer works at the school.
‘I am aware that this information may cause parents concern and I would like to reassure parents that the governing body and staff at the school are working in co-operation with and with support from the local authority and police.
‘Should either you or your child have any particular concerns arising from this issue, I would advise that in the first instance contact Brian Orrells, acting headmaster, or Suzanne Lewis, assistant head of pastoral care.’
Parents at the 1,600-pupil comprehensive school for children aged between 11 and 16 were told about the ex-deputy head’s arrest yesterday but told that the alleged offences did not involve pupils from the school.
The allegations are believed to have come to light as part of an ongoing police investigation by Sussex Police’s child protection unit and related to images downloaded from the internet.
More…Teenage ‘Columbine copycats’ planned ‘best massacre ever… to kill thousands’ in attacks on school and shopping centre
Teachers moan that new code of conduct will stop them getting drunk at weekends
Officers confirmed they were investigating but would not release any further details about how the alleged offences came to light.
A spokeswoman for Brighton police said: ‘A 59-year-old Brighton man has been arrested on suspicion of possession of indecent images of children.
‘The man is a senior staff member form the Dorothy Stringer school.
‘The police investigation does not relate to any past or present pupils of the Dorothy Stringer school.’
Police would not reveal the nature of the images concerned or say how many pictures he is accused of possessing.
A spokesman for Brighton and Hove City Council said: ‘Due to the ongoing nature of this investigation, Brighton & Hove City Council is unable to comment beyond the facts laid out in a letter to parents and carers this week.
‘However, we can confirm that the council is working with governors and staff to provide information and support to children and their parents and carers about the matter.’
One parent, who asked not to be named, said: ‘This has come as a huge shock to everyone here.
‘Mr Browne was seen as someone the kids turned to in a crisis. Everyone is deeply disturbed by his arrest.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211171/British-ambassador-schools-sacked-child-porn-charges.html#ixzz0QF8e4dRL
Round Up The Usual Suspects
Article by Mike Robinson
Sep 4th 2009
Your intrepid reporter has a house in France, where his family is gathering this weekend for a birthday celebration. He awoke yesterday morning to 12 very polite, if armed to the teeth and threatening, French police from the anti terrorist unit asking for an ex-neighbour.
This was the first hint that something was afoot.
Simultaneously, a total of 11 individuals from the locale were rounded up – the local tobacconist, the neighbour’s dentist, the local butcher, a Notary from the next town – all local activists who despise what is becoming of France.
These men are all allegedly members of a “terrorist” group calling themselves “The Combatants of Cell 34″ and are accused of sending Magnum bullets and death threats to Sarkozy and some of his political supporters.
As is typical of the French media, the leader of this group has a nickname – “the Raven.” Very Frederick Forsythe.
The operation had all the hall marks of a staged event. All those arrested have been hounded by the French authorities for some time. But what was most strange about it was that, by coincidence, photographers from Midi Libre just happened to be at the exact locations at the exact times that the arrests were being made.
As I spoke to people locally, I was reminded of Casablanca. The Prefect of Police, on hearing of any crime, would simply issue the order “round up the usual suspects.” The view here is, “if they’ve arrested 11 people, at least 10 of them are innocent.”
So why am I recounting this tale?
Because we should mark it well.
In France, people live under a regime of Corpus Juris – the European legal system. Under that system, you are presumed guilty until you can prove your innocence. Make no mistake, the British legal system is increasingly operating under that presumption, and is without question being normalised with European “Justice.”
If we don’t act now to protect our Constitution, our institutions and our laws and customs, we will all soon be being lifted off the streets in this way, held without charge, homes searched, DNA forcibly taken …
Oh.
This post is tagged corpus juris, law, Terrorism
One Response to “Round Up The Usual Suspects”
lerustique says: September 5, 2009 at 10:35 am – ReplyThe EU Communitarian agenda, complete with Communitarian Law. It is all in place and ready to roll anytime soon. Good-bye Habeas Corpus.
Unfortunately, it seems as though people on the other side of the Atlantic are more concerned for us regarding this, than we ourselves:
http://nord.twu.net/acl/cafta.html
http://www.quebecoislibre.org/990612-6.htm
“..All of this has gone virtually unremarked by the British public. Some of the quality papers have reported on it, but this attack on the rights and freedoms of the citizens does not seem to be a matter of pressing concern. Certainly not enough to draw much attention away from such important matters as the possibility of Manchester United winning the Premier League, the European Cup final and the FA Cup Final all in the same year. Of course, all this is the way the present, or indeed any, government likes it, a fait accompli is easier for them to deal with as an option. On the topic of Corpus Juris, the general attitude of UK governments has been to successively deny its existence, admit that it exists but say it doesn’t matter or say that it does matter but will never happen. Now that it is happening they will say that there is nothing that they can do about it. “
YOUR NEWS..
http://www.ukcolumn.org/2009/09/04/round-up-the-usual-suspects/
I would like to see these videos reviewed.
Most taxes are illegal in the UK, But don’t know about the States’