The Great Betrayal of the British People, by the art of misdirection
by John Harris via sam Friday May 11, 2007 at 04:54 PM
The rise of Blair the Dictator
tuk.jpg, image/jpeg, 500×448
The Great Betrayal of the British People – By the art of misdirection.
The rise of dictator Blair – Please be assured we are not members of The EU and never have been. We only think we are members because we have been duped.
Recently we started to display the image [on the right] on our home page, which invoked quite a response. This was done for a specific reason, and the effect it had was incredible and resulted in the TPUC network receiving information that is of the up most importance. What sparked the reaction was the fact we displayed an image of the Queen being listed as a traitor to the United Kingdom. The Constitutional information you are about to read on this page has been researched for over thirty years and has been passed to us. We will now show you not only how the government has duped us into believing we are part of the EU, but how they have installed a dictatorship in Parliament, adopting EU Police state Laws for British Laws, and duping the British people into believing, they have to abide by them.
Did you know Britain has a written Constitution The Bill of Rights 1689 that is still Law today. Every treaty that was signed to abolish our country to the EU is invalid. You might say? ‘why do I not know about this? Well the fact of the matter is this; In 1965 under prime minister Harold Wilson teaching the constitutional Laws was removed from the curriculum of all schools in the United Kingdom, and after talking to people who were taught history before 1965, most we talked to had little, or no recollection of being taught the Constitutional Laws in school. Another fact we have unearthed is that from 1982 all law regarding Treason was removed from the syllabus from all colleges and universities in the United Kingdom, resulting in not one lawyer understanding treason in Law studying from that period.
Since 1972 Five treaties have been signed by four different Prime ministers and the Queen. In 1998 a certain court case involving the above took place in the high court under a media black out. All accused including the Queen stood accused of acts of treason against the British nation and the British people. Why? The treaties they had signed were in fact against our Constitutional Rights and were not valid, but the mere fact they had tried to abolish the UK to Europe by duping the British People was why they stood accused. Just before the conclusion and in a stunning abuse of power, Tony Blair secretly repealed the treason laws, hidden in the Crime and Disorder Act[section 36.3], and the Queen signed it saving both their necks.
Now we cannot link the first traitor Edward Heath to any of the other prime ministers, but we can link Thatcher, Major, and Blair because they are all distant cousins. when Stalin said ‘…it is not the people who cast the votes who make the decision, it is the people who count the votes…’ Do you see a resemblance here. An orchestrated line of prime minister’s destined to turn the UK into a Police State, and result in Blair becoming the dictator.
Apart from all the illegal EU Police State Directives and Draconian Laws that have gone straight through the commons, and all the treasonous Acts passed as Law against our Constitutional Laws, the following one is the most unbelievable.
In 2005 the Constitutional reform Act went through which in effect signed the Queens ‘prerogative powers’ over to Blair and lord Falconer making Blair ‘Commander in chief’ of the country which he so proudly proclaimed on the Parkinson show to the nation. Now there is a slight problem with this because under the Constitutional Laws of this country, which remember are still in force to this day ‘no one apart from the sovereign of our country can be commander in chief’ as was laid down by Sir Edward Cook 1627….the Royal Prerogative is part of the sovereign, and can not be taken from the sovereign, even by an act of Parliament.. So Mr Blair can you kindly explain how can this be? And if you could be so kind to explain as well, how can this be valid?
Miss Direction of the British People; (1) Diana’s death. (2) London Bombings
Before you stop reading this because of the subjects we have mentioned, please understand, this is not about who killed Diana? Nor is it about why? It is not about who bombed London? Nor again why? This is about how these incidents contributed to the biggest abuse of power any government has ever committed on the British People, bigger than the signing of all the treaties, bar one, and how it allowed Blair to introduce draconian EU Police State Laws, without contest from the majority of the British People. let us explain. Blair needed more to complete his Dictatorial take over, so lets take it from when he arrived in power.
When Diana died on 31st August 1997 almost all the nation went in to mourning for the People’s Princess, so named by a Blair’s top adviser, which in turn Blair used so cleverly, in his speech to the nation, and then adopted by the people after Diana’s death. Being newly elected and the flavour of the month with the British People, the duped British public believed every word he said. What we didn’t know was, that this was the beginning of his illegal, total, take over of our country. When Diana died she was no longer a member of the Royal family, so under the Constitutional Laws she did not deserve a State funeral, but with Blair’s clever manipulation of the British press, he incited the British public to turn against the Royal family, and demand Diana had a state funeral. Then under another breach of Constitutional Law we the public again with the help of Blair and the newspapers, forced the flag on Buckingham Palace to be flown at half mast, when in fact the sole purpose of this flag is just to say when the Monarch is, or isn’t, residing in the Palace. So we were actually forcing the breach of our own laws, but if you don’t know the law, how do you know you are breaking it? Now while this is all going on and we were still concerned about the death of Diana, and still mourning in the wake of her funeral, Blair secretly signed [with the assent of the queen] the Amsterdam Treaty on the 2nd October 1997 which was the most damning EU treaty signed and this resulted in him being tried in court for treason, until he changed the law to save his neck. [as we reported earlier]
London Bombing’s 7th July 2005
All of us know about this tragic event so we need not report anything about this apart from the fact it happened. Now this incident happened during the G8 Summit which was discussing world wide poverty, thereafter this incident turned immediately to the fight on terrorism. Or so we thought. What 7/7 really did was allow Blair to introduce Laws, that are completely against our civil liberties and our Constitution. ID cards, human Databases, more CCTV, the list goes on, but what did come into effect[1st January 2007] was the new Police Directives, allowing the police to basically arrest us for anything. Also the EU Corpus Juris Directive that killed an innocent man on the Stockwell tube, the shoot to kill policy, [now known as the shoot to kill and protect policy] of which you might note that Commander Cressida Dick, who ordered the killing, and the officers who committed the state killing, have never had any charges brought against them for this unlawful murder. [this is an EU Law not a British one] So do you see now how the tragic incident of 7/7 gave Blair the power to become judge and executioner of our country. Using his corrupt powers and the art of misdirection, the British people were duped into believing we needed these measures, he used our own misguided fears to fuel his dictatorship upon the British people. ‘…a dictator uses his own disillusioned people to imprison themselves…’
How did he do it?
As reported earlier the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act went through Parliament and received Royal assent on the 24 March 2005. What you are probably unaware of, is the implications of this Act. This Act gave Blair and Lord falconer ‘prerogative powers’ making Blair as he proclaimed ‘Commander in Chief’ of the UK. All Acts of Parliament and all new laws that go through the Commons must have royal assent. Now considering the Queen had passed the [prerogative powers] her position as commander in chief over to Blair, and The House of Commons voted in favour, [this is against their Oath of Elegance, without which, they have no seats in parliament] Blair has been giving the new Laws assent. All new Directives from the EU come to a committee in the form of Bills, this committee is meant to be impartial so MP’s [and their Whips] from all parties sit on this committee, but the problem with this is; the majority being made up of the proportions of the Parliamentary majority (i.e.) Labour. So the system is corrupt, because any objections or amendments other party members sitting at the committee make, are wiped out by the Parliamentary majority so this is why the EU Laws come into effect without objection, and with Blair being able to give assent, their is no time wasted if the Queen is not present to sign. So this is why all new laws have gone through without a hitch, no matter how they effect our Civil Liberties, or how corrupt they are. A pure system of corruption, in Parliament, for a dictator!
We are not, for one minute saying that Blair was responsible for Diana’s death, nor are we saying that any member of the Royal house hold conspired with Blair to kill Diana. We are not saying Blair is responsible for 7/7. All we are saying is this; It seems quite coincidental that Blair gets into power, then Diana dies, he creates a manipulative smoke screen with the help of the mainstream media to hide his real agenda the actual signing of the most damning treaty against our Nation. Then behind another smoke screen he systematically turns Britain into a Police State, and takes his place as the Dictator of Great Britain. The parts of this about the incidents regarding Diana and 7/7 and how Blair used them, are just examples of what we think could have happened. but you must agree they make sense considering what has happened to our country.
Now he is about to leave and Gordon Brown is set to take his place, I suppose the only thought now is ‘has Brown got the Gaul to carry on with this farce?’ Only time will tell. But one thing we should all remember is we have laws at our disposal to reverse all this but unfortunately we think the judicial system has been corrupted also, so the route we know existed has possibly been corrupted as well.
So what we are going to do very soon, is publish a complete list of cases where the British people have used the Bill of Rights 1689 to reverse and have acquitted the charges against them, that contravene the Laws laid down by the 1689 rights. We already have members who are in the process and have already done this, and are willing to let us publish the facts of these cases.
This article is only the first part of many concerning our rights under the True British Law…to be continued.
So even if we were removed from the EU tomorrow, exactly what difference would it make to us? Absolutely nothing. Why? because the Parliamentary Dictatorship is already in place, the police state draconian Laws are in place, for our British Laws, and the general public have little or no knowledge of the fact, that we as a nation and a people have a Constitutional set of laws.
After the Revolution of 1688 the people of Britain drew up the Declaration of Rights, which became the Bill of Rights 1689. Our Ancestors set in place a set of Laws that no one can change. The Queen can’t change them, Parliament can’t change them, not even the People of Britain can change them, they are the very fabric democracy is built on.
What you don’t realise is, that these laws are still enforce today. Every treaty signing us to the EU, every EU directive in force, and all the Acts that are against our Constitutional Law are INVALID. Let us explain;
…Prerogative Powers are ours…we give the Queen the powers to govern, only after she has agreed to rule by our Laws [the peoples Law] …she signs an Oath to abide by this at her Coronation ….we then lend her the power to govern for her lifetime…the monarch and Parliament are our servants, we are not theirs.
The Queens contract is with us and not her ministers. She has to act accordingly to the constitution, and the power to act is not given by her ministers, it is given by us, the British people. Ministers are elected to represent us, and not to change laws, they do not possess the power to change laws.
So why do we not know about this?
What do they not want us to understand? The answer is simple, they do not want us to understand the Laws we were given at birth, wrote by our ancestors to prevent such a thing like this happening. Do they think the British people are stupid? Because we are not. Do they think we are gullible? I suppose we are a little perhaps. So how did this happen? How have the British people been so badly duped? It is because we are basically honest and trusting. We trust our politicians to abide by the Law. We trust are Judiciary to up hold the Law, and above all, we trust our Queen to stand by her Coronation Oath and protect us from a Dictatorial government and abolishment by a foreign power. Alas the trust we bestowed to them has been misplaced.
So I ask you this? Do we live in a democracy?
No democracy can function securely without Constitutional safe guards. Why? Because human beings are always striving for more power, this is why we have a sovereign bound by Constitutional Laws. [If you want to see another example of this just look up Mugabe and the Ugandan government]. The Sovereign is given the Prerogative powers by the people, to protect the people from a Parliamentary take over in the form of a Dictatorship, exactly what Blair has done.
What has happened to the Church of England since the head of the C of E, the Queen, is reported to be no longer Christian, but now is in fact Catholic. This can be traced back to 1951, we will explore this at a later date. For now we would like to bring your attention to a letter we have been sent that someone saw in the Portman Papers.
At the time just before the last (in both senses) election, I became very concerned about the Queen in Parliament no longer being ‘Sovereign under God’. I was also very concerned about the fact that , as a clergyman in the Established Church, I have been required to take the Oath of Allegiance. I asked the question. “to whom do I owe this allegiance?” Not being very legally minded I put this matter initially to our Diocesan chancellor. He has no idea so consulted the registrar in Westminster. A day or so later he phoned me back with the following (verbal) reply, which I now relay as accurately as I can
” the question has been asked recently by someone else. The Registrar therefore consulted Buckingham Palace concerning the Oath. The Palace consulted Brussels, who replied that the Oath could stand as it was for the present.”
The Implication is quite clear: the Queen is a vassal of Brussels (or why consult them?) and those who have taken this Oath (such as the Police, MPs, Judges Armed Forces, etc.) are liable to have this Oath called in by Brussels when it suits them. May God have mercy on us!
Philip Foster MA February 1999.
This is to say the least very worrying! Even if you are not religious think about the implications upon us as a people?
Homepage: http://The Peoples United Collective
Responses to Implication is Quite Clear; The Queen is a vassel of Brussles….May God have mercy on us…Phillip Foster MA Feb 1999
Francis Codjoe | March 8, 2009 at 3:03 pm | Reply
The unknown truth about EU. A British public servant wrote about apolitical alliance of European nations, how it woul ddevelop, its charcter and future prospects before the FRench Founding fathers of EU – jean monnrt and robert schuman – were born in 1888 and 1886. According to this Britaon an European confederacy, which would be dedeloped through a European crisis, would be the next major political feature in history after te restoration of the Jews to Palestine. He has been proved right. The nation of Israel was reborn in May 1948 and the EU was born in May 1950. Whatever he wrote about EU has come to pass. Indeed, the Lisbon Treaty paves the way for his prediction about the future of Europe to be fulfilled. This Briton warned Great Britain would not be saved in Europe. We must consult the “Forgotten Briton” to understand the EU and its future
THAT BRAVE MR CAMERON….LIKE HELL HE IS….HE’S A TRAITOR!
Are we actually incarcerated by Treaties to the EU? Not according to British Law.
The Oath of Supremacy, imposed by the Act of Supremacy 1559, provided for any person taking public or church office in England to swear allegiance to the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Failure to so swear was to be treated as treasonable. The Oath was later extended to include Members of Parliament and people studying at universities.
Text of the Oath and the Act of Supremacy as published in 1559:
I, A. B., do utterly testify and declare in my conscience that the Queen’s Highness is the only supreme governor of this realm, and of all other her Highness’s dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal, and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority ecclesiastical or spiritual within this realm; and therefore I do utterly renounce and forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiorities and authorities, and do promise that from henceforth I shall bear faith and true allegiance to the Queen’s Highness, her heirs and lawful successors, and to my power shall assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, privileges and authorities granted or belonging to the Queen’s Highness, her heirs or successors, or united or annexed to the imperial crown of this realm. So help me God, and by the contents of this Book.
Text from Bill of Rights 1689
I A B doe sweare That I doe from my Heart Abhorr, Detest and Abjure as Impious and Hereticall this damnable Doctrine and Position That Princes Excommunicated or Deprived by the Pope or any Authority of the See of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other whatsoever. And I do declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiastical or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.
The government wants us to believe that the Act of Supremacy has been repealed, but I can find no evidence of this. The Act’s could not be repealed anyway; as they are part of our Constitutional Law, and they clearly state that no foreign power has any jurisdiction in this country. This also means it does not matter if the Royal Assent was valid or not, as the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly backs the Act of Supremacy up.
The Ministry of Justice have just confirmed that the government have no plans to replace the Bill of Rights 1689, so as you can see from the text in red, we most certainly are not members of the EU, and proves without doubt that our government have committed Treason against our monarch, our country and us as a people.
All treaties signed are INVALID, as they are against our Constitutional laws, as I have said many times before, Halsbury say’s “to act against the Constitution is an act of Treason” (Halsbury law – Birth Right of the English People. Available on the internet) The signing of the Treaties and all EU legislation the government have introduced into this country, are not valid, for they are an act against our constitution (Bill of Rights 1689, Act of Supremacy 1559) so they can only amount to Treason.
In the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act the government secretly repealed the Treason Acts as follows:
The following enactments shall cease to have effect, namely—
(a) the [1790 c. 48.] Treason Act 1790;
(b) the [1795 c. 7.] Treason Act 1795
The following Acts could not be repealed for the two following reasons.
(1) Both treason Acts are part of our constitutional law, thus cannot be repealed, for the reasons given above.
(2) All Treason Acts were made permanent in 1807 also you can add to the list The Felony and Treason Act 1848. The Treason Act 1351.
So needless to say the government is blatantly guilty of treason and thus can be tried in a court of law for their acts against us. Even more evidence can be found in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, where Blair claimed to have taken the Prerogative Powers from the Queen. He also claimed to be commander in chief of the country, the problem with this bold statement is that only a monarch can be commander in chief of this country, yet again another blatant act of treason. Furthermore Halsbury Law States Sir Edward Coke 1615 ….the prerogative power cannot be removed from a monarch even by an act of parliament… Even more proof.
They have committed a heinous list of offences and blatant treason against us and the proof is in black and white. With combined effort of all our members we can wake the nation up and force the greatest court case in the history of the UK. We could see in the future every MP who allowed this treason to happen, every Prime Minster who instigated acts of treason and even the Queen her self for allowing this to happen, tried in the High court for TREASON. As our protector she should have put a stop to this long ago, as she is only there because of the Constitution, as said by Edward III.
We have a Constitution, it is there to protect us, but it can only do this if we recognise the fact that it exists and is still Law today.
CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT ELIZABETH BECKETT WAS AGED 83 WHEN SHE TOOK ON THE GOVERNMENT…..NEWS BLACKOUT WAS IN FORCE!!
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
CAMERON AND CO ARE PLAYING YOU ALL FOR A BUNCH OF FOOLS- AND YOUR PLAYING ALONG CONFIRMS THEIR BELIEF!
ZOG OF BRITAIN!
ZIONIST ALWAYS DESTROY THE MONARCHY FIRST……BOLSHAVIK RUSSIA..
UnaVoceMiami on 13 Dec 2010
The Brutal Murder of the Russian Royal Family. Sheet Communist Hate and Savagery!
Want to know what the Communists would do to you and your family? See what they did to the Czar Nicholas II and his family.
The horrific and hate filled murder of Russian Czar Nicholas II, his wife Alexandra and the Royal family on July 17, 1918 are irrefutable proof of the criminal behavior and diabolical mindset of godless Communism.
To better understand what Communists, and their aiding and abetting Capitalist Banksters, are capable of doing to you and your family, just take a look at what they did to the Czar and his family.
These bloodthirsty murderers are the same people promoting the anti-Christian, Cult of Death throughout the world. The Cult of Death is bent on spreading the crimes of abortion, aberrosexualism, contraception, euthanasia, feminism, suicide, pornography, and family destruction in all countries, but especially in Christian ones.
The spread of apostasy and heresy within the Church after the extremely controversial and highly divisive Vatican Council II has made the work of the Cult of Death easier than ever. Please pray and work to defeat the savagery and hate of the minions of the anti-Christian Cult of Death.
YOU CAN SEE THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY IN THE FACE OF NICHOLAS….BUT WHEN GIVEN THE CHANCE TO SAVE THE FAMILY- THE BUCKINGHAM PALACE CREW REFUSED- LEAVING THEM TO THE BOLSHAVIK MOB!
1975 REFERENDUM RIGGED…7-7 INSIDE JOB!!