At first glance a bill to repeal EU laws illegally imposed on us seems like a good idea, I say at first glance. What this bill allows is government to repeal any bill they like without going through Parliament.
You will all be aware of the new Bill of Rights Cameron was prattling on about, well I got a copy of the joint House of Commons House of Lords report which starts off well enough saying we will keep our existing rights and freedoms, but it all goes tits up on page 106 paragraph 4 where they say by passing a bill they can remove any of our rights and freedoms.
Now I wrote to them all six MP’s and six Peers and I said who the hell do you think you are that you can take away from me rights and freedoms my forefathers fought and on occasion died for? I received a reply from Andrew Dismore’s MP’s secretary telling me I would be interested in the discussion they were having in Parliament about whether by passing a bill they could remove the rule of law?
Now what does that mean if they remove the rule of law? we are left with Satanic law. “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”
Lets think about that. Our children can be dragged of the street and raped and it will not be a crime, your old mum can have her door kicked in beaten to death and robbed and it won’t be a crime. And we are left with law which is tantamount to Sharia law. And we need that like a hole in the head.
The Great Repeal Bill will allow the (un)establishment’s ministers to illegally scrap any law which protects us, they have for some time been dumming down our police force by putting common purpose yes men in charge they have so reduced our armed forces and keep them fighting overseas to support one world government.
We are living in dangerous times, I was a constable and firmly believe in the rule of law but in my opinion if we are to remain a totally free people we must by hook or by crook arm ourselves ready to take this Kingdom back by force from the crooked traitors in Parliament they need to be put on trial for there lives.
Why do they want to replace the real Bill of Rights 1689?
Simply because it sets limitations upon any administration of governance which comes into service.
Without the original Bill (of 1689) being followed by successive governments, they would be even more tyrannical than they are right now, and the people are running out of time.
The 1689 Bill which is unalterable, has the strongest legal foundations and binds parliaments says 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.”
This isn’t the only reason we were never in the then “eec” or European “Union”.
This is also proven by the two documents that follow:
This Letter, written in December 1960 by the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir in response to Edward Heath on the implications of Signing the Treaty of Rome and joining the “Common Market” attempts to caution the then ‘Prime Minister’ by outlining that his attempts to trick the people of the UK into the supposed trade deal would in fact be an act of Treason. It was HIDDEN FOR 30 YEARS. It was only in the 1990’s that this letter seen the light of day.
Shoe-horned into the EU (containing FCO 30/1048)
This classified government document dated April 1971 remained top-secret until it too was released under the 30 year rule (in 2002). It proves Heath’s government knew the 1972 EEC Treaty would lead to the loss of sovereignty, and was therefore treason. They had a stunningly accurate picture of the EU, which never was the EEC (an Economic Community), expecting Britain to be abolished after the turn of the century. The authors, all civil servants or ministers, are very pro EU, their intent is clearly to conceal the loss of sovereignty. But they understood perfectly it would all be abolished. In public Heath’s government all lied the treaty would not affect our sovereignty. This includes Douglas Hurd, still an active senior Conservative, who is also both a liar and a traitor, the evidence was put to him at a Conservative Conference in Blackpool. He was reassuring that his connections in the legal profession would ensure he was never convicted. We the people will see about that.
This supposed “Great repeal Bill” cannot repeal the six unconstitutional European Treaties signed and sealed by impostors within Westminster because treaties of any kind, cannot be repealed. The one way to abolish those treaties is with a peoples Declaration or hearing the treason matter in a court of law. And there hasn’t been any courts of law since 1848. Brexit was really brexiTRAP.
Since the recent Referendum on the membership of the European Union no changes has been made and it has not only confused the general public more, it has also divided the people of Britain who should instead be unifying under the law. By letting it continue in time we may never see those same inherent rights be maintained. There has not only been talk of “converting EU law into British
law” which cannot legally be done especially since the invocation of Article 61, there are still plans for the
“absorption of the British Military to form the EU Military and a ‘nuclear defence shield” which cannot be allowed to happen.
Foreign Rule is DEFINITELY ILLEGAL in Britain
The Bill of Rights 1689, one of the most important documents in the British Constitution, states with
absolute certainty 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.”
In 1913 (Bowles v Bank of England) it was ruled that:
“The Bill of Rights still remains unrepealed, and practice of custom, however prolonged or however
acquiesced in on the part of the subject, cannot be relied on by the crown as justifying any infringement of its provisions.”
On 21 July 1993, the Speaker of The House of Commons issued a reminder to the courts. She said:
“There has of course been no amendment to the Bill of Rights, the house is entitled to expect that the Bill of Rights will be fully respected by all those appearing before the courts.”
The original English Bill of Rights 1689 (which the traitors in parliament want to illegally replace) passed to secure liberty in past times of despotism 328 years ago, and in verbatim incorporating the people’s unrebutted British Declaration of Rights 1688, cannot be repealed. Not only is the Bill of Rights a “constitutional statute” which are, according to the Thoburn Judgement; “immune from implied repeal” the Declaration of Rights 1688 is a Peace treaty which like all treaties, such as the The Treaty of Union in 1707, and Magna Carta 1215, cannot be repealed.
The principles that came of the Glorious Revolution cannot be changed by any Parliament, but can only.be changed via a constitutional convention of the people. Much the same for the Scottish Claim of
Right in 1689.
Addressing both Houses of Parliament on 20 July 1988, at a meeting of both houses to mark the 300th anniversary of the Declaration of Rights, Her Majesty said that it is “still part of statute law which the whole foundation and edifice of our parliamentary democracy rests.” so why do they want to replace it? It should be obvious by now that they know they have been breaking it (and still are).
So far, the people still don’t seem to know about this great plan or the seriousness of it all. The (non) Queen’s 2017 imposter speech written by the unelected quisling Theresa May contains plans to:
● “regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremism”
● “maintain a deep and special relationship with European allies”
● “modernise the court system”
● “the same rules and laws apply after exit”
● “convert EU law into UK law as we leave the EU”
● “maintain the scope of devolved decision-making powers immediately after exit.”
● “The [International Sanctions] Bill will support our role as a permanent member of the UN
Security Council, by establishing a new sovereign UK framework to implement international
sanctions on a multilateral or unilateral basis”
● “ensure that . . . data protection . . . is suitable for our new digital age . . . including a right to be
Do you think Brexit was a Trap? Let us know in the comments!