I tell no lies and tomorrow when you have your lunch, just take a moment to remember what was happening, on a hill in Runnymede, way back in 1215...
source
On the 15th June, in the year 1215AD, Evil King John was escorted by what was left of his allies to a meeting place in Runnymede. It was here that King John had AGREED to meet the committee of Barons, who had gained the trust of the people and were empowered to speak on their behalf. After years of LAWLESS rebellion, between Crown and it citizens, a perfect storm was created and this culminated in this famous scene.
source
A country that had come so far, in the last 400 years, with its solid foundations of laws, laid down by the first Kings of England, was now at the point of complete disillusion. King Alfred's "Greatness" had been forsaken by "Evil" King John and he had enjoyed years of proving his critics right.
Eventually, King John pushed too far and like many rulers from around the world, felt the wrath of liberty.
source
In every revolution that has gone by since time began, I have to assume that some lessons have been learned and both equality and justice have evolved a little bit more each time. To my mind, this is just the process of 'the evolution of society' and when you think about it, from start to finish, you can see the obvious trends that accompany such change.
Since the Laws of Wessex were first laid down, in 694AD, all sided have been "wising-up" and reacting in-turn. It is fact that our ancestors agreed upon a treaty with the Crown of England and this was to last forever and bind any future ruler to its more finely-tuned laws.
source
The groundbreaking nature of this treaty, named appropriately as 'The Great Charter', or 'Magna Carta' (Not to be pronounced "The" Magna Carta, as I made the mistake of doing - see video at end of post -), was encapsulated in the first and final clause. In-fact, the people were so confident that they had things "all sown up" that they were more than happy to continue under the rule of such a tyrannical King, once he had sealed the treaty and agreed to stand by the following...
Clause 1:
(Remember to read this from the perspective of a King or Queen)
“FIRST, THAT WE HAVE GRANTED TO GOD, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired. That we wish this so to be observed, appears from the fact that of our own free will, before the outbreak of the present dispute between us and our barons, we granted and confirmed by charter the freedom of the Church's elections - a right reckoned to be of the greatest necessity and importance to it - and caused this to be confirmed by Pope Innocent III. This freedom we shall observe ourselves, and desire to be observed in good faith by our heirs in perpetuity.“
And there it is, the magic word "perpetuity".
This vital clause of Magna Carta was the only reason that people were able to regain order and hold its rulers accountable for corrupting these sacred laws. In the case of King James I and the "The Great Enlightening" of 1648, that followed his punishment, it was already agreed in the constitution that the price for "High-Treason" was your head...
A law that still stands to this day and should have seen Tony Blair and many others swinging from a rope.
As I have stated in the earlier parts of this series, it seems that there is a time-cycle of around 400-years, between reinstating our constitution and when it breaks down again. I will demonstrate this by briefly explaining these breakdowns and the dates they occurred.
It was the beginning of the 9th century, after King Alfred set in to motion the idea of upholding the core principles of the rulers before him, that Law took a giant step in its own evolution. This was the beginning of UK Laws being set in perpetuity and it managed to hold things together for over 400-years.
This is where we reach the time of 'Treasonous' King John, around the beginning of the 13th century. After he had either repealed or just simply ignored Alfred's Laws, the next step in the evolutionary cycle began...
Do you remember I said this:
"The groundbreaking nature of this treaty, named appropriately as 'The Great Charter', was encapsulated in the first and final clause."
I am speaking of the 61st clause in 'The great charter', otherwise known as Article61. It is testimony to its own power, that even though the 1215 treaty was redrafted, without the inclusion of Article61, in 1226 and many times thereafter, Article61 came to be reclaimed and held aloft, in order to facilitate the "The great revolution"
Coincidentally, this was400-YEARS after Magna Carta was sealed IN PERPETUITY...
Clause 61 (also known as the security clause)
“….We give and grant to the barons the following security: The barons shall elect twenty-five of their number to keep, and cause to be observed with all their might, the peace and liberties granted and confirmed to them by this charter. If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the peace or of this security, and the offence is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us - or in our absence from the kingdom to the chief justice - to declare it and claim immediate redress. If we, or in our absence abroad the chief justice, make no redress within forty days, reckoning from the day on which the offence was declared to us or to him, the four barons shall refer the matter to the rest of the twenty-five barons, who may distrain upon and assail us in every way possible, with the support of the whole community of the land, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, or anything else saving only our own person and those of the queen and our children, until they have secured such redress as they have determined upon.
Seems it wasn't just King John who hated this clause...
I've spoke of the revolution against King John', 400 years after Alfred and I have also told you a little about "The Peasants Revolt", which led to the beheading of Charles I.
source
So here we find ourselves in the 21st century and if my calculations are correct, we are due for our next step-up in the evolution of Law.
The catalyst for this "next step-up" would come in the form of 'The house of Lords'. Or to be more precise, it was something that happened, in 1911, to change the powers of the Lords, that invoked the spirits of our brave ancestors.
In 1911 our constitution was changed and not for the better. In UK law, we have a something that is known as "separation of power". This is basically like saying "you can't be judge, jury and executioner". The biggest example of this, in common law, is that Laws cannot be made by 'Man' or 'Woman', they can only be discovered.
This is one of the main differences between EU laws(Canon Law) and the UK constitution(Common law) and it has been explained perfectly in @mrbullet131's post, titled "The 12 assumptions of Roman Canon-Law".
A Roman Court does not operate according to any true rule of law, but by presumptions of the law. Therefore, if presumptions presented by the private Bar Guild are not rebutted they become fact and are therefore said to stand true. There are twelve (12) key presumptions asserted by the private Bar Guilds which if unchallenged stand true being Public Record, Public Service, Public Oath, Immunity, Summons, Custody, Court of Guardians, Court of Trustees, Government as Executor/Beneficiary, Executor De Son Tort, Incompetence, and Guilt:
source - @mrbullet131
Fact is, tyrants will always exist and most or our politicians seem to be tasked with finding loops-holes and weaknesses for these tyrant to exploit. As I said at the start of this, both sides have learned to react in response to the other and while Common law has always protected itself by decentralizing its powers, corrupt politicians have always sought to abolish such protocols. One such lawful-protocol is the power that the House of Lords has to 'veto' an act of parliament. Obviously, this is to stop any kind of mad Prime Minister or any of his minions, creating any law they wish to.
Or better still, it stops psychopaths taking us into unlawful wars, under false pretenses....
In 1911, when the 'power to veto' was removed from the house of lords, it left us with a parliament that was allowed to pass laws, relatively unchallenged. It goes without saying that it becomes more than suspicious when this happened just 4 years before the whole world went to war, 1914 - 1918.
But this was just the spark that began the fire and it's time to come full circle and back to what I briefly spoke about in part 1 of this epic crusade.
Sir Edward Heath, Prime Minister of the UK, 1970 - 1974.
To cut a long story short, Edward Heath signed us into the EEC(European Economic Community). Although not revealed to the public, this treaty changed certain parts of what was left of our constitution and there were many folk who noticed these finer points of the agreement.
THE INQUIRY THAT WAS LOCKED AWAY FOR 30 YEARS...
The Heath Administration were fully aware at the time that there would be an inevitable “Loss of Sovereignty” which was even admitted in the Kilmuir letter. However at the time this was all hidden in secrecy and so the British people were fooled and duped into what would turn into foreign Rule. The people were voting for the Common Market, not a European Government. The British Government also committed Sedition by heavily backing the entrance into Europe. This evidence was hidden as it showed quite clearly that fundamental laws were broken
source
This classified government document dated April 1971 remained secret until it was released in 2002 under the 30 year rule. Also known as “Shoe-horned into the EU” as titled now, 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
Maybe, if we would have known this in 1973, when PM Heath signed the deal, we would have avoided the future that we now live in.
Now I was not expecting this part to go on so long and I have no intention of editing this story, you need to know the whole truth and I am becoming conscious that this post is becoming quite large(I am staring at another 7 paragraphs below this one, at present). I have no intention of causing you to 'flat-line' and I want you to take in the details that are involved in this monumental act of skullduggery. So please come back for PART 5!! and I promise it will finally conclude this tale of high-treason.
Preview to part
'SHOEHORNED INTO THE EU' (Official pdf document) and the treason that allowed the war against Iraq.
(Magna Carta, not "the Magna Carta")
Previous editions to this series:
part1 - part2 - part3
