[EXTRACT]

[Sunday-21st September,2008]

Where freedom is vanishing

Think of me ten years ago trying to describe and come to conclusions on the frightening-fast ongoing process of the

TAKEOVER.

We are now, in the next year or so, coming to the crunch point and the potentially

FINAL LOSS OF OUR FREEDOM.

Someone sagely said that freedom is like being pregnant, you are or are not, there is no half-way house.

The most deadly threat to Britons as

FREE PERSONS in a FREE COUNTRY

is the proposed

EU CONSTITUTION

under the guise of a

NEW LISBON TREATY

to replace the Constitution rejected in 2006 in a

NATIONAL REFERENDUM by the FRENCH and DUTCH.

THE BRITISH WEREN'T ALLOWED TO HAVE ONE.

[As we all know. in 2008,the Irish people also voted NO to the LISBON TREATY though you would not have thought so when reading the comments of many of the prime movers of the EU CONSTITUTION.]

So bear with me and I will tell you in as few words as possible where the this threat came from.

This has been researched in the book called

"The Great Deception"

by

Booker  and  North.

If you find copies are banned or just not obtainable in ten years' time then you will know that

THEY WROTE IN VAIN.

The first person we have to thank is an Italian communist Altiero Spinelli who in his prison cell during the war had a vision of a

UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

to be assembled over a long period without openly revealing the end purpose.  The people's of Europe , he planned, should

NOT BE CONSULTED

until

"constituent assembly"

was ready to draw up a

"constitution"

THAT WAS IN 1941!.

The next two originators were Arthur Salter, an English civil servant and Jean Monnet, a French brandy salesman.

Their idea of a

UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

was a new form of supra-national government run by technocrats

BEYOND THE CONTROL

of beyond the control of

ELECTED GOVERNMENTS

elected politicians and certainly

ELECTORATES.

They too realized that they could never succeed

IF THEIR TRUE PURPOSE BECAME EVIDENT.

The final originator was Paul-Henri Spaak, a prime Minister of Belgium who thought up the brilliant way to

DISGUISE the POLITICAL PURPOSE of the PROJECT

This was by disguising the project as only being concerned with

ECONOMICS MATTERS and COOPERATION

hence the original

"COMMON MARKET"

under which

DECEIT

WE JOINED

  In 2003 it was decided the time was ripe to abandon subterfuge and wrap up the takeover in the form of the

EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION.

Brought forward before nine new countries were admitted, some having just escaped from communism, it was to set the whole thing in concrete.  It was advertised and promoted as a document to bring the EU and the people closer together and in the UK as a mere tidying-up exercise of loose ends of previous treaties.

One hundred and five carefully selected delegates from fifteen countries met under the chairmanship of former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing to formulate it.  An impression of public consultation was created by consulting non-governmental organisations, NGOs in Brussels speak. These NGOs were almost all

 FUNDED BY THE EU

and no organization which was in any way slightly critical was included.

Two British delegates, the Labour MP Gisela Stuart and the Conservative MP David Heathcote Amory, thoroughly alarmed, proposed a number of amendments and mildly sceptic reservations which were totally ignored.  The result after many months, was a document running to three hundred and fifty pages incorporating all the previous treaties.

Its form as usual was deliberately ambiguous, spattered with contradictory objectives such as

"UNITED IN DIVERSITY"

The vagueness enabled many

VITAL ISSUES

left to be finally decided by the

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

whose guiding purpose in all judgments is held to be

"ever-closer union".

In effect it was a vast blank cheque where its full implications would only be realised

WHEN IT WAS RATIFIED AND AGREED BY NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS.

Someone summed it up as the ramblings of a slightly pompous megalomaniac.  the British Institute of Directors gave the more sombre opinion that the additional powers written into the document were

"effectively limitless"

In a misguided attempt to con the public

OUR GOVERNMENT

offered to send a complete copy of the constitution to anyone who asked and your aged grandfather has one on the shelf as I write.  I have attempted to read it too, unlike most of the politicians

WHO VOTED FOR IT.

Believe me I have dealt with it gently.

The first attempt at a draft constitution was published in October 2002 and discussed at the Dublin conference in June 2004.

It specified a flag, the anthem, the motto

 UNITY IN DIVERSITY

the

EURO CURRENCY

and let joy be unconfirmed

Europe Day on 9th May.

April 1, was rejected for some reason.

A good day, 9th May my fellow churchwarden suggests, to fly the

FLAG of ST. GEORGE

The new powers taken were divided into

"Exclusive competences"

where the EU had total control and

"Shared competences"

where member states kept power

IF THE EU DIDN'T WANT IT

THE RESULT IS MUCH THE SAME.

Referendums were started in the countries which had either decided to have one thinking the result would be YES where political pressure forced it on a government in the UK or where their own constitution insisted on it [As Ireland in 2008]

The mind-set of the EU to REFERENDA and its attitude to DEMOCRACY are summed up by Louis Michel, once a Belgian Foreign Minister, commenting at the time of the NICE TREATY which IRELAND

initially

REJECTED:

" I personally think that it is very dangerous to organize  referendums when you're not sure

TO WIN THEM.

If you lose the referendum it's a big problem for the EU"

Here is where the big problem unimaginably happened.

Both FRANCE and the NETHERLANDS decisively rejected it to the shocked disbelief and consternation of BRUSSELS.

This in theory and according to EU rules

KILLED IT STONE DEAD

However, with the EU when you get the  wrong answer, you just keep asking the question until you get the right answer on the basis that the misguided voters [That's possibly YOU!]  either didn't mean what they said and needed educating.

FIRSTLY though, we tried to see who was

LYING TO US

and YOU can JUDGE for YOURSELF.

The leaders of

FRANCE, GERMANY and HOLLAND said outright that the new LISBON TREATY to replace the REJECTED CONSTITUTION was 95 to 99 per cent, the same as before, with just superficial alterations in wording, and that any opt-outs secured by the then PRIME MINISTER Tony Blair were not worth the paper they were written on. though in slightly more diplomatic language.

The British government stated that it was only another treaty, that it had got secure opt-outs on all the points it wanted and that there was no need for the

REFERENDUM THEY HAD BEEN PROMISED.

*

[With such on the whole a laid-back population there was no question of a

REVOLUTION

and instead the EUROSCEPTIC leaders of the different factions just went on

Talking; Talking ; Talking and Talking and more TALKING as they are doing today in September 2008. The seriousness of our situation just hasn't got home to the majority of the population who when listening to the case for

WITHDRAWAL FROM THE EU

ask themselves why have the converted not taken to the streets to show their anger of the BETRAYAL?

There have been no barricades - no civil disobedience - in fact one would think that there was nothing at all to worry about.  In history it has always been THE FEW who make the difference and in 2008 there is still no overall leader of the Eurosceptic parties with the courage and determination to GET THEM OUT ON THE STREETS until we have secured OUR PROMISED REFERENDUM. As we have stated many times there is not the room in prison for the thousands of persistent criminals let alone those who are

FIGHTING FOR THEIR COUNTRY'S CONSTITUTION AND FREEDOM.

The Home Office it has been reported is now using BED and BREAKFAST accommodation in Hotels on the South Coast for their overflow difficulties so it is hardly a matter to be greatly concerned about if you find yourself having an extra holiday paid for from the almost bankrupt GOVERNMENT which is still at this dyer moment filling the Guardian  with their politically - correct needs for further non-jobs at astronomic salary and pension levels when they already have more on their payroll than no doubt any government in the past. The International Monetary Fund is bearing down on MR SPENDTHRIFT  from across our Northern Border who with members of his Tartan Clan and hanger's -on have made a gigantic mess of our country in Labour's 12 years in office and as with the call for BANKERS to REPAY their ill-gotten gains why should not those in government who have brought us to such financial catastrophe not also to be asked to give up their gold-plated pensions and make further recompense for the way they have brought our once great country TO RUIN.

WE have tried time and time again to get ACTION but it appears the EU COMMISSION is so confident of the inability of the majority of the people in our country to see the danger that they have only to wait just a little longer and they

WILL HAVE US ALL IN THEIR CAPTIVE BAG.]

*

To return to the subject in hand:

So cutting through the forest of verbiage, let us get down to particulars and try and see what our leaders proposed to

GIVE AWAY

As Ruth Lea says in her

"essential guide to the European Union"

this constitutional treaty is unlike any previous treaty for three main reasons:

a)    THE CONSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS ARE PROFOUND

b)    THERE ARE MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES

C)     THERE IS AN UNPRECEDENTED TRANSFER OF POWERS TO THE EU.

The EU would have FULL LEGAL personality, it would become A STATE.  Its POWERS would no longer be based on TREATIES. 

MEMBER STATES WILL CEASE BEING INDEPENDENT COUNTRIES

[THIS IS A FACT and NOT FICTION whatever GORDON BROWN and his  false acolytes PROCLAIM  the NEW TREATY as a 'tidying-up exercise' and no doubt as SAFE AS HOUSES.  Well we all know in September 2008 that there will soon be many householders who will lose THEIR JOBS and THEIR HOMES and on top of this to LOSE the right of FREEDOM and their centuries old 'habeas corpus '  protection together with the  accustomed COMMON LAW of ENGLAND within an

INDEPENDENT NATION STATE. ]

There would be an

EU HEAD OF STATE

and

 FOREIGN MINISTER

under whatever name.

The EU Foreign Minister called the High Representative to avoid delicate British susceptibilities will preside over a

SINGLE SUPRANATIONAL DIPLOMATIC SERVICE.

This will include seconded diplomats from member countries, but, they will be

ACCOUNTABLE TO

and owe

THEIR LOYALTY

to the new

EU FOREIGN OFFICE

[IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?]

Also, member states will not necessarily know what is going on in negotiations between the

 EU and OTHER GOVERNMENTS.

This is all in Working Paper No28, EU Foreign Service.

[The present ] Sixty vetoes would go and Qualified majority Voting QMV would become the norm.

WE WOULD also become REAL instead of NOTIONAL

 EU CITIZENS

and

OUR LOYALTY

OUR ALLEGIANCE

would be to the

EU [EUROPEAN UNION COLLECTIVE]

 NOT

TO OUR OWN COUNTRY

[YES! you are right! .You have lost your own national identity and country but your successive governments kept it from YOU because they knew YOU would have more to say.  The tragedy is that YOU  expected others to tell YOU the TRUTH but know that many more people have now learnt the lesson that they cannot trust the majority of their so-called REPRESENTATIVES in THEIR HOUSE of COMMONS.  We cannot talk ourselves out of this mess .Only direct action on our streets taking a lead from history at home and abroad-you haven't forgotten the early Labour movements and the example of Gandhi in India.  Civil Disobedience will win if sufficient people decide on

ACTION not TALKING

 and then they will save

THEIR IDENTITY THEIR CONSTITUTION THEIR FREEDOM -THEIR COUNTRY.

Your own Eurosceptic bodies refuse to work and march together and take the fight onto the streets which is the RIGHT of every FREE MAN when his FREEDOM and COUNTRY are threatened. History can confirm this.  The most powerful country in the world came about from REVOLUTION and we should know because we had taught our kith and kin who have migrated across the world the importance of the

RIGHTS and LIBERTIES

of

ENGLISHMEN. ]

*

THIS WOULD NOT OF COURSE BE SPELT OUT IN BLACK AND WHITE

[LIKE SO MUCH OVER THE PAST 40 YEARS]

BUT THIS WOULD BE THE EFFECT.

WE WOULD also become REAL instead of NOTIONAL EU CITIZENS and our LOYALTY would be to the EU

NOT TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY

[WHAT IS LEFT OF IT!]

THE "TREATY"

also imposes a

LEGAL DUTY on PARLIAMENTS

[To call what will be left in place in ENGLAND a PARLIAMENT will be like comparing the many despotic regimes in the world who have such supposed  ASSEMBLY to its real ILLUSTRIOUS forbear.]

"to contribute actively to the good functioning of the [EUROPEAN] UNION"

a catch-all  phrase if ever there was one.

Even more important, the

EU CONSTITUTION

would be an enabling one

[As used by Adolf Hitler in GERMANY in 1933 to gain COMPLETE CONTROL of the GOVERNMENT and therefore the COUNTRY]

so that were the UNION has not yet got COMPLETE POWER it has

"shared competence"

where member countries

[They will no longer be countries but provinces of the EU COLLECTIVE.]

CAN ONLY ACT

IF THE EU CHOOSES NOT TO.

[WHICH WILL BE VERY UNLIKELY]

One of these competences is

"FREEDOM, SECURITY and JUSTICE"

and this is where

"corpus juris"

comes in which is even nastier than it sounds.

[Don't confuse with our own valuable and ancient right of habeas corpus:

Only the United Kingdom, which since the beginning of the 1970s  has been systematically betrayed by its successive governments, led by the 'Conservatives, has, among the EU 'Member States' of world substance, contrived, through incompetence and fumbling, to hold back a little from the revolutionary onslaught.  The  slim chances of Britain escaping national annihilation were diminishing at an ever accelerating pace as this book was being finalised. For instance, on 6th February 2002 the European 'Parliament' approved the

EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT

and blocked

habeas corpus

- safeguard established by the

English Common Law

since the 13th century, as a means of preventing over-zealous or corrupt magistrates from incarcerating EU citizens from another EU country sine die in their own jails, or in those of a third EU country.  This appallingly retrograde decision means that Britons, with effect from 2004, will be at risk of being arbitrarily arrested for crimes which are not recognised in English law,

such as

RACISM

or

XENOPHOBIA . . .

[Criticising the EU for example will qualify and punishment will be vigorously enforced when the trap door has finally been sprung. Then many of you doubters out there will learn the TRUTH but TOO LATE!]

The above information from:

THE EUROPEAN COLLECTIVE

by Christopher Story

www.worldreports.org.uk

 *

To return to our previous subject:

ALSO, as the EU CONSTITUTION does NOT SET LIMITS to UNION power, its POWERS would be

EFFECTIVELY LIMITLESS

with the powers of the member states only those permitted by the

EU [COLLECTIVE]

Even more deadly, powers are written in so that the

CONSTITUTION/TREATY

could be altered in future without all the democratic bother of setting up further treaties. This is under a new

"simplified revision procedure"

allowing incremental change.

THE NEW UNION WOULD HAVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS OF STATE HOOD'

[NOW DO YOU GET IT?]

As some perceptive person wrote, this is the final state of a slow moving

Coup d'etat

[If you are not aware of this term it is:

'a violent or subversive stroke of state policy]

Why then do I single out corpus juris from the long list of powers proposed to be given away to this power hungry monster?

I do so because it cuts at the heart of our ancient system of

JUSTICE and FREEDOM

without which we are truly

NO LONGER FREE MEN OR WOMEN

I'll make it as simple as I can. Even at my advanced age I'd rather be doing other things than raising my blood pressure writing this

[Well! the transcriber of this bulletin knows the feeling as he  is on Friday 26th September to receive DC Cardioversion (electric shock ) treatment in order to get his heart back in rhythm. We will not discuss the dangers of this procedure but if anyone wishes to get us out the way this will be a simple matter of fixing the equipment or other means.  If  you still see this message on Saturday 27th September, then you'll know that I'm a goner! -( my sincere thanks to P Da- and team and S H. ]

Corpus Juris

 is a full -fledged plan painstakingly prepared by the

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

as some perspective writer said' pointing a loaded pistol at the heart of our most

ANCIENT LIBERTIES

It first came to our notice when a student of Italian law called Torquil Dick Erickson was invited by mistake, having a non-English name was invited by mistake, having a non-English name, to a select gathering of  "members of European Jurists for the protection of the financial interests of the

EUROPEAN UNION"

It was called to unveil the detailed project of

Corpus Juris

and was envisaged as the embryo of a future

EUROPEAN CRIMINAL CODE

NO ENGLISH or IRISH were INVITED.

The proposals were and still are:

A SINGLE LEGAL AREA IN THE EU

[No place for our common law of ENGLAND]

A EUROPEAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

 with

NATIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTORS

"under a duty to assist him"

A Judge of Freedoms, straight from Orwell's 1984, a scary prophetic book which I've mentioned before. 

His job would merely be to ensure ant arrest was lawful under

Corpus Juris  rules

Not to demand evidence for arrest.

A EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT

issued by any

[Each underlined word has a separate bulletin]

NATIONAL JUDGE

on instructions from the

EUROPEAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

"means any national police force would be required to enforce it".

The arrested suspect could then be imprisoned for six months, renewable for a further number of three month periods

WITHOUT EVIDENCE BEING PRODUCED.

[Has this woken you up out of your slumber of indifference?]

The eventual trial would be held by professional judges with none of the bother of having

A JURY

or

LAY MAGISTRATES.

The prosecution could then retry a prisoner on appeal even after acquittal and continue the process, as opposed to our law of double jeopardy.

TO REMIND YOU!

In our (common) law we have

SUSPICION

INVESTIGATION

ARREST

CHARGE.

  *

IN EUROPE

the sequence is :

SUSPICION

ARREST

and

IMPRISONMENT

INVESTIGATION

and eventually

CHARGE.

[Which system would YOU prefer?]

Spell this path to tyranny out to any knowledgeable person today

AND THEY WOULD LAUGH

and say

WE WOULD NEVER ACCEPT IT.

[Over 500 years ago a Lord Chancellor - Lord Chief Justice of England - Sir John Fortescue prised the Common Law of England and derided the Corpus Juris system on the continent which was not the system for

FREE ENGLISHMEN

with their

habeas corpus

 -a safeguard against tyranny and injustice.]

[Each word underlined has a separate bulletin]

Edmund Burke the great parliamentarian and English orator and statesman of the the 18th century made a comparison of the

ENGLISH CONSTITUTION

for that is what it was then and is today in 2008

and

"the proud Keep of Windsor"

in his celebrated Letter to a Noble Lord!

" Such are their IDEAS; with their RELIGION, and such their LAW.  But as to our COUNTRY and our RACE, as LONG as the WELL-COMPACTED STRUCTURE of our CHURCH and STATE, the SANCTUARY, the HOLY of HOLIES of that ANCIENT LAW, DEFENDED by REFERENCE, DEFENDED by POWER - a FORTRESS at once and A TEMPLE -shall STAND INVIOLATE on the brow of the BRITISH SION,  AS LONG as the BRITISH MONARCHY - NOT MORE LIMITED than FENCED by the ORDERS of the STATE - shall, LIKE the PROUD KEEP of WINDSOR, rising  in the MAJESTY of PROPORTION and GIRT with the DOUBLE BELT of its KINDRED and COEVAL TOWERS; AS LONG as this AWFUL STRUCTURE shall OVERSEE and GUARD the SUBJECTED LAND, so the long MOUNDS and DYKES of the low, fat, BEDFORD LEVEL will have NOTHING TO FEAR from the PICKAXES of all the LEVELLERS of FRANCE [we will add GERMANY in 2008]  AS LONG as OUR SOVEREIGN LORD the KING [QUEEN] and his [her] FAITHFUL SERVANTS, the LORDS and COMMONS of THIS REALM - the TRIPAL CORD which NO MAN CAN BREAK [Until New Labour came to Power]; the SOLEMN, SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL FRANK-PLEDGE of THIS NATION; the FIRM GUARANTEES of EACH OTHER'S BEING., and EACH OTHER'S RIGHTS; the JOINT and SEVERAL SECURITIES, EACH IN PLACE and ORDER, for every KIND, and every QUALITY of PROPERTY and of DIGNITY - AS LONG as THESE ENDURE, so LONG the DUKE of BEDFORD is SAFE: and we are ALL SAFE TOGETHER - the HIGH from the BLIGHTS of ENVY and the SPOILATIONS of RAPACITY; the LOW from the IRON HAND of OPPRESSION [within the EU Collective] and the INSOLENT SPURN of CONTEMPT.   Amen!

*

[NO ONE can READ the ABOVE and NOT SEE that the TRUST that HAD BEEN PASSED TO US has BEEN BROKEN.]

*

Unfortunately under Article 280 of the

AMSTERDAM TREATY

it can be introduced

AND WE HAVE NO VETO

It was introduced in three easy stages to sugar the pill

TO THE GULLIBLE BRITISH

Stage 1  -  It will just apply to the European Commission and their employers.

Stage 2  -  A Prosecutor's office will be established in each STATE to work with POLICE and LAW COURTS.

Stage 3  -  After a period an intergovernmental conference will ratify the introduction of Corpus Juris and then establish a

EUROPEAN PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE.

THIS IS A CLASSIC EU PROCESS: a secretive start, government and EU denials -

"only a discussion paper"

then legislation by

STEALTH

UNTIL IT IS TOO LATE TO STOP IT.

I remind you that in the official memorandum to the Corpus Juris document it is described as

"a fairer, simpler and more efficient system of repression"

This seems a refreshingly accurate description.

Another definition of a

POLICE STATE

which fits in with this is

"where the

POLICE

or

PAID SERVANTS of the STATE can ARREST PEOPLE and send them to PRISON without TRIAL".

[As everyone knows in Brown's supposed Britain there are now the highest numbers ever now paid by the STATE.  No doubt in every lane; street; and  road, in village -  town - city there will be many who will relish the power to send their neighbours to

PRISON without TRIAL.

Back to the CONSTITUTION and cast your eyes down this list of

"exclusive competences",

i e. complete power which the treaty would give the EU.

Before you do that though, consider the admission by one Guiliano Amato, a former Italian Prime Minister and one of the principle architects of the

REJECTED CONSTITUTION

in a speech given in London on the

 "TREATY" to REPLACE IT.

"They (the EU leaders) decided the document

SHOULD BE UNREADABLE  -  IT IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL

that was the sort of perception.  Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a

REFERENDUM

because it would mean there was something new.."

This was accomplished by putting the proposals of the constitution into amendments to existing treaties and not publishing the consolidated

3,000 PAGES

UNTIL THE TREATY HAS BEEN RATIFIED.

[NOW DO YOU GET IT?]

To resume, without further comment,

Competition rules for the functioning of the market.

CUSTOMS UNION

MONETARY POLICY

MARINE and BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

COMMUNICATIONS

PUBLIC HEALTH, which would tell your MOTHER and the NHS what to do and HOW TO DO IT.

ENERGY

COMMERCIAL POLICY

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

So as not to miss anything out, the following would be

"shared competences"

the definition of shared being that nations [provinces] could only legislate on them if the EU chose not to do so:

THE INTERNAL MARKET

FREEDOM, SECURITY and JUSTICE

AGRICULTURE and FISHERIES.

TRANSPORT

ENERGY (a new competence).

SOCIAL POLICY

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL and TERRITORIAL COHESION, ENVIRONMENT.

CONSUMER PROTECTION

SAFETY in PUBLIC HEALTH matters.

It may occur to you that this lot doesn't leave a great deal for our

WELL-PAID

[with gold-plated pensions]

600-odd MPs in

WESTMINSTER

to chat about.

THIS applies even more to SMPs in EDINBURGH

That however should not worry the

EU COMMISSION

 as long as they are left in place for people to vote them in and out of office

PERIODICALLY

AS a FACADE of DEMOCRACY

You will remember the following which were dealt with in

CHAPTER 5

but also come under the heading of

VANISHING FREEDOM

These include the growth of

Europol

with its new headquarters now to be established in

 Denmark,

The European Gendarmerie Force

with its

SPANISH and FRENCH

associations and the unreported massive order for

CROWD CONTROL WEAPONRY

for the

HOME OFFICE,

now presumably updated.

The process of eventually getting the whole population ona

DNA DATABASE

is currently gathering speed, with reports of

POLICE

taking swabs for crimes as severe as dropping litter or speeding.

Anyone could be on it with details trawled by unknown officials and combined with those of real criminals on the other EU country's databases.  There was also a linkage of national databases EU-wide, done for bland and sensible sounding reasons.

Chapter Five also dealt with ID cards and sophisticated surveillance and the pressure of political correctness leading to

SELF-CENSORSHIP.

An idea the EU Commission is working on is the EU-wide political parties where those making the right noises would be subsidized. This comes from the

TREATY of NICE

where an article states that

"The Council.....shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level and in particular the rules regarding funding".

It then goes on to say in

EUROSPEAK

that parties must agree with the objectives of the EU before they can be registered and that ARTICLE FOUR of the TREATY lays down a process of verification of these obligations.

It then says that the European Parliament could de-register a party which

"did not satisfy the conditions for registration".

[Well as we have stated on many occasions our so-called MINISTERS of the CROWN

have signed EU TREATIES without even reading the FULL TREATY.  As one can see from above those political parties opposed to the EU will not be able to register and therefore will not be permitted to exist.  The main purpose of the 1998 Election Regulations on a party being registered was the forerunner of these final objectives.  We ourselves were refused by the Birmingham Election Office in 1999 European Election from using the name of our party-English Democratic Party and we were given just 5 minutes to come up with another name EDP-English Freedom Party.   We were however at the pre-election broadcasts from the Black Museum introduced as the English Democratic Party and we had our own EDP ROSETTE in place.  But on the election voting form we were down as an INDEPENDENT. It is not difficult to see the gross injustice of the Birmingham Election Office decision.  They knew that the name ENGLISH was not a word to encourage and as for as DEMOCRATIC that did not fit in with their ideology. We achieved over 3000 votes  in the EU Election but it is obvious that a great number of the voters had no idea of the aims of the  INDEPENDENT candidate which the name ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY would have portrayed on the voting form.  We are still at our post 12 years later because of our commitment to those who voted for the English Democratic Party in the 1997 General Election and also the EDP-English Freedom Party in 1999 which was not listed on the official voting form.

You will immediately see that this would make it nearly impossible for any

REAL OPPOSITION

to survive and the heresy of opposition to the

 EU RELIGION

could in practice be

BANNED.

Sun Tzu, a very wise and successful Chinese general 2,500 years ago, wrote,

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable".

*

That is very nearly enough of

DOOM and GLOOM

for one chapter, except for two completely harmless sounding pieces of home grown legislation, entitled the

"Civil Contingences Act ,2004

and the

"Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill"

The first gives the Prime Minister or Secretary of State or even a GOVERNMENT WHIP, powers to REPEAL or AMEND and laws and to do practically whatever they like in a emergency. They could even EXTEND THE LIFE OF A PARLIAMENT.

The second proposed legislation, ON HOLD after being heavily challenged in the HOUSE OF LORDS, aims to give MINISTERS powers to ALTER ANY LAW without going back to PARLIAMENT, apart from where it increases TAXATION or where the PENALTY is more than TWO YEARS in PRISON.

It is extraordinary similar to the ENABLING ACT which gave ADOLF HITLER the TOTAL POWER he gained in NAZI GERMANY in 1933.

[And we should all know how this led to a devastating Second World War in which tens of millions of people died. The NAZIS PARTY which still exists today in many parts of the world has its members in high positions in many countries. We ourselves had our nest of traitors in Balliol College, Oxford in 1938 who were reported to MI5 by the then Master-A D LINDSAY.]

[Each underlined word has a different bulletin]

It would enable certainly enable ministers to avoid uproar over unpopular edicts from Brussels. Again it is similar to the

"enabling clause:

in the proposed

EU CONSTITUTION

which

WOULD HAVE THE SAME EFFECT.

A widespread suggested alternative title for the last proposed legislation was

" THE ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL".

*

[To be continued - but WHY WAIT get your copy from -  www.junepress.com at £6.99 (p&p free) NOW!

*

For your copy of the publication

THE END OF ENGLAND

by

David Brown

price £6.99 (p&p Free)

contact :

WEB SALES www.junepress.com

[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining Used-Comments in Square Brackets]

*

HOME

SEPTEMBER-2008