Dear Editor,
It would seem our leading national
journalists and commentators are as ignorant of our laws, customs and the rights
and liberties of the subject, indeed our very Constitution, as are our leading
politicians and now politicised judiciary.
Much of the 'Comment' column in last
Sunday's The Mail on Sunday was given to extolling the Queen's dedication to
upholding her coronation oath in which she swore to uphold our laws and customs.
Unlike the said journalists, politicians and judiciary, some of us were present
at the time of the coronation and remember it well and what it meant and
signified when the Queen swore to GOVERN us according to our laws and customs.
We were also present when in 1972 the
Queen allowed her then government to commit high treason by signing an article
of national capitulation to the Franco German Axis by surrendering the supremacy
of the Crown, along with the supremacy of our laws and national sovereignty,
thus placing the British people under foreign rule for the first time in a
thousand years. By failing to govern us according to our laws and customs the
Queen neglected to uphold the oath she took in the sight of God and so
abdicated. Since that time the monarchy has been a politically manipulated sham
to create the illusion that nothing has changed, an illusion encouraged by the
press with such statements as "...one of the greatest monarchs in our history."
(Comment. Mail on Sunday.)
The Queen's 1972 abdication was further
confirmed in 1992 with the equally treasonous signing by our politicians of the
Maastricht treaty, which confirmed that the Queen is no more than a citizen of
the EU and therefore bound by the constraints and obligations of that
citizenship, as was made perfectly clear in the House of Commons by Prime
Minister John Major at the time. Had John Major been wrong in his statement he
would have been committing both treason and perjury but no such charges were
ever drawn up against him.
No one can be both monarch and citizen
at the same time.
Yesterday the Daily Mail quoted Bishop
Michael Nazir-Ali as saying "But while she is faithful to the vows she has taken
in this country she has to act on the advice of her ministers."
Myths such as this example clearly
created by politicians can invariably be dismissed by logic and common sense,
for what it is claiming is that the Monarch, and therefore the people, are
subordinate to their subordinates, which is of course a total nonsense. When
confronted with this fact parliamentarians and law Lords invariably claim that
it is made valid by convention, another claim which is in reality unsustainable
as "convention has no force in law" as clearly laid out in Halsbury's 'Laws of
England'.
Further evidence that the surrender of
our national sovereignty and constitutional supremacy in 1972 ended the monarchy
was the permission given to Charles as heir to the throne to marry in a civil
ceremony Camilla Parker-Boles a divorcee, as by so doing Charles placed himself
in breach of Article 37 of the 39 Articles of Religion, or Article 7 of Cannon
Law as it has become, thus rendering him ineligible to hold the office of
Governor of the Church of England and therefore the Crown itself.
There can be no sovereign head of state
of a nation that is not sovereign and no governor of a nation that is not self
governing. To those who are aware that this nation has been totally betrayed,
Queen Elizabeth II is seen as the absolute antithesis of Elizabeth
I.
Yours Faithfully, Bob Lomas. The
Magna Carta Society.
No comments:
Post a Comment