I noticed these three seperate news stories in the last couple of weeks. Although seemingly unrelated, once combined, they struck me as having all the elements of a good conspiracy, so I thought I'd share it with you. Enjoy

From The Scotsman:



Couple that with the following report from the Daily Mail:


And finally - this news article from the BBC





So - in summary - Gordon Brown's been accused of Treason, and a week or so afterwards, Lord Goldsmith issues a set of proposals that annoy's the Queen, including a rehash of the Treason law.

Anyone else find that slightly suspicious?

I would love to see that bloody idiot Brown hanged.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...017322536911169

this guy knows about treason, but will anybody listen will anybody care

people are listening Chem, we just need to shout a little louder, some at the back cant hear,.

Brown to fight referendum court case

The Prime Minister has decided to fight a court case brought by a UK Independence Party member in which he is accused of breach of contract over a referendum on the EU Constitution.

The case, to be heard at Brighton County Court, claims that the government promised a referendum on the European Constitution in its election manifesto of 2005. The court will be asked to decide whether the government's refusal to hold one is a breach of contract with all those who voted Labour in the 2005 General Election.

The case is being held at Brighton County Court, Williams Street, at 10.30am. Rally supporters will be gathering between 9am and 9.30am near the Court House. There is a municipal parking area approximately 500 yards away. Hope to see as many of you there as possible.

Tiggs: I am intrigued by your theories and would like to subscribe to your newsletter and/or view your youtube documentary.

--Jaylemurph

It's a start, certainly, but i do hope they're not planning on leaving it at that. there's a whole lot more to get through after that. I do hope they're not going to waste time with all this tedious business of "trials" and "lawyers" and all that. maybe they ought to try Iraqi-style justice: bish, bash, bosh, no nonsense.

yeah i totally agree

Just to explain this a bit further: Be warned - there's some moderate to heavy references in here to British history and law, probably more than is taught these days in British schools. And please bear in mind that I'm not laying out some kind of grand conspiracy theory here, I'm just explaining part of the law of Britain, and how it might apply. There's no theory as such, just facts, and laws.

Under English (and since the early 18th century, British) law, High Treason is the crime of disloyalty to the Sovereign amounting to an intention to undermine their authority or the actual attempt to do so.

"Offences constituting High Treason include plotting the murder of the Sovereign; having sexual intercourse with the Sovereign's consort, with his eldest unmarried daughter or with the heir to the throne's wife; levying war against the Sovereign and adhering to the Sovereign's enemies, giving them aid or comfort; and attempting to undermine the lawfully established line of succession."

This by the way is exactly the section of the UK treason laws that Lord Goldsmith is now advocating we "reform" as part of his "Britishness review" - commissioned of course by PM Gordon Brown.

Citizenship ideas

Pupils 'to take allegiance oath'

Scots, Welsh and Irish lead rebellion against oath of allegiance to the Queen

"The ancient law of treason should be reframed to get rid of out-dated offences and language and provide a precise modern definition of criminal disloyalty to the state."

STATE, not Sovereign. That's a pretty disturbing shift for a country that has always prided itself on its monarchy, isn't it?

Lord Goldsmith calls for 'Britishness' day and oaths to the Queen

Treason laws outdated, says Lord Goldsmith

And here's Lord Goldsmith himself. Just what he said here is treasonous. There's a difference between free speech and making suggestions to undermine authority of the Sovereign of Britain. I don't think she minds criticism, but I do think she minds when slimy politicians suggest that we look to a different authority.

According to the Treason Act 1702 and Treason Act (Ireland) 1703 high treason is an offence punishable under attempting to hinder the succession to the throne under the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701.

The Treason Felony Act 1848 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (11 & 12 Vict. c. 12.) The Act is still in force. It is a law which protects the Queen and the Crown.

"If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, or of any other of her Majesty’s dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty’s dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty, and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing ... or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable ... to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life."

Since penal transportation was abolished in 1868, the maximum penalty is now of course, life imprisonment.

I'll highlight the important parts there:

"If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom."

So basically, undermine the sovereignty of the Crown, and therefore the nation. The reason I say this is the unique structure of the UK representative government, whose roots lie in medieval feudalism and oaths of fealty.

The Parliament of the United Kingdom is made up of the following:

* The House of Commons, or Lower House are Ministers elected by the public; they represent the common man in Britain.

* Then you have the House of Lords, or Upper House. This is composed of landed hereditary or life peers; usually Barons and Baronesses, Lords and Ladies. They represent the nobility of Britain. They are the checks and balances for the House of Commons, and were able to veto prospective laws approved by the Lower House until Tony Blair placed reforms upon them.

* And then you have the Sovereign, who is the people's Magistrate, giving Royal Assent to every Law passing through the two Houses; representing the country itself. She isn't just a figurehead, she has a real role in government that not a lot of people appreciate; the guardian of democracy and civil rights. So in a very real way, High Treason is not only a crime against say, a lady named Mrs Elizabeth Windsor who happens to live in Buckingham Palace in London, but also against every man, woman and child who lives in Britain, because to do anything to remove the Sovereign or undermine them removes or undermines the ultimate representation of the country.

"in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament"

I can't imagine her Majesty willingly signing away her sovereignty and our entire country, can you? In fact, since Labour has passed over 3000 laws into the statute books since it was elected into office in 1997, I'd be very interested to know how many of those were personally given Royal Assent by Her Majesty, and how many used the Great Seal of the Realm to sign. And whether or not the EU Treaties had her actual signature. The current keeper of that seal is of course, the Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw.

"and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing"

This would essentially cover every EU Treaty that's been signed since 1972, if their cumulative effect is to undermine the sovereignty of Britain.

The Treaty of Lisbon seems to confirm that aim, by stating:

"The constitution and law adopted by the Union's institutions in exercising competences conferred on it shall have primacy over the law of the member states."

This was originally the part of the proposed EU Constitution which a lot of people balked at.

From the BBC's own website:

The EU will for the first time have a "legal personality" and its laws will trump those of national parliaments: "The Constitution and law adopted by the Union institutions in exercising competence conferred upon it by the Constitution shall have primacy over the law of the member states."

"This really just confirms the status quo, which is that if the EU is allowed to legislate in an area of policy, its law will overtake any national laws. Equally in areas where it does not legislate, national law prevails. By having a "legal personality", the EU will be able, as an organisation, to enter into international agreements. The old European Community had this right but the EU as a whole did not so its status in world diplomacy increases."

What this does not explain very well (and when it does, its in horrendous political/legal doublespeak) is that it will give the EU a legal personality as a SINGLE STATE. So the EU can represent itself to the UN, not its constituent member-states. They lose their individual representation.

Now, this applies to the Treaty of Lisbon too, because Lisbon because they are essentially the same document. Every leader in Europe but Gordon Brown has admitted this.

EU treaty is a constitution, says Giscard d'Estaing

Although Gordon Brown might have slipped up at least once:

Gordon Brown finally signs EU treaty

"Mr Brown has also stoked controversy by referring to the new EU Reform Treaty as a "Constitution" during interviews today."

And from the UK Government's own information site:

The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty on European Union

"Some controversial Constitution articles deleted in line with specific Member States’ demands appear in amended form in declarations, which are not legally binding, attached to the main texts. For example, the Constitution Article on the primacy of Union law is not reproduced, but the IGC agreed on a Declaration accepting the primacy of EU law “in accordance with well settled case-law of the EU Court of Justice”.

This is a BIG DEAL in the UK - our own British Constitution prevents any foreign power from dictating ANY law to us, since ALL UK law has to pass through the House of Commons, House of Lords and the Sovereign. And no Parliament and not even the Sovereign ever has the authority to give that up. And the 1972 European Communities Act introduced by PM Edward Heath allowed the EU to start dictating legislative directives to be signed into UK law, therefore making it a document that undermined the Parliament and the Sovereign...

Also please note that the above isn't saying that the controversial parts were erased, they just "appear in amended form". And this treaty is acknowledged to be self-amending, so what is counted as "not legally binding" now can be changed without consent or consultation at a later date to become legally binding, without need for national referenda. Besides, even the PROPOSAL that we sign the EU Constitution if it created an EU legal primacy was a textbook definition of High Treason under UK common law.

Here's some other news articles connected to these allegations.

EU wants to get rid of the Queen from our passports

Queen Raises Fears over EU Constitution

And I would count this as being a sign that something is very rotten at the heart of our government:

Schools told to dump Churchill and Hitler from history lessons

Something is obviously SERIOUSLY WRONG when the British government are advising we stop teaching British kids about CHURCHILL, arguably the great British historical figure of the 20th Century. And apart from that madness, why drop Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Hitler and Stalin from the curriculum? Don't they want children to learn human and civil rights, the evils of fascism, or the oppression of states under communism and totalitarianism?

As for the proposals for the passports, granting the legal primacy of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Oath of allegiance to the State...I'm sure all of those things combined fit into a textbook definition of the crime of High Treason.

Hope this helps everyone in understanding that there is a very clear and real case for this. And feel free to repost this wherever you like.

This doesnt suprise me at all . America has these kind of dominoe downs all the time.
In one way its good because it doesnt promote any one power in today times to excell in
a victorious win. "Meaning: the thumb cant say that the fingers are dumb when the fingers are far mor than just one, they are four." If they dont all agree in the goal , the goal cant be acheived. Victory in these kind of lowness in mind can not win without doubt. Card castles fall easliy if not glued together. Love is pretty strong , so I'll use this for a illistration. Love binds and moves and continues even after we die. Intentions of the heart and mind are motivated by the love or lie within oneself or power. Card castles cannot stand due to the deck being delt, luck isnt relavant due to the lady in charge. The tramp must solisitate for funds so a card castle might seem fun but will she buy the glue to keep it stable or tke the cards by the chance she can always cheat some other way to make it look like the castle stands. Then the wind comes in and blows it all over the place. lol

Egos are not looking to bond with anyone but themselves and they think they are smart by using tactics just because others like minded , like them are thinking of themselves only , like them, that one way or the other evil always exposes itself and protecting is not an issue . Protecting themself is , not the others that are playing in the same feild.

Piont : Mankind is nowhere without a love thatr they can trust or hope in or for , truth is it is so strong that it doesnt have to be proven to anyone but that person aand even if they are not
favored for that goodness or truth, they are willing to share putting themselves at risk or sacraficing the mselves in a non egotistic way even if it shows another , just one that thr truth is out there and time will eventually be the giver of the ones intruding upon those that do not deserve the powers that place them in harm or danger.

I hope that all made sense. Tiggs , thanks for the information on your end of the world but its all over the place here and this happens allot where im at . In fact I even wonder sometimes if the media or news on the telivision is manipulating it to a certain degree as to it possibly not giving us the news today but the constrained news . notr all the journalists get their article out due to a thumb trying to call the finger dumb. lol

Catch my drift.? the wind said to the card. teehee
It is all millarkie of some sense . perhaps one day all that kind of nonsense will not exhist.
Abecrombie

P.S Life is full of suprises and even though we live in the world , I feel it is huge and challenging and shouldnt be taken for granted. I wish everyone well.

I agree he should be charged, and secondry charges brought against him for impersnating a Scotsman. the Scots i know are good decent loyal people , he is a public schoolboy brit in disguise.