Are YOU content for the EU & UK politicos to be party to every detail of your life?

The latest communication that I have received from Anne Palmer, is copied below. I think as PM David Cameron appointed his own man,  a senior Tory Grandee as the Head of the Intelligence oversight arrangements for the UK, such questions for MPs suggested by retired JP Anne Palmer,  are particularly important for us all! Is all our personal data now available to the big political parties, such awesome power makes a mockery both of democracy and individual freedoms, never mind that old-fashioned concept of privacy

§§§§§

Did YOUR MP agree to implement this EU Directive or did they object?  Why not ask Him or Her?

Mrs Merkel seems a tad upset that she, along with other 'important people' are being spied on by the USA.  Perhaps this might bring home to ALL our Leaders in the EU and especially those in our own Parliament that are supposed to Govern and protect us, how we felt and feel when the EU eagerly brought in THEIR legislation to spy on each and every one of us "ordinary" people through their "Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC. But is it being enforced here in the United Kingdom?  Surely not. Surely your MP did not vote for this?  Why not write and ask HIM or HER if they did indeed vote for the EU Directive to go through to spy on each and every one of us here in the UK?   Will our own elected Politicians obey these EU Directives that want, need and must have every tiny detail of what we are watching and who we are contacting?  Our Government really should let us know, for so many gave their lives for our freedom. Surely the people of this Country will never forget or forgive them if they have betrayed the people of this Country if they have put this intrusive legislation through? Knowing that they deliberately betray all those that sacrificed their lives so that we may live in FREEDOM.

Many people however, just like Mrs Merkel herself believed that those she worked with would not stoop as low as the EU did when THEY spied on many ordinary people throughout the EU through the EU's 'Snoopers Directive 2006/24/EC?   Has this Government accepted or implemented the Data Retention Directive?   Would our own Government deliberately betray their own people by accepting this intrusive Legislation?  If Mrs Merkel didn't know she was being “monitored” are our own Politicians as well us being monitored?  What else do the people here in the UK not know? Please do ask your own MP if He or SHE did indeed vote FOR this intrusive legislation.   Anne

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/2199/contents/made

The UK is in full compliance with this EU wide Directive, and is one of the countries who most often access and act upon the information obtained as a result of it. It does this with little or no judicial oversight, and over 200 agencies and police have been authorized to access personal data logged by ISPs and VPN providers, including the following  https://www.bestvpn.com/blog/5583/data-retention-and-vpn-logging-in-the-united-kingdom/ 

Note=Not all Countries are applying this Directive http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_retention_directive

http://www.mondaq.com/x/48196/Telecommunications+Mobile+Cable+Communications/Data+Retention+Directive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_data_retention#United_Kingdom

Report:

United Kingdom

Chapter:  II. Surveillance policies

National security, government surveillance and law enforcement.   This is a long debate but it can be accessed here below.

https://www.privacyinternational.org/reports/united-kingdom/ii-surveillance-policies

The EU Data Retention Directive

The UK is in full compliance with this EU wide Directive, and is one of the countries who most often access and act upon the information obtained as a result of it. It does this with little or no judicial oversight, and over 200 agencies and police have been authorized to access personal data logged by ISPs and VPN providers, including the following: 

https://www.bestvpn.com/blog/5583/data-retention-and-vpn-logging-in-the-united-kingdom/

Anne Palmer email received today 27/10/13

§§§§§

The EU Conspirators compound their treason

Removing our democracy, rendering the nation subject to rule by foreigners and destroying our individual liberties and freedoms is all clearly treasonable. Combine all these EU related infringements and manoeuvrings with the activities of GCHQ, as revealed by Edward Snowden, and Britain quite clearly has a very major problem concerning individual citizen's rights.

This blog has from time to time posted in full the thoughts and writings of retired JP Anne Palmer. We do so again today. As it is the weekend, please find time to read it and give it as wide a circulation as you feel able. We "the people" are the victims, but will only obtain redress by acting together to protest in the greatest possible numbers:

§§§

Regarding TREASON      10.10.2013.  Anne Palmer
This Government, a little while before the new Royal Baby was born, changed (allegedly) nine separate parts of our Constitution-I believe, to be in keeping with the EU’s Equality Act,  although this was denied by the Government.  There is no explanation other than for the EU Equality Act.
I wrote three separate letters in three separate months to the Prime Minister regarding the proposed changes. (20. 2.2013.  23. 3. 2013.  15.4.2013.)   I had no reply until AFTER the Succession to the Crown Bill became an ACT.  As the Commonwealth Countries had agreed to these then proposed changes-which I was already aware of through our Prime Ministers and Mr Hague’s attendance at the Commonwealth meetings.

On the 17.6.2013. From the Cabinet Office,  4^th Floor (SE) 1 House Guards Rd, London SW1H 2HQ   Dated simply, June 2013.  These are four paragraphs from the letter sent to me in response to my three letters on the subject.  “Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Prime Minister, David Cameron, on the Succession to the Crown Bill, in particular you believe that the legislation is not required.  I am responding as a member of the team working on Constitutional Reform.  I am sorry for the delay in dealing with this matter, this is due to an administrative error”.

 “The Prime Minister announced at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Perth on 28 October 2011 that, with the agreement of the fifteen other Commonwealth realms of which her Majesty is also Head of State, the government would change the rules of royal succession to end the system of male preference primogeniture and the bar on those who marry Roman Catholics from succeeding to the Throne and repeal and replace the Royal Marriages Act 1772”.

“The government received final agreement from all the remaining Commonwealth Realms in December and the Bill was introduced into the House of Commons shortly after.  Firstly, I would like to point out that changes to the laws of succession are not due to pressure from Europe or from the Equality Act but from a reasonable need to progress and evolve.  The Prime Minister states on 28 October 2011: “The great strength of our constitutional approach is its ability to evolve.  Attitudes have changed fundamentally over the centuries and some of the our-dated rule – like some of the rules to succession – just don’t make sense to us any more.”

“The Deputy Prime Minister also stated on 22 January 2013 that: “On female succession, the real question that we need to ask is why it has taken us so long.  This is a nation that prises itself on pioneering equality between sexes:  a nation of great Queens such as Queen Victoria and Elizabeth II.  A woman can, and has, been Head of the UK Government, yet still on our statute books, with Parliament’s official backing, we have succession laws based on the supposed superiority of men.  That anachronism is out of step with our society, it sends the wrong message to the rest of the world, and it is time for the rules to change.”   “We believe that the government’s commitment to end male primogeniture and the bar on the Monarch and those in the line of succession from marrying a Roman Catholic will end two significant areas of discrimination in the UK”.   End of Quotes.

There was not and there has not been any attempt at all to put these proposed changes before the people of this Country. WHY NOT? Yet it has been put to the Governments of the Commonwealth. The very people that these changes would affect mostly and to their long standing Common Law Constitution which would and will indeed affect us all, very much so, if these changes were indeed be possible to change.  Many people, ordinary people fought and died in two World Wars to keep their way of life and their very Constitution the Governments of “TODAY” have tried to alter.  This cannot be done without the people of this Country agreeing because each and every one of us live by (and some gave their young lives for) the very Constitution that this Government has tried to change.  Not, I suggest for the coming baby, for had they waited until it was born, a son, there would have been no need for any attempt for Constitutional change at all, but of course, there would have been no excuse to change the nine necessary parts of our Constitution for the EU’s Equality Act.  There was absolutely no need to TRY to change our Constitution at all. Our Constitution, I suggest, cannot be so changed without the people’s of this Country’s permission.  It is noted that Magna Carta cannot be changed at all (See further below) and neither can the people’s Bill of Rights because of the two codicils at the end of the Bill of Rights, stating such.  If we had lost a WAR, all Governance of our Country would be gone-lost forever.
No new written constitution can be entrenched or dislodge Magna Carta and the Declaration and Bill of Rights 1688/1689.  However, what Parliament does, Parliament can undo.
Also made clear is that the use of the Prerogative Power may not be subversive of the rights and liberties of the subject. (Which includes the people’s Bill of Rights and Magna Carta of course (See case of Nichols v Nicholes, “Prerogative is created for the benefit of the people and cannot be exercised to their prejudice”)  The Bill of Rights 1689 is a declaration of Common law. It is also an operative statute and it contains the Oath of Allegiance, which is required by Magna Carta to be taken by all Crown servants including members of the Armed Forces, MP's and the Judiciary. They are required also to "take into consequence anything to the detriment of the subjects liberties”.  The Monarch is constitutionally bound to respect the Common Laws, which are recognised in Magna Carta and declared in the Bill of Rights and so bound by Her Majesty's Coronation Oath. The Royal Prerogatives of the Crown and Parliament were set by Common Law and cannot be lawfully infringed by them.  Each British Subject from the moment they are born here in the UK is bound by an Oath of Allegiance to the Crown and this country, just as if that person has declared so out loud.

From the Bill of Rights. II. And be it further declared and enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after this present session of Parliament no dispensation by _non obstante_ of or to any statute or any part thereof shall be allowed, but that the same shall be held void and of no effect, except a dispensation be allowed of in such statute, and except in such cases as shall be specially provided for by one or more bill or bills to be passed during this present session of Parliament.

I now ask the question previously asked by others, How can a ‘Citizen of Europe’  be Queen of our Nation and the Commonwealth? No wonder this Government have tried to repeal the Laws of Treason? Those Treason Laws are there still, and are ENTRENCHED to protect the wearer of the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and even though the 1795 Treason Act was allegedly repealed in full instead of just “Death by Hanging” in the 1998 Crime And Disorder Act, if people care to dig a little deeper they will find that the Treason Laws remain there to protect the Crown, and although Terrorism Laws may be used where it might have been better to use the laws on Treason, Terrorism Laws are no alternative for violation of the Oath of Allegiance because violation of that Oath that is made to the wearer of the British Crown is the greatest betrayal of all. 

It has been said that there are only four clauses left in Magna Carta.  Proof that Magna Carta remains complete is recorded in Hansard, for many are the times clauses have been quoted to prove an argument. I have over a hundred pages printed where Magna Carta has been mentioned-I stopped looking after one hundred, to back up, or enforce or protect legislation.  The last time Clause 61 was used, was by four Lords at the time of NICE-a clause that was allegedly repealed.  Magna Carta is a Treaty and it needs the people’s consent to alter.

I quote Lord Renton when he said (Lords Hansard 20^th July6 2000)  “My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down, perhaps I might mention one point in relation to his fascinating speech.  He suggests that we should amend Magna Carta.  We cannot do that.  Magna Carta was formulated before we ever had a Parliament.  All that we can do is to amend that legislation which, in later years when we did have a Parliament, implemented Magna Carta”.

Parliament was reminded of the Bill of Rights after the Case of Pepper v Hart when the Speaker at that time said, “This case has exposed our proceedings to possible questioning in a way that was previously thought to be impossible.  There has of course been no amendment to the Bill of Rights.  I am sure that the House is entitled to expect that the Bill of Rights will be required to be fully respected by all those appearing before the Courts.”

Quote from Govermnment Research Paper 18^th July 1996. Page 38. “Many, including Dicey himself, have sought to distinguish between legal sovereignty and political Sovereignty.  Indeed Dicey regarded the Queen-in-Parliament  (ie, the legal body comprising the two Houses and the Monarch) as the legal sovereign and the electorate as the political sovereign.  This latter point is the British version of what in many other constitutions is the idea of ‘the people’ as the true sovereign, a political concept which is often invoked to confer upon the constitution moral authority and binding force as the supreme source of legal power.  Perhaps the most famous example of this is the constitution of the United States.  (We the people…)”

Page22. “Mr Major announced a concerted Ministerial campaign on all aspects of the Constitution: “This will be the most thorough debate on the constitution for a generation’ He concluded his speech by emphasising the Conservative approach of supporting “practical change that would solve real problems or improve the way our constitution works….I don’t make any apology for defending what works.  I‘m a Conservative and I reject change for change’s sake…Our constitution is the lifeblood of the United Kingdom.  It upholds our freedom.  It binds Parliament and the Government to the citizen.  It provides the checks and balances that prevent abuse of power. It cements the Union together.”

Even as those MP’s step forward in the House of Commons to place their hand on the Bible and swear the Oath, that Oath ends with the words , "ACCORDING TO LAW". This is the Executive ECHOING the Queen's own Coronation Oath. There are TWO OATHS operative here, to protect the nation and the people. The Queen's Oath, and the Oath of her Executive to her. They are interlocking oaths to respect the RULE OF LAW at all times.

Anne Palmer. JP Retired

The oath of allegiance has its origins in the Magna Carta, signed on 15 June 1215.

Once the terms had been finalised on 19 June, the rebels again swore allegiance to King John. The later Bill of Rights (1689) included the Oath of Allegiance to the Crown, which was required by Magna Carta to be taken by all crown servants and members of the judiciary.^[6][7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_%28United_Kingdom%29#cite_note-6

§§§

EU Advice from Anne Palmer and Rodney Atkinson

Two of the most dedicated opponents of the EU since the earliest days when its game plan had become clear to only a limited few, have now given us their thoughts on the upcoming Cameron speech, due to be made in Amsterdam tomorrow. That from Anne Palmer, is reproduced in full; while that of Rodney Atkinson is quoted only with its opening paragraph, with a link to his own web site, where it is much better presented!

§§§§§

Some people have much more faith in Mr Cameron's promise of an, "in or out" vote on the EU than I have and that is for sure. Will the REFERENDUM be held BEFORE the next General Election or will the people have the absolute stone cold sober promise to hold one AFTER, if by any chance anyone is or was fool enough to vote for any ONE of the THREE MAJOR Political Parties that ALL WANT TO REMAIN IN THE EU- FOREVER, then more fool them, for our MP's still expect the people to continue paying their VAST WAGES as if they are governing, and most importantly, they still want their vast expenses?

I am urging people to use the coming General Election as the REFERENDUM we were promised and never had. We know without doubt we have THREE MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES that all want to remain in the EU-forever. Why on earth would any of us vote for one of them when we want "freedom from foreign rule", exactly as written in our own Constitution?  Put your COUNTRY (and its freedom from foreign rule) before your Allegiance to your Political Party and hope that those you elect also realise that their total sworn solemn Oath of Allegiance is to this, their own British Crown that represents all of us.  May this always be so, for none of us that were in that last war want any allegiance what-so-ever to be to FOREIGNERS.

Our Governments have fooled us in the past, but whether in a Political Party or not, (And I am NOT in any Political Party or Organisation) I urge you to put the freedom of our Country before any one of the three major political Parties that want the money, the vast expenses, but want foreigners to actually Govern this Country completely and forever if they get a chance. DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THAT CHANCE.

Many of the British people have had enough of foreigners making the laws that even our Government has to obey for we see Government cutting down on pensioners, workers, the old, the sick and the vulnerable yet government still pays, or borrows more money to pay the EU its billions of British Pounds and to also contribute financially to the many EU Agencies, one of which is the EU Defence Agency, while they are busy reducing our Defence and Forces.

There is no point in voting for any of the three Major Political Parties because they all three want to remain in the EU forever.  Therefore it makes sense to use the General Election as the REFERENDUM, and only vote for Political Parties or Organisations that want FREEDOM from FOREIGN RULE so that a true Britsh Government can Govern this Country according to its long standing Common law Constitution.  In case any have forgotten, our Constitution FORBIDS us to obey or allow foreigners to govern or make laws in violation of our Constitution, for to destroy our own Constitution is treason. Two Terrible WARS were fought to prevent foreigners from Governing us.  We betray those that gave THEIR young lives for OUR freedom.

To those that read this, please DO use your (REFERENDUM VOTE) at the next GENERAL ELECTION, and please ALL vote if possible to make sure all vote papers are used up (so none other may use it) and also to make it the biggest vote in the history of this Country.   This, to me, is the only peaceful way (Yes, I know there is another way) we can free our Country from foreign rule.  This way might be regarded as the Second "Glorious Revolution" in our history making. 

As you maybe aware, this Coalition Government has only put through EU legislation, for almost every bit of it started its Journey from the EU, yes, even same-sex Marriage. Which ever Organisation votes may go to, just make sure they are NOT GOING TO ANY ONE OF THE MAJOR THREE Political Parties, Labour, Conservatives or the LibDems.  It is your future, the future of this Country and it is well and truly in your hands, and I believe the healthy competition will serve you well. Go for it.  Anne

§§§§§

&&&&&

16th January 2013

Even before David Cameron sits down to negotiate his "new relationship" with the European Union aggressive threats emanate from EU leaders. The Dutch say they don't like opt outs, some Germans say we can't pick and choose and the Eurocrat parachuted in as the unelected Prime Minister of Italy said "In Europe there are some who feel their heart would be lighter if the UK left the EU". So much for Mr Cameron's "friends" and "partners"!
Such comments - and even a passing acquaintance with the history, structure and constitution of the European Union - indicate that it is extremely unlikely that what is acceptable to the builders of the "country called Europe" can come to an agreement with a people wishing to maintain their existence as a nation state and enjoy democratic sovereignty.

&&&&&

Read the full comment "Repatriating Powers from the European Union" by Rodney Atkinson, from his own Free Nations site, linked here.

Was Europe Minister MacShane's criminal mindset a job prerequisite?

Former Minister for Europe for the Labour Party is now being investigated by the police for possible criminal charges. Evidence already laid against him which has led to his suspension and resignation from Parliament seems sufficient to send ordinary members of the public to jail.

A more interesting aspect of this everyday story of greedy politicians engaging in day to day fraud and deception is what connection might exist between the necessity for any Minister for Europe in a UK Government to be up to his neck in deception, distortion and who knows what else and his day to day theft over an extended period?

While Minister for Europe, at what became the FCO propaganda office for the EU during MacShane's tenure, he received a letter detailing the lies and trickery dated 19th March 2005, from Anne Palmer, it may be read in full from the archives of Ironies, linked here. I quote its concluding paragraphs:

The EU will disintegrate, whether before the EU constitution is ratified or not remains to be seen, but it will end in terrible bitter conflict. The fault will fall on all those that did not dare to spell out the true meaning of the requirement for a European Constitution.
 While we are busy reducing our forces, the army, navy etc, and while we are eagerly following all EU Regulation re competition, etc, other Countries are not. While we are disarming and reducing our forces, others have conscription and rearming quite strongly. To me it is déjà vu, the 1930’s all over again. All of our Members of Parliament, will have to decide soon, do they want to govern this Country, to actually earn the money the people pay them, or do they want to go down in history as the government that has given this Country away and continue to have laws and an alien constitution foisted upon us, which nothing we can say or do can alter or block them. Or, do we obey our own Constitutional laws we have had in this Country for hundreds of years, even though we have had to fight to keep them rather than be ruled by others in the past, and which we are duty bound to fight to protect and keep. The myths you speak of Sir, are your own, especially ”The Constitutional Treaty is not only a simplification of the existing forest of interlocking Treaties, but encapsulates many of these British themes”. As Minister for Europe, you appear to have forgotten the meaning of a “True Brit”, that is your loss sir, not mine. My solemn oath of allegiance remains to the Crown and this country for all time coming. Yours faithfully,
 Anne Palmer

The chaos that is now unfolding across Europe is partly down to MacShane and all the others like him. That is his and their greater crime. The above letter and the entire archives of my blogs and earlier writings, along with the superb arguments tirelessly presented by Anne Palmer and others like her down the decades, hopefully will eventually serve to prove that these despicable political criminal classes knew exactly what they were about!

Treasures from the threads - Number Eight

Simon Heffer in his Telegraph column todays hits out at Ed Balls, linked here. The following contribution came from Anne Palmer at 0734: Maybe a word can be changed in Hansard but the deeds that are happening "Today in Parliament" and what will be written down in Hansard forever will cast a shadow that will stain the future of this Country, because it cannot all be altered. That famous verse of Cicero "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious, but it cannot survive treason from within" is spoken now more than it ever was in his 'own time'. Just add up Simon, the 'wages', vast expenses, second home perks so recently revealed, the cost of the extra layer of Regional Assemblies, Councils etc, then the EU Commissioners, ALL the MEP's, plus expenses, the overseas visits-you get the idea, the list is endless,and then ask yourself, just how much longer are the general public going to continue to pay the politicians here in the UK for a Job they no longer can do, or in the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty obviously they no longer want to do? We see "our Leaders" in The EU scraping the barrel having to cook up ways of raising yet more taxes from people though means of "saving the planet". It became obvious when "smoking was banned' in so many places that there would be a need to raise taxes in other ways. What could be better than saving the planet? Our newspapers and TV haven't shown the dreadful weather, the freezing temperatures in other parts of the world just across the Atlantic for one because it would not be helpful to their plans. This Government that has ignored the people, must make a decision and make it soon. Does IT want to Govern this Country? Does IT really think that the people will continue to accept ALL that THEY, our own MP's are doing, and NO, they are not doing it in the people's name, for they know without doubt, that the people do not want further integration into the Union. ALL this cannot be altered in Hansard. Hansard must record the treachery that is taking place in those magnificent buildings, because the people know for sure, that both sides in the argument re the Treaty of Lisbon cannot both be right, can they? We will remeber this Government all right Simon, but not as "Great Warriors", actually not as "Great" anything. Posted by Anne Palmer on March 15, 2008 7:34 AM