TREASON EVIDENCE IN DETAIL - My Canada Book
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
TREASON EVIDENCE IN DETAIL
This draft relates to crimes committed in Britain/England
but can also be used by Canadians too.
25-06-2019 by David Robinson
[This file can be used to compel the police to stop ignoring the evidence of
High Treason being committed today, whilst they are themselves aiding
and abetting (committing) high treason in full knowledge of the facts,
which are provided herein. They cannot later claim to be unaware of the
facts if they have been served this document by recorded post.
We need the police to be overwhelmed by the weight of 'we the people'
badgering them in a reasonable, polite but assertive manner. It is after all a
fundamental duty for those entrusted to defend the law to observe truth
(evidential facts) themselves. Justice cannot be had nor corruption avoided
within a police state that does not hold truth as sovereign.]
Treason is any act adjudged to undermine or be in conflict with the Peo-
ple’s Absolute Sovereignty ordained by the 1215 permanent Constitution
of the People. Sovereignty is specifically embodied in and exercised
through implementation of the Trial by Jury in accord with the Constitu-
tional Common Law of the Land.
Common Law and Constitution assign the Crime of High Treason to all
acts which attenuate or attempt to attenuate the sovereign authority of the
Juror. It is to commit High Treason against the People to be implicated in
any act which undermines the juror’s sovereignty; or denies or attempts to
deny (the right to) the Common Law Trial by Jury Justice System for any
Plaint and private prosecution (of whomsoever) through a cost-free suit-at-
law or, for any citizen’s defence. (See Articles 36, 39, 40, 61, of Magna
Carta 1215).
PESCO and BREXIT are current acts of High Treason being committed to-
day by the present British (and Commonwealth) administration(s). The
British and Commonwealth people cannot be said to be “Policed by con-
sent” whilst their consent over the legality of government statutes has not
1Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
first been approved by the juror(s). And unanimously approved. Conse-
quently we are being Policed with force by Corporate Policy Enforcers
acting outside of the law, in 'Outlawry'.
The evidence herein provided will be difficult for any policy enforcer to
accept, and we accept that. Those serving as alleged Police Constables to-
day have not been educated as to the law, the common law constitution
was removed from the curriculum in universities in the 1970's and re-
placed with unconstitutional statutes, which are designed to oppress the
people and to deny them their natural human rights.
The police are lied to by parliament as are the rest of us. Parliament is
NOT sovereign and cannot do as it pleases without recourse. The police
are brainwashed into believing that they cannot look at anything political
because it’s not within their remit, that lie is easily exposed as a lie, the
common law constitution makes it very clear that nobody is above the
common law even the monarch, and especially 'Her parliament'.
The evidence herein MUST be dealt with by those entrusted to defend the
nation from crimes against the people, or we will ALL suffer the extremely
serious consequences if they do not. They should be reminded that they
won’t always be employed within the police service, and will also have to
live under the despotic rules of the EU Superstate that they are allowing to
come to fruition, as well as their own friends and family. And when the
people en masse realize what the police, and other so called 'pubic serv-
ants' have done, in full knowledge of the facts, they will be despised by
everyone.
The EU's destructive rules will evidently remain superior to British com-
mon law, but this will be propagated behind a British mask of 'parliamen-
tary sovereignty', and the usurped monarch will remain waving at the audi-
ence of the fictitious theatre show. Parliament will merely rubber stamp
EU directives and further dismantle the infrastructure of the last remaining
services we have.
Everything is now corporate anyway as it was criminally designed to be.
The theft of public services has always been ensuing, even since the wel-
fare state was created in fact. Margaret Thatcher stole the Water and Sew-
age industry in 1986 for example, and also granted the EU (Ofwat) author-
ity to regulate the industry. It is actually a crime to pay for water and sew-
age charges because to do so is to aid and abet the theft.
2Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
BREXIT TREASON:
BREXIT is treasonable simply because by granting Article 50 of the Lis-
bon Treaty authority over the British Common law constitution, is to deny
the office of sovereign (King or Queen) their sworn duty to govern the
sovereign people under the terms and conditions laid down within the
1215 Magna Carta and 1688 Coronation Oath Act i.e., by only governing
the people of the entire realm according to their ancient laws and customs.
Taken from a transcript of the 1953 Coronation of Elizabeth II.
Archbishop.
“Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New
Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your
Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertain-
ing, according to their respective laws and customs?”
Queen. “I solemnly promise so to do.”
Archbishop. “Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to
be executed in all your judgements?”
Queen. “I will.”
[Take note that; “laws and customs” refer to “their” (the peoples) LAWS
and not unconstitutional Acts and statutes that only serve to undermine the
common laws and customs of the people. Statutes which have been created
by diverse traitors in parliament ever since 'The Estates’ sought to under-
mine Magna Carta 1215 and slowly, covertly, the Coronation Oath too,
which not only undermined the nations sovereignty held in trust by the
crown, but which also gave the so called ‘ruling elite’ families the false
power to rule us by deceit.]
PESCO TREASON:
PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation) is High Treason because by
this agreement Britain cannot remain as an independent Nation State.
Without an independent military in service to the nation state and no other
state, Britain ceases to be an independent sovereign nation. PESCO will
place British armed forces under the control of the EU PERMANENTLY!
The long range plan for military integration of British armed forces has
been a part of the agenda for decades. The following is a summary of the
more recent culminations of that agenda. As per usual they implement their
'endgame' plans slowly so that the people accept them more readily.
3Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
20th March 2017 Britain announces bilateral “defence pact” with Ger-
many. Theresa May announces that Britain and Germany will form a de-
fence pact immediately following the formal invocation of Article 50 of
the Lisbon Treaty.
The Ministry of Defence says it is working with Germany “on a joint vi-
sion statement on future co-operation”.
22nd June 2017 European Council calls for the launch of a permanent
structured cooperation.
At the June European Council, EU leaders agree on the need to launch an
inclusive and ambitious permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) to
strengthen Europe’s security and defence.
Within three months, member states will agree a common list of criteria
and commitments, together with concrete capability projects, in order to
start this cooperation.
“It is a historic step, because such cooperation will allow the EU to move
towards deeper integration in defence. Our aim is for it to be ambitious and
inclusive, so every EU country is invited to join,” says Donald Tusk at the
European Council press conference.
12th September 2017 UK Government publishes “Foreign policy, defence
and development” Brexit White Paper.
Despite “Brexit”, the U.K. will continue its contribution to CSDP missions
and operations if it can participate in both the mandate development and
detailed operational planning stages of the process (PESCO).
12th October 2017 Boris Johnson and Michael Fallon meet Polish counter-
parts to progress Defence and Security Cooperation Treaty.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson
meet their Polish counterparts to discuss security and defence cooperation.
Fallon and Polish Defence Minister Macierewicz discuss increasing mili-
tary ties and co-operation, including working towards a “Defence Capabil-
ity and Industrial Partnership” to strengthen cooperation between the UK
and Polish defence industries.
They also discussed the Defence and Security Cooperation Treaty, which
the Prime Minister signed at the next UK-Poland Inter-Governmental
meeting in December.
15th October 2017 Boris Johnson meets Foreign Ministers at Chevening
House. Boris Johnson is joined by the foreign ministers of Bulgaria, Croa-
tia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia
4Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
at Chevening House to discuss “shared challenges” and the UK’s “contin-
ued commitment” to EU security and defence.
19th-20th October 2017 European Council Discuss PESCO. Heads of state
or government resume discussions on the permanent structured coopera-
tion (PESCO) on defence at the European Council meeting, attended by
Theresa May.
26th October 2017 Dutch Officer commands German Panzer Battalion for
first time. A Dutch officer becomes commander of the German Army’s
Panzerbataillon (Tank Battalion) 414 for the first time. The Bundeswehr
describes his command as “historic” and the Dutch Ministry of Defence
says it is “a next step” in the integration of the Dutch Army’s 43 Mecha-
nised Brigade into the German 1st Panzer Division.
[Source: operationbeacon.com/]
OVERVIEW
Quietly, without most people noticing, the European Commission is mov-
ing ahead with a strategy that will arguably make the EU into the first fully
operational model of a centralised ‘one state’ supranational authority: ‘A
New World Order’; the long standing neoconservative ambition which lies
at the heart of global secret society agendas and US geopolitical hegem-
ony. This is tied in with the United Nations who seek to be the world’s po-
lice force.
The key ingredient of this strategy is the establishment of an ‘EU Treasury’
which, according to Donald Tusk, President of the EU Council, will come
into effect in June 2018, under the official title: European Monetary Fund.
This will result in the single point control of all EU member state finances.
The plan will involve a further leveraging of the power of the major banks,
to consolidate their controlling influence over EU affairs. By combining an
‘EU Treasury’ and a consolidation of banking power, a major step will be
taken in the ‘amalgamation of everything’ heist; to be brought under the
single umbrella of a Totalitarian Super State.
We are talking about individual country’s monetary policies; the military;
police forces and intelligence services all being run from a central control
unit in Brussels. These will be followed by more of the same — covering
almost all areas of administrative control, that were once the domain of in-
dividual countries. The institution at the forefront of this power grab is the
5Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
Bank for International Settlements, based in Basel, Switzerland, which has
global outreach and acts as a funnel for the acquisition and distribution of
vast sums of globally fluid international money.
[Source: www.sott.net/article/367523-Europe-Totalitarianism-now-on-its-
doorstep]
The British Government is committing the most heinous act of High Trea-
son with regard to PESCO since the corrupt Rump Parliament, formed in
1648 to replace the purged Long Parliament, was consequently dismissed
by Oliver Cromwell on the 20th April 1653.
In 1689 'The Estates' (Parliament) again took control by deception after a
power grab was achieved, whilst the implementation of William and Mary
to the English throne created an opportunity for them to introduce more
deceptive legislation, also to undermine further the Coronation Oath Act.
Statutes that are observed by H M Courts today, which are no longer com-
mon law jurisdictions where a juror is present in their full capacity accord-
ing to law, to also decide upon the legality of Statutes created by parlia-
ment, are thus operating 'ultra vires' and in a quisling capacity whilst com-
mitting treason against we the people. These so called ‘Courts’ operate un-
der Maritime Admiralty Rules (the rules of shipping). Common Law
MUST be observed in all courts of law. Imagine if you will? that the Com-
mon Law (Constitution) is the ‘motherboard’ of a computer programme
which all other programmes (juridictions) must comply with to be able to
function.
The long range plan to overthrow British National Sovereignty:
1. A long range deception strategy to create a single Federal European state
with the erosion of each nation's sovereignty, currency and the powers to
determine its own laws and affairs, was finalised by the Geo-political cen-
tre of the third Reich in Berlin 1942. This was done with the effect that
should the Nazis lose the war, militarily, they could continue their plans for
a European dictatorship economically, through corporatism, and political
subversion.
Their future shape of Europe is detailed in the seminars entitled 'Eu-
ropaische wirtschaftsgemeinschaft ' (public document worldcat OCLC
number 31002821). Translated into English as 'European Economic Com-
munity' which has been herein presented as evidence. The chapter head-
ings of this Nazi document were replicated almost verbatim in the 1992
6Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
Maastricht Treaty.
2. Since the end of the war, diverse treasonous persons, groups and move-
ments with this ideology, have conspired to build on this agenda which has
become known as the European Union.
3. The involvement of the United Kingdom in this agenda began in 1948
with the formation of the European movement. This was a state funded
Anglo-French pro- federal European lobbying body posing as anon-Gov-
ernmental grass roots pressure group.
4. The said movement is still publicly active today lobbying for total Euro-
pean integration and a European constitution.
5. The first move towards a federal Europe did not involve Britain directly,
it was the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957 by Germany, France, It-
aly, Belgium Luxembourg and the Netherlands.
6. Meticulous research has uncovered a wealth of official, archived docu-
ments from the period 1970-72 which shows the deceit perpetrated by the
ruling elite at the time and these documents have been released after the 'il-
legal' thirty year rule.
7. The common law applies to all sovereign living breathing men and
women and dictates that we are all born free to do what we choose for our-
selves provided we do not cause harm, injury or loss to another's life, lib-
erty or property or their rights to life, liberty or property.
8. England, within the United Kingdom of Great Britain is a common law
jurisdiction and British parliament has no lawful authority ever to breach,
surrender, land, or transfer, even temporarily, sovereignty except when
conquered in war.
9. No one (neither monarch, nor prime minister, nor any prelate, politician,
judge or public servant) is above the common law of Great Britain that
forms the British constitution (Magna Carta 1215, the Coronation Oath Act
1689 and the Act's of Union succession and settlement 1701-07).
10. Treason in statute law was redefined by the Treason Act 1795 for the
7Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
principal forms to include; a) compassing the death or serious injury of the
sovereign or his (other) spouse or eldest son;
b) levying war against the sovereign in his (or her realm), which includes ,
any insurrection against the authority of the sovereign or of the Govern-
ment that goes beyond riot or violent disorder;
c) giving aid or comfort to the sovereign's enemies in wartime.
11. Treason at common law is the offence of attempting to overthrow the
Government of a state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betray-
ing the state into the hands of a foreign power.
12. Sedition at common law means overt conduct such as speech and or-
ganisation, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insur-
rection against the established order. Sedition includes the subversion of a
constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful author-
ity.
13. The evidence presented in the 'shoehorned into the EU' FCO 30/1048
files, shows that the Heath Government of 1972 was well aware that an es-
sential loss of British sovereignty would occur within thirty years with the
passing of the European Communities Bill and knew it would, in all likeli-
hood, be rejected if brought to the people, which of course it was not. This
in itself is an Act of Sedition at common law by the Heath Administration.
14. The passage of the European Communities Act in 1972, establishing
the principle that European law would always prevail over British law in
the event of a clash, thereby overthrowing the supremacy of the British
parliament, was a criminal Act of Treason at common law by the Heath
Administration.
15. The signing of the single European Act in 1986 reducing Britain's inde-
pendent decision making powers further by extending majority voting in
certain areas of policy making, was a criminal Act of Treason at common
law by the Thatcher Administration.
16. The signing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, based on the original
EEC Berlin document 1942, surrendering sovereign powers of the Queen
in parliament to an unelected body in Europe, was a criminal Act of Trea-
son at common law by the Major Administration.
8Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
17. The signing of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 increased the European
Union's powers for action at community level. This included further Euro-
pean Integration in legislative, police, judicial, customs and security mat-
ters and strengthened Europol. The signing of this Treaty was a further Act
of Treason at common law by the Blair Administration.
18. With the full knowledge of this Treason and to escape prosecution, the
Blair Government repealed the Treason legislation in section 36 of the
'crime and disorder Act' of 1998, abolishing the death penalty. This includ-
ing the repealing of the Treason Act 1795. However, the crime of Treason
at common law still stands as common law has primacy. This was a further
Act of Treason at common law by the Blair administration
19. The signing of the Nice Treaty in 2001 and the EU constitution in 2004
were further Acts of Treason at common law by the Blair Administration.
20. In an attempt to further protect themselves against criminal prosecution
the Blair Government removed the word 'sovereignty' from the oath of of-
fice of constables in the 'police Reform Act 2002 (section, 83), and also
modified the legislation to enable non British nationals to become officers
(section, 82). These were both acts of Sedition and Treason at common law
by the Blair Administration
21. The signing of the Lisbon Treaty in 2008 surrendered further control of
policy making, including that related to immigration and borders. This was
the crime of Treason at common law by the Brown Administration.
22. By denying the British people a proper referendum on remaining
within the EU, and further misdirecting the British people with regard to
the legality of remaining within the EU. Was an acts High Treason by the
Camoren administration.
23. PESCO (The integration of British armed forces under the command of
the EU superstate) provides the EU with the authority to direct British
armed forces. A nation unable to defend its borders independently cannot
be a sovereign nation. This is an Act of Treason by the May Administra-
tion.
9Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
24. BREXIT provides authority to Article 50 of the EU's Lisbon Treaty
2009, whilst British common law is blatantly denied and ignored by the
quisling government, The electorate were deceived into voting to remain in
or out of an illegally constructed regime within a criminal referendum, this
was a further act of Treason by the May administration.
The above facts and evidence are all on public record. For anyone to know
of an act of Treason being planned or committed, and to not report the
crime is also guilty of the same (Misprision of Treason) - (1795 Treasona-
ble and Seditious Practices Act section 5).
TREASON AND SEDITION EVIDENCE BY THE HEATH ADMIN-
ISTRATION:
In 1971, an FCO memorandum known as FCO 30/1048 was drafted. This
document details how the UK would surrender sovereignty if it were to
join the E.E.C/EU. However, this document was classified as Confidential,
and not released into the public domain until 2002. This document is now
within the public domain and provides clear, undeniable evidence that Ed-
ward Heath lied to the British electorate and committed both Sedition and
High Treason at common law.
A SECRET document prepared for pro-Europe Tory Prime Minster Ed-
ward Heath shows how the Foreign Office knew EU membership would
dismantle Britain as a sovereign nation. More damningly, in line after line,
the faceless Whitehall mandarins behind the astonishing briefing paper
FCO 30/1048 actively welcome Britain’s decline and Europe’s predomi-
nance.
The briefing paper acknowledges that Britain would in time become little
more than a puppet state of Brussels, after ceding judicial and executive
powers to the fledgling EU – then called the EEC. But, instead of sounding
alarm bells, the authors of the paper warn ministers to hide the truth from
the British public.
Bizarrely FCO 30/1048 reads more like an educated anarchists’ guide to
crushing Britain’s political standing on the world stage than the sober
briefing of civil service pillars of the British establishment. The language
suggests repeatedly that the British people are too stupid to grasp the im-
plications of joining the EEC (which became the EU in 1993), and that in-
deed this stupidity could be used against them to hide the truth until it was
essentially too late to do anything about it. Again and again they assert that
Britain’s parliament will be sidelined and that, sooner rather than later,
there will be a United States of Europe with a single currency.
10Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
Here we read between the lines of the most damning paragraphs of the
FCO 30/1048 and explain what the writers really meant:
The paper starts with a academic discussion of sovereignty – arguing that
sovereignty is not necessarily a good thing. By page five we are left in no
doubt as to the author’s position on sovereignty as he writes:
“Sovereignty is a technical concept with, in many ways, only limited bear-
ing on the questions of power and influence that form the normal preoccu-
pation of foreign policy.”
And after some rambling paragraphs about the Queen having sole sover-
eign law making power in Britain, he cuts to the chase saying: “Member-
ship of the Communities will involve us in extensive limitations upon our
freedom of action.” The first acknowledgement that Britain was about to
transfer significant powers to Europe.
A few paragraphs later he confirms this saying: “we shall be accepting an
external legislature which regards itself as having direct powers of legislat-
ing with effect within the United Kingdom, even in derogation of United
Kingdom statutes, and as having in certain fields exclusive legislative
competence, so that our own legislature has none.”
And further the authors not only concede the handing over of power but
that this is a no-going back deal:
“we shall be accepting that the Commission will jointly represent the
member states, who to that extent will have their individual international
negotiating powers limited; and we shall in various fields be accepting a
wide degree of coordination of our policy with that of the rest of the Com-
munity. All of this we shall be accepting “for an unlimited period,” with no
provision for withdrawal.”
In a clumsy attempt to diminish the massive changes to the way Britain is
governed the writer says: “Overall it is clear that membership of the Com-
munity in its present form would involve only limited diminution of exter-
nal sovereignty in practice.” But just a page later he makes it crystal clear
that it is just a matter of time before Europe starts eating away at Britain’s
ability to govern itself saying:
“The loss of external sovereignty will however increase as the Community
develops, according to the intention of the preamble to the Treaty of Rome
'to establish the foundations of an even closer union among the European
peoples'.”
11Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
Paragraph 12(I) is one of the most damning – as it clearly details the way
in which EU law will trample over British law. But that this must be kept
from the common knowledge of the British people. He writes:
“By accepting the Community Treaties we shall have to adapt the whole
range of subsidiary law which has been made by the Communities. Not
only this but we shall be making provision in advance for the unquestioned
direct application (i.e. without any further participation by Parliament) of
Community laws not yet made (even though Ministers would have a part,
through membership of the Council, in the making of some of these laws).
Community law operates only in the fields covered by the Treaties, viz,
customs duties; agriculture; free movement of labour; services and capital;
transport; monopolies and restrictive practices; state aid for industry; and
the regulation of the coal and steel and nuclear energy industries. Outside
this considerable range there would remain unchanged by far the greater
part of our domestic law.”
Community law is required to take precedence over domestic law: i.e. if a
Community law conflicts with a statute, it is the statute which has to give
way. This is something not implied in other commitments which we have
entered into in the past.
Previous treaties have imposed on us obligations which have required us to
legislate in order to fulfil the international obligations set out in the treaty,
but any discrepancy between our legislation and the treaty obligations has
been solely a question of a possible breach of those international obliga-
tions, the conflicting statute has still undoubtedly been the law to be ap-
plied in this country. But the community system requires that such Com-
munity Law as applies directly as law in this country should by virtue of
its own legal force, as law in this country prevail over conflicting national
legislation.
Clause III adds with shocking prescience that the seismic legal shift would
in effect be creating a federal law in a United States of Europe. And this
was 47 years ago, back in 1971. He writes:
“The power of the European Court to consider the extent to which a UK
statute is compatible with Community Law will indirectly involve an inno-
vation for us, as the European Court’s decisions will be binding on our
courts which might then have to rule on the validity or applicability of the
United Kingdom statute.”
(iv) The Law Officers have emphasised that in accepting Community Law
12Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
in this country we shall need to make it effective as part of a new and sepa-
rate legal order, distinct from, but co-existing side by side with, the law
and customs of the British people. They have referred to the basic Euro-
pean Communities Treaty provisions as amounting “in effect to a new
body of ‘Federal’ statute law.” which is Treasonable.
Next he deals with the reality of the homogenising of British life into Eu-
ropean life and says:
“In lay terms we may say that if Britain joined the Community there would
be many implications for both external and internal (particularly parlia-
mentary) sovereignty. Some of these would be wholly novel, and the gen-
eral effect particularly in the longer turn would be of more pervasive and
wide-ranging change than with any earlier commitments. Largely this is
because the Community treaties when drawn up were seen as arrange-
ments not merely for collaboration but for positive integration of large
parts of the economic and social life of the Member States. As a result the
conventional theoretical line dividing internal from external affairs has be-
come blurred, a process which as we have seen is already advancing with
the development of transnational economic activity.”
The patronising tone deepens further as the writer suggests Britain is popu-
lated by xenophobes who have a large ‘mistrust of foreigners.’ He bi-
zarrely quotes novelist Nancy Mitford saying: “Nancy Mitford’s Uncle
Matthew was not alone in considering that: “Abroad is hell and foreigners
are fiends.”
He writes: 15.(i) National Identity:
"We are all deeply conscious through tradition, upbringing and education
of the distinctive fact of being British. Given our island position and long
territorial and national integrity, the traditional relative freedom from com-
prehensive foreign, especially European, alliances and entanglements, this
national consciousness may well be stronger than that of most nations.
"When “sovereignty” is called into question in the debate about entry to
the Community, people may feel that it is this “Britishness” that is at stake.
Hence Mr Rippon’s pointed question “are the French any less French?” for
their membership. There is another, less attractive, aspect of this national
pride. This is the large measure of dislike and mistrust of foreigners that
persists in Britain. Nancy Mitford’s Uncle Matthew was not alone in con-
sidering that: “Abroad is hell and foreigners are fiends.”
13Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
(iii) Remoteness of the Bureaucra:
"It is generally acknowledged that in modern industrialised society the im-
personal and remote workings of the Government bureaucracy are sources
of major anxiety and mistrust. The operations of democracy seem decreas-
ingly fitted to control the all-embracing regulatory activities of the Civil
Service. In entry to the Community we may seem to be opting for a system
in which bureaucracy will be more remote (as well as largely foreign) and
will operate in ways many of which are already determined and which are
deeply strange to us. This bureaucracy is by common consent more power-
ful than compared with the democratic systems of the Community than is
ideal. Yet the way to remedy this balance without reducing the Community
to a mere standing association for negotiation between national Ministers
is by strengthening the Community’s democratic processes which in turn
means more change and more “loss of sovereignty.”
The following paragraph (iv) is so damningly anti-British it reads like the
ramblings of some pseudo Guy Burgess type Oxbridge communist attack-
ing, as it does, Britain’s idea she has any power on the world stage as fan-
tasy.
(iv) National Power "As explained in paragraph 6 above, questions of
power and influence have a close popular connection with ideas of sover-
eignty. The British have long been accustomed to the belief that we play a
major part in ordering the affairs of the world and that in ordering our own
affairs we are beholden to none. Much of this is mere illusion.
As a middle power we can proceed only by treaty, alliance and compro-
mise. So we are dependent on others both for the effective defence of the
United Kingdom and also for the commercial and international financial
conditions which govern our own economy. But this fact though intellectu-
ally conceded, is not widely or deeply understood; instinctive attitudes de-
rive from a period of greater British power.
Joining the Community does strike at these attitudes: it is a further large
step away from what is thought to be unfettered national freedom and a
public acknowledgement of our reduced national power; moreover, joining
the Community institutionalises in a single, permanent coalition the neces-
sary process of accommodation and alliance over large areas of policy, do-
mestic as well as external. Even though these areas may be less immedi-
ately relevant to survival than defence, as covered by NATO, the form of
the Community structure and the intentions explicit in the preamble to the
Treaty of Rome emphasise the merging of national interests.”
14Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
In a section that could have been written 47 minutes ago rather than 47
years ago he deals with the inevitable – and welcome – single currency,
and the prospect of an EU army. He writes:
“…but it will be in the British interest after accession to encourage the de-
velopment of the Community toward an effectively harmonised economic,
fiscal and monetary system and a fairly closely coordinated and consistent
foreign and defence policy. This sort of grouping would bring major polit-
ico/economic advantages but would take many years to develop and to win
political acceptance. If it came to do so then essential aspects of sover-
eignty both internal and external would indeed increasingly be transferred
to the Community itself.”
Towards the end the anti-British, pro-Europe rhetoric is in full flow, ac-
cepting Britain’s notion of itself as an independent state would be com-
pletely dismantled. Britain would be a European state, it’s Parliament neu-
tered.
19. "…then over a wide range of subjects (trade, aid, monetary affairs and
most technological questions) Community policies toward the outside
world would be common or closely harmonised. Although diplomatic rep-
resentation would remain country by country its national role would be
much diminished since the instructions to representatives would have been
coordinated among member states.
By the end of the century with effective defence and political harmonisa-
tion the erosion of the international role of the member states could be al-
most complete. This is a far distant prospect; but as members of the Com-
munity our major interests may lie in its progressive development since it
is only when the Western Europe of which we shall be a part can realise its
full potential as a political as well as economic unit that we shall derive
full benefits from membership."
20. "…of the functions of the Community could probably only take place
with concomitant development of the institutions of the Community. It is
hard to envisage the necessary decisions being taken under the present or-
ganisation of the Community; more effective decision-making at Commu-
nity level would either require majority voting on an increasing range of
issues in the Council or stronger pressures to reach quick decisions by con-
sensus.
In either case the role of the Commission would become more important as
the Community became responsible for the regulation of wider areas of the
internal affairs of the member states and this would in turn increase the
15Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
need to strengthen the democratic institutions of the Community, including
perhaps a directly elected Parliament. In that event the development of a
prestigious and effective directly elected Community Parliament would
clearly mean the consequential weakening of the British Parliament as well
as the erosion of 'parliamentary sovereignty'."
-Note: Parliamentary sovereignty is a construct of Treason and is a contra-
diction. Parliament is supposed to be operating in SERVICE to a constitu-
tional monarchy, whom in turn is supposed to be in SERVICE to the sover-
eign people under the Coronation Oath Act. The many layers of the decep-
tion have come about due the longevity of the Treasonous administra-
tion(s) progression, since (at least) parliament usurped the position of the
British monarchy by criminally 'proclaiming' parliamentary sovereignty.
FCO 30/1048 even predicts Michel Barnier’s current attempt to bully and
punish Britain for having the temerity to leave the EU saying “member
states would probably nominally have the ability to leave until about the
year 2000, but such a move would have increasingly damaging economic
consequences for the defector.”
And in yet another sideswipe at the British public he says it will be im-
portant for politicians to deal with – or cover-up – “anxieties about British
power and influence (masquerading under the term sovereignty) by pre-
senting the choice between the effect of entry and on Britain’s power and
influence in a rapidly changing world.”
And the pressing need to cover-up the realities goes on in the next para-
graph where he writes:
“After entry there would be a major responsibility on HMG and on all po-
litical parties not to exacerbate public concern by attributing unpopular
measures or unfavourable economic developments to the remote and un-
manageable workings of the Community. This counsel of perfection may
be the more difficult to achieve because these same unpopular measures
may sometimes be made more acceptable if they are put in a Community
context, and this technique may offer a way to avoid the more sterile forms
of inter-governmental bargaining. But the difference between on the one
hand explaining policy in terms of general and Community-wide interest
and, on the other, blaming membership for national problems is real and
important.”
Finally, in conclusion, the writers concede openly that Parliament will be
made effectively redundant saying:
16Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
“To control and supervise this process it will be necessary to strengthen the
democratic organisation of the Community with consequent decline of the
primacy and prestige of the national parliaments.”
The evidence above can be viewed on computer disk or downloaded from
the internet. The evidence was discovered within the public records office
by David Barmby whom compiled the evidence and can, as far as I am
aware, still be found there today. High Treason is the most serious crime
that can be committed or is on a par with genocide.
It is clearly evidential that the British Establishment is committing High
Treason whilst destroying British National Sovereignty. The police SER-
VICE is under Oath and Attestation to defend the common laws and cus-
toms of the realm, defending the sovereignty of the people is a duty that
MUST be adhered to by law.
All police constables whom have been put on Notice of the Treason evi-
dence by the people, nationwide, are blatantly and evidentially ignoring
said crimes being committed, and are thus defined as TRAITORS and
OUTLAWS under British Constitutional law, and the people they are sup-
posed to serve. Within a lawless state the people themselves are called
upon by law, to defend the Nation and police the police.
The evidence supplied herein is all verifiable fact and, has been provided
to you under duress of circumstances in defence of our common law rights
and freedoms, in order to “compel” police constables to investigate the
herein allegations, and to act according to law under Oath. You can use this
document to educate police constables (Corporate Policy Enforcers) in or-
der to provide proof that they are aware of the situation. Once served by
recorded delivery on an individual or named constables they cannot later
state that they were unaware.
Source: https://vote.us.org/memo/thread/43285/fco-30-1048-the-secret-
document-which-damned-britain-to-eu-membership/
POLICE CONSTABLE OATH OF OFFICE (England)
“I do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly
serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, dili-
gence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according
equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause
the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people
and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the
17Practical Lawful Dissent: TREASON EVIDENCE 25-06-2019 by David Robinson
best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully
according to law.”
Source: https://www.metfed.org.uk/support/uploads/1214552596Of-
fice%20Constable.pdf
The Oath specifically states “ACCORDING TO LAW.”
The “Law” refers to Common law as laid down within the British/English
Constitution. Evidently, whilst ignoring the variety of Treason evidence
provided, many/all police constables are aiding and abetting the crime(s)
and have thus deposed themselves of any legal/lawful authority by breach-
ing the above Oath of Office, this is the opinion according to law.
This document may be used in evidence.
18You can also read
