British History, Culture & Sports, History of Freedom, Heroes, Inventors, Brits at their Best.com, English country scene

Blog Home | All Posts

Letter from HM The Queen

Many people have written to The Queen with the same concerns that I have. Britain's sovereignty and the liberty of the British people are being threatened. The Queen's constitutional duty is to defend them.

I think those thousands of letters may be having an effect.

After my first letter met with a disappointing reply, I wrote again in August and at the end of September. In August:

I wrote to Your Majesty recently about the Lisbon treaty. Ms Bonici sent a reply. It didn't have my name on it as she has apparently been very busy dealing with many letters similar to mine.

So many of your subjects have written to Your Majesty precisely because Your Majesty is a constitutional monarch. Your Majesty's subjects expected that a constitutional monarch would uphold the constitution. A part of that constitution is the Coronation Oath, which Your Majesty swore before God and to the people.

Archbishop of Canterbury: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, 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.

At the time Your Majesty swore the Oath we British were sovereign and made our own laws. Our traditional custom is to freely govern ourselves. With Royal Assent to the Lisbon Treaty Act and Your Majesty's subsequently signing the ratification document, Britain becomes a mere province of the European Union. Your Majesty's subjects will be governed by Brussels, and not by Your Majesty's government.

It is Your Majesty's right, nay, it is Your Majesty's duty and obligation, to refuse Royal Assent to Acts of Parliament that threaten the People's laws and customs or Your Majesty's constitutional position. . .

The September letter:

Your Majesty, It is the right of the British people to petition their monarch.

My first petition to Your Majesty was a letter of the 25th of June. It was answered by Mrs Sonia Bonici, who said, “I should explain to you that there is no question of Her Majesty, as constitutional sovereign, refusing Royal Assent to an Act which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament”.

I wrote to Your Majesty again on the 11th of August. I have not received a reply to my second letter although it makes a constitutional point of the gravest importance for Your Majesty and the British people and the continuation of the Monarchy itself.

In Canada, in 1964, Your Majesty made unequivocally clear what the people expect from their constitutional sovereign - “The role of a Constitutional Monarch is to personify the democratic state, to legitimate authority, to assure the legality of its measures and to guarantee the execution of its popular will.”

Parliament may try to persuade Your Majesty to obey it, but Your Majesty has pledged to defend the laws and customs of the people and Your Majesty’s constitutional writ extends to protecting your people from a tyrannical Parliament and from any unjust statute that Parliament may pass.

What would Your Majesty’s father, our dearly beloved George VI, have done if he had been told by Parliament to give away Britain’s freedom and sovereignty to Hitler? Would he, could he possibly have agreed to do Parliament’s bidding?

The answer, again, was made by Your Majesty - “I shall work as my father did throughout his reign to uphold Constitutional government and to uphold the happiness and prosperity of my peoples”.

In giving your Royal Assent to the Lisbon Treaty, Your Majesty has ignored the wishes of your people, which were also ignored by Parliament.

Tyrannical is a realistic description of Parliament, which promised the people a vote on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty and then broke its promise. Negligent is an honest description of many MPs who admitted that they had never read the Lisbon Treaty.

Foreign leaders are agreed that the Lisbon Treaty is the same as the EU constitution. Parliament is forcing the British people to accept this unwanted political settlement, which is sweeping away their long-treasured liberties, laws and customs, which have stood them in such good stead for hundreds of years.

Our Declaration of Right and Bill of Rights plainly state:

“That no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm”.
Giving any foreign body authority over the British people is unconstitutional.

Britain’s Constitutional government includes a sovereign, a parliament and a judiciary. Are we to believe that Parliament’s overweening domination has reduced the champion of the people, Your Majesty, to a cipher, who cannot speak for us or defend our liberties and whose Royal Assent means nothing because it can never be denied?

Perish the thought.

It was and is still Your Majesty’s responsibility as our constitutional monarch to refuse Parliament your Royal Assent when Parliament passes unconstitutional statutes.


The second reply from Buckingham Palace shows a slight and perhaps significant change.

The Queen may be concerned that a grave threat and a great constitutional question face her:

queen_letter__lisbon_24_oct.jpg

I urge anyone who has not written to express their concerns to The Queen and everyone who has written to write again, and to write or meet with the Lord Chancellor.

f_constitution_oak_200w.jpg

For those who love liberty, the British Constitution is here.

Comments (9)

John Gouriet:

Dear David,

Well done! Your persistence may yet be rewarded, but only if we all keep writing as you suggest, and as I have been doing in similar vein for more than ten years.

However I should emphasise that HM's officials do tend to soften their obduracy when backed into a corner, as you have eloquently done. We all know that Jack Straw is only too well aware of our arguments and their veracity, but it does no harm to keep rubbing his sanctimonious face in the truth as HM is doing.

Nevertheless the sad fact is that unless and until the Sovereign is prepared to exercise her lawful authority by confronting her ministers, refusing assent to unlawful bills that are in conflict with our constitution and her oath to us or are against the national interest, and ensuring that her coronation pledge to us her, hitherto loyal, subjects is upheld, the dismal fate of this proud old nation will be assured. It is a clear case of monarch and people versus overmighty traitorous politicians. We cannot wait for the monarch for ever!

Best regards

John Gouriet
Defenders of the Realm

Terry Pendrous:

I have been making submissions for over a decade, All backed up by your points in your letters. In the year 2000, a petition was placed before the House of Lords raising tthe very points made here. It was suppressed and the people involved isolated. I personally raised it at various elections, and our would be candidates would not discuss it! They were obviously gagged. So what chance this latest effort?

Torquil Dick-Erikson:

Where is the change of attitude in this recent letter from the Queen?

She always "takes careful note of the views expressed" and always passes it on to the relevant govt minister.

I cannot see anything new here, or anything to show that she may be about to effect an about-turn over the EU.

I fear that the moment for her to play her hand was over Lisbon - the last Treaty - which passes our remaining vestiges of power over the EU. She could easily have put her foot down, and said "I am not signing that until you give the people the referendum on it that you promised". It would have been a win-win situation for her, for if she aligns herself with the people there is no Parliament that can gainsay her.

She supinely signed, not even having the delicacy to say "I'd like to wait to hear what my judges have to say about it first" (Wheeler's case was still sub judice).

Under Lisbon the EU at last gets its paws on our mechanisms for law-enforcement, ie for using force on the bodies of people in Britain. As soon as they have sorted out the Irish, Lisbon will be up and running and they will be able to bring in their own armed paramilitary Eurogendarmerie. It'll be armed men who are not the Queen's servants and who do not acknowledge her sovereignty, on British soil. A threat to national security as well as to the individual security of each and every one of us.

Will she object then? It'll be a bit late by then.

John Lloyd:

Dear Dr Abbott ,

Thank you for this opportunity to comment . Your efforts in assisting us here in Britain is most appreciated , as it is by many others and hope that you will continue to do so. In some respects myself and others have been slow in reacting to what is happening to our Country, our Laws, our way of Life, Our Beliefs also our Faith. Please continue with your efforts in helping us.

We are at a low ebb, as we are overtaken by all of the treachery , perhaps have been slow to realize, but find that we have been overtaken by lies and deceit. Am of the opinion that should our frail attempts to prevent the loss of our Country and Heritage Fail, it will lead to the rest of the Western World and the Commonwealth Countries to be taken over in much the same way .

Time is running out for all democratic people.

Sincerely,
John Lloyd


Anonymous:

Thank you for this, David, and re-reading your letters I must again compliment you on the wording and the grasp you demonstrate in their construction.

I fear, however, that the referral to Jack Straw is clearly another fob-off.

The Monarch, supported by our taxes, has taken months to reply to you. She has now merely decided to request yet another of her Ministers (a
subordinate) to answer the criticisms you raise but to which she should respond. Straw, the Minister selected, has been directly complicit in the diminution of the Monarch's sovereignty, the passing of the Lisbon Treaty and the undermining of the Crown's Constitutional position, role and
prerogative.

While it will be interesting to see Straw's response, if only to see how he wriggles out of these serious questions, he will do so in the manner that all previous Ministers have done - by verbal sleight of hand. And, by so doing, he will answer on behalf of the Monarch, which will finalise the correspondence. That is her excuse for taking no further action.

Perhaps you should write to Bonici and pre-empt Straw's reply. You might well ask how and why the Queen expects her Minister, who has had a major hand in the transfer of our nation's sovereignty to Brussels and who is therefore arguably guilty of treason, to answer these important questions impartially. Would the police defer to a burglar on the issue of whether or not the sanctity of a property had been invaded and goods therefrom
purloined?

Finally, the solution is clear-cut: the political parties promised a referendum on Lisbon. None was granted. The prerogative of the Monarch is to dissolve Parliament and call a General Election. The Tories have promised a referendum on Lisbon, provided it is not ratified by the time they enter office. The role of the Monarch could not be more clear-cut: Parliament must be dissolved.

john kelly:

Well done David, but I too am gloomy at the prospect of any change by HMQ - Torquil summarises the position well. For that reason, I'm increasingly of the opinion that we need a second Boston Tea Party - a taxpayers revolt, peaceful, pointed and persevering. As you can see from my BBC Bias revolt, I've been at it for 8 years and haven't been prosecuted - yet! Of all the many taxes we pay, there is only the BBC licence and council tax which are voluntary - one has a choice as to whether or not one pays!!

If enough folk were determined to put down their mark on this one, supreme issue, would the Govt dare to take action against us???

Think about it.

John Lloyd:

I wish to suggest that the points raised by the last two commentators be taken under your wing.

Her Majesty must be reminded again of the wedge in which she is now begining to find herself in, and that she needs to protect her people, even against the intentions of the political parties and other groups .

Time is not on our side, things are now critical .

John Lloyd

Jervis Fraser Brownell:

Ask for the abdication of the total House of Windsor. I.E. Saxe Cuburg Gote, and send them all back to Germany and perhaps they could get a job in a Bratwurst factory. Then crown the rightfull King of the UK Michael Hasting, currently residing in Australia. They are all past their sell buy dates. Do it now

John E. Payne:

Dear Mr Abbot,

I wish to add my admiration for the tenacity you show, and wholly support your views.

It is misleading to me our head of state, Her Majesty, seeks the advice of Jack Straw, who is an elected politician of just a single constituency. Jack Straw is not our Monarch! Yet Her Majesty refuses to seek the opinion of her subjects.

In your letter you quote:

‘Your Majesty’s constitutional writ extends to protecting your people from a tyrannical Parliament and from any unjust statute that Parliament may pass.’

Leaving the Lisbon Treaty aside, is it not now the time for Her Majesty to reconfirm if she maintains her coronation oath. At the very least the Country would like to know exactly where she stands as our Sovereign.

That surely is a very simple question to answer, and avoids any political bias.

Yours sincerely

John Payne

Post a comment

(Please do give us your name or the name you write under in the form below and your URL if you have one. Your comment may take a little time to appear. Thanks for waiting.)

COPYRIGHT