ZaraJC

The British have rules, the English have rights.

[The English Remnant @Englishremnant]

The Weaponisation of Language

One of the most effective tactics of the modern left has been the corruption of language itself. Words that once had clear meaning have been twisted beyond recognition - redefined to suit their agenda and silence dissent.

They call censorship “safety.”
They call propaganda “education.”
They call perversion “pride.”
They call cowardice “tolerance.”
They call patriotism “hate.”

Through manipulation of words, they’ve managed to reshape moral reality. By controlling the language, they control what people are allowed to think. Change the definition, and you change the debate.

When “man” and “woman” become “identities,” when truth becomes “offensive,” and when disagreement is rebranded as “violence,” reason itself is under attack.

It’s not ignorance - it’s strategy. Because when the meaning of words collapses, truth becomes whatever they say it is. And that’s exactly how control begins.

Language built our civilisation. The twisting of it will destroy it - unless we start speaking plainly again.

“When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom.” - Confucius

[🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Graham Moore 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @englishexit]

These are @RupertLowe10 words “I have always made it clear that I support England and the English.” Rupert Lowe

Rupert has always made it clear! To the other gutless bastards, another quote for you!

“In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” Mark Twain

Never surrender @EngliscVeteran we are winning!

[The Secret People 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @SecretPeopleTSP]

The lady policeman at the end of that clip couldn't be more wrong.

The history of our civilisation and its constitutions dictate that we are governed by consent. The root of that consent lies in the solemn compacts formed between the Sovereign and People, and the Oath to maintain said compacts, but that consent can only be legitimate while the People have Trust in the Sovereign. The Sovereign is the root of all authority to govern. There are no authoritative sources that prove otherwise, but an abundant to the affirmative.

Police are under oath to, and are servants of, the Crown and as such are delegated powers and authority that only the Crown can bestow. The People losing trust in the police reflects that loss of trust on their superior, the Sovereign, who has delegated powers that have been misused. He only has the power to govern while he is trusted to fulfil his side of the compact. Break that Trust then there is no obligations to fulfil on the Peoples part, and no consent to be governed (or policed).

Imagine stupid it would be to play a game and not know the rules.

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

Proud to be English.

[Andy The Gabby Cabby @gabby_cabby]

I received a personal letter from @RupertLowe10 today.

House of Commons postmark. Direct answers. No waffle.

That told me everything I needed to know.

Rupert Lowe and @RestoreBritain are the real deal.

Makerfield now has a chance to send shockwaves through the establishment with Rebecca Shepherd.

Labour won’t save us.
The Tories won’t save us.
Reform won’t cut the mustard.
It is time to get behind Restore Britain.
For your family.
For your children.
For England.

We are running out of time — but we are not out of fight.

Share this. Make them hear us.

[@Constitutional Checks🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @EnglishHistory]

@Kingbingo_ We are governed by consent. If we don't have freedom of information, how can we make informed decisions? How could we make the decision of whether to consent or not? And how would we then choose the correct representative to vote in accordance with our will? Unconstitutional?

[The Secret People 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @SecretPeopleTSP]

To add further weight to what @ABridgen said.

Primary constitutional statutes such as this are not your run of the mill Acts of Parliament. They are agreed compacts between the Monarch and People enshrined in law. They contain confirmation of the establishment of specific Rights and Liberties of our People and limitations on how we are to be governed, be it expressly by the King, or, by his Government. All of which is given the force of law.

The Bill of Rights is in essence the Declaration of Rights set in law. To look at the Bill of Rights from the correct perspective, all you need do is to understand the above, and that the 'Bill of Rights' is the short title given to that enacted compact at a later date. It was originally know by its description of what it does;

'An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown and better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject'.

Nowhere does it say the Rights of Parliament or the Rights of the Government, does it!

It wouldn't, because it is a compact between the Sovereign and our English People. A restating of the 'original contract'.

It is OUR RIGHT that a Parliament exists for OUR benefit as expressly stated, 'for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening, and preserving of the laws,'; not for a rogue State to redefine what the existence of a Parliament means in that compact, to then arbitrarily enact legislation that suppresses our Rights and Liberties that the very same text established.

That is constitutional subversion of the very worse kind, and even attempting to subvert our Constitution has in the past been worthy of the loss of one's life. See the Cato Street Conspiracy for example.

The Coronation Oath Act is explicit in that the Monarch is to solemnly swear to not only govern by our Law, but by STATUTES AGREED ON. The Bill of Rights is one such statute to which that statement is referring.

'Now in pursuance of the premisses, the said lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in parliament assembled, for the ratifying, confirming and establishing the said declaration, and the articles, clauses, matters, and things therein contained, by the force of a law made in due form by authority of parliament, do pray that it may be declared and enacted, That all and singular the rights and liberties asserted and claimed in the said declaration, are the true, ancient, and indubitable rights and liberties of the people of this kingdom, and so shall be esteemed, allowed, adjudged, deemed, and taken to be, and that all and every the particulars aforesaid shall be firmly and strictly holden and observed, as they are expressed in the said declaration; and all officers and ministers whatsoever shall serve their Majesties and their successors according to the same in all times to come.'

There is no doubt that by giving Royal Assent (consent) to this, and by the reply after having been read the Declaration, that this Statute was most definitely agreed to.

'Day 15 February 1688.

His majesties Gracious answer to the Declaration of both houses.

My Lords and Gentlemen

This is certainly the greatest proof of the trust that you have in us that can be given which is the thing that maketh us value it the more and we thankfully accept what you have offered. And as I had no other intention of coming hither than to preserve your Religion, Laws and Liberties so you may be sure that I shall endeavour to support them and shall be willing to concur in anything that shall be for the good of the Kingdom and to do all that is in my power to advance the welfare and glory of the nation.'

By understanding our English Constitution we have all the tools we need to de-legitimise all that is being done to our People and to halt the Wilful destruction of our ancient civilisation.

@englishexit @RestoreBritain @AllForEnglandHQ

[Senator Rand Paul @SenRandPaul]

A reminder that the Constitution was not written to restrain the citizens' behavior.

It was written to restrain the government's behavior.

[Godfrey Bloom - The New Philosophers @Godfrey_Bloom]

We Don't Fix This By Elections. String 'Em Up?

[🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Graham Moore 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @englishexit]

It is not often I’m lost for words. God bless you!

Foot prints in the sand.

One night I dreamed I was walking along the beach with the Lord.
Many scenes from my life flashed across the sky.
In each scene I noticed footprints in the sand.
Sometimes there were two sets of footprints,
other times there were one set of footprints.
This bothered me because I noticed
that during the low periods of my life,
when I was suffering from
anguish, sorrow or defeat,
I could see only one set of footprints.
So I said to the Lord,
‘You promised me Lord,
that if I followed you,
you would walk with me always.
But I have noticed that during the most trying periods of my life
there have only been one set of footprints in the sand.
Why, when I needed you most, you have not been there for me?’
The Lord replied,
‘The times when you have seen only one set of footprints in the sand,
is when I carried you.’

[Dr. Ammous @AmmousMD]

Your smartwatch is making you sick.

It emits Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and cellular radiation directly into your body.

No health metric it gives you is worth that trade.

[🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Graham Moore 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @englishexit]

Rape and Torture Gangs:

"This Inquiry records the failure without reservation. Khan and the senior leadership of the Metropolitan Police must answer for their role in this scandal. Until the capital confronts the truth with the same rigour now demanded elsewhere, the children of London remain at risk and the state remains complicit."

Criminal Justice Act 1988 section 134 Torture. Mandatory life sentences.

[☣️ Pleb Kruse = BTC foundationalist in exile 🟩🔆 @DrJackKruse]

A DARPA MD spreading DARPA propaganda because fear keeps this operational. It needs to end. War is a fiat game. Malone is a compromised player in this game. He is trying to give DARPA and the CIA the deniable plausibility of the OK of killing Americans for the sake of safety over freedom. Remember what Franklin said.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Those who knew must go to prison for a long time

[🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Graham Moore 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @englishexit]

Rape and Torture Gang report - read through and commentary. https://t.co/Q2Pug9gJub

[The Secret People 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @SecretPeopleTSP]

I don't know what the plan is, but I do know that the prosecutions need to be thorough going right to the very top of the State hierarchy, to the one under oath to govern according to our Law and that all other State officials take oath to:

'the source of all power, civil and ecclesiastical, — “ the fountain of honour,” — the first and paramount institution of the state.' - Sir Thomas Erskine May

[Mark Attwood @MarkAttwood]

Listen. End the British Establishment. They are cesspit of satanic pedophiles.

[@Constitutional Checks🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @EnglishHistory]

¶ 34. "When the Christian religion is become a part of the subject’s property by the laws and constitution of the country; then it is to be considered as one of their principal rights: And so may be defended as well as any other civil right." Lord John Somers🧵

[The Secret People 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @SecretPeopleTSP]

What is done by the King's government, officers and ministers, is done by the King; and the King does not have a natural Right or lawful power to cause Injury to his subjects. Our Law is our Birthright, including the Law that makes Kings. Subversion of our Law by the King, whether directly or by his inaction's is a breach of the 'original contract' with the People, the consequence of which is his renouncing of the Trust placed in him by the People, and an abdication by deed/action.