Secret British Royal family VETO on new laws exposed!!

[K626]

"A little-known power enjoyed by the Queen and Prince of Wales to alter new laws is due to be exposed after the government lost a legal battle to keep details of its application private.

The information commissioner has ruled that the Cabinet Office must publish an internal Whitehall guide to the way the senior royals are consulted before legislation is introduced to ensure it does not harm their private interests.

The application of the controversial veto was revealed by the Guardian last year and has been described by constitutional lawyers as "a royal nuclear deterrent". Some believe it may underpin the influence Prince Charles appears to wield in Whitehall over pet issues ranging from architecture to healthcare"....

For years I've been bringing to peoples attention the power of the European monarchies and especially the British Royal family, so at last it was great to see something like this in the public domain in a main stream newspaper. IMO this is just the tip of the iceberg.

love

K



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/aug/31/secret-royal-veto-powers-exposed

[Flash]

Very interesting indeed. Do the royals have still the same input as well in the ex colonies? Namely Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand amongst others.

I was once with Americans from the South (SC and FL) and we were talking about different business when I mention one Canadian business as a "crown corporation". They had no idea what I was talking about, I had to explain "pertaining to the Crown of England" and they laughed telling me they thought I might be mixing in the crown for our teeth. lol I also realised that I had been quite brainwashed myself into accepting that there were crown corporations and crown lands, etc.

You know what, I think the English monarchy still has these powers in the ex colonies, through their non elected representative which can abolish a parliament if necessary. I should verify if laws are passed through that person before being voted on.

[Möbius]

Well Found K626. When the Prime Minister has his weekly meeting with the Queen who do you think is calling the shots? The other thing that most people don't know is that 1/3 of the land in Brittain is owned by Aristocracy.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-1707678/Aristocracy-still-owns-a-third-of-Britains-land.html

[bluestflame]

would be interesting to gain access to a detailed list of prior vetoed laws and legislations just to see exactly HOW MUCH influence HAS been exerted in the past

would be a real eye opener for the uninitiated

[Vitalux]

God Bless the Queen, we could always have done worse:confused:

http://www.stickergiant.com/cand/imgs/bush.jpg

[Carmody]

"A little-known power enjoyed by the Queen and Prince of Wales to alter new laws is due to be exposed after the government lost a legal battle to keep details of its application private.

The information commissioner has ruled that the Cabinet Office must publish an internal Whitehall guide to the way the senior royals are consulted before legislation is introduced to ensure it does not harm their private interests.

The application of the controversial veto was revealed by the Guardian last year and has been described by constitutional lawyers as "a royal nuclear deterrent". Some believe it may underpin the influence Prince Charles appears to wield in Whitehall over pet issues ranging from architecture to healthcare"....

For years I've been bringing to peoples attention the power of the European monarchies and especially the British Royal family, so at last it was great to see something like this in the public domain in a main stream newspaper. IMO this is just the tip of the iceberg.

love

K



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/aug/31/secret-royal-veto-powers-exposed

I'm guessing that it stems from a very old agreement. Probably from right about the same time the British parliament was formed.

That the monarchy agrees to allow the people their 'parliament' ...but the monarchy does NOT back down, they hold their ground.

Thus..still a 'house of lords' or wealthy land owners who run the show, lip service to the public so they think they have a say..and then power shared with the monarchy, via this veto ability. I'd wager that the only way that the monarchy would allow the parliament to be formed at all, would be to have such a capacity for a veto in place. Otherwise..it would be war. Monarchy and subjects, and it never would have changed an inch.

Thus, again..a house of lords and a monarchy.. ruling.... with an appearance, on the surface..of a parliament for the people.

[bluestflame]

in essence another PR exercise (placating the public giving them a false sense of "victory" )
while behind the scenes things remain essentially unchanged

[Carmody]

in essence another PR exercise (placating the public giving them a false sense of "victory" )
while behind the scenes things remain essentially unchanged


There are stories that the same thing is also the case with the USA, regarding it still being, on paper, hidden paper, a place still controlled and owned by the Crown.

Kinda like hidden US Presidents having secret signing and directive measures available to them, via the mechanism of always keeping the USA in a 'state of emergency'. And that the USA has been in a continual 'state of emergency, signed into effect by Jimmy Carter, when he was the Prez. Under that directive, all things can be kept secret by the president and he has no need to tell anyone what they are doing, simply via the mechanism of signing the USA into a legal 'state of emergency'.

Under such a state of emergency, the president is a de-facto dictator, who's power, legally speaking is absolute, and unchallengeable by any US law, except being removed by congress for contempt or treason.

All they have to do, is keep the public unaware that they are continually declaring 'national emergencies', keeping that going, for short periods of time, like IIRC..4 month or so..then renewing it, the same day it expires.

In this way, the USA president has secret powers to do anything they want.

To keep this going, they limit their excursions into doing whatever they may be doing..into areas and places that are not easy for the public to find out about or know about.


IF..one is to look into what the presidents are doing, this 'declaration of a state of emergency'.... in a continually done repeated way..they find out, to their horror...that this is indeed TRUE.

This secret agreement with the crown still owning the USA, legally and also financially, this is apparently very true.

But the thing about the declaration of a state of emergency, this is provable. That single point that is on record is the ONLY clue of what is really going on. One clue, one clue only, that periodically comes up and is signed into effect, again and again. Hiding in plain sight in the presidential singed directive records.

And one of our authors, It is either Jim Marrs, or possibly Author Greg Palast..they found out that this is indeed true: That the USA does not have voting and elections, they have a hidden dictatorship, with a rotating figurehead..a dictatorship running in the background with the illusion of democracy.

[Anchor]

Is this not just Royal Assent? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Assent

I don't think this is hidden or secret - it is part of the way things get done in Britain.

[mosquito]

OK, let's flip this coin over and look at the other side.

In my view, the only point of the monarchy is to provide a check against over-legislation by the government. If all the Queen does is to rubber-stamp what parliament hands her, she's a complete waste of space.

There is such a thing as the "Royal prerogative" which may be what this is all about, and which gives the monarch the right to implement a law regardless. In the past however it's been abused by the government, 2 examples being the odious Blair's invasion of Iraq, and the Wilson government's expulsion of the Chagos islanders in order to provide the USA with the military base on Diego Garcia.

The house of Lords is no longer exclusively made up of hereditary peers, it's now basically a place where unpopular or retired politicians can be provided with a continued role in governance (think Mandelson), along with any sycophantic businessmen who (purely coincidentally of course) have made financial contributions to whichever party is in power. In my opinion, this is far worse than the days when it was full of stuffy old farts.

Why do people insist on knocking Prince Charles for his views on architecture ?? Which do you prefer, York Minster or the latest piece of sh1t to be built in Southwark ?

Just so you don't all think I'm a raving monarchist, I believe the current mob to be an anachronism and a monumental waste of taxpayer's money. I don't have anything against them personally, but I would like to see their position change such that they REALLY DO have the right of veto, and they use it from a position of responsibility and duty, responsibility to the people they are supposed to serve and to the world in general.

[K626]

in essence another PR exercise (placating the public giving them a false sense of "victory" )
while behind the scenes things remain essentially unchanged


There are stories that the same thing is also the case with the USA, regarding it still being, on paper, hidden paper, a place still controlled and owned by the Crown.

Kinda like hidden US Presidents having secret signing and directive measures available to them, via the mechanism of always keeping the USA in a 'state of emergency'. And that the USA has been in a continual 'state of emergency, signed into effect by Jimmy Carter, when he was the Prez. Under that directive, all things can be kept secret by the president and he has no need to tell anyone what they are doing, simply via the mechanism of signing the USA into a legal 'state of emergency'.

Under such a state of emergency, the president is a de-facto dictator, who's power, legally speaking is absolute, and unchallengeable by any US law, except being removed by congress for contempt or treason.

All they have to do, is keep the public unaware that they are continually declaring 'national emergencies', keeping that going, for short periods of time, like IIRC..4 month or so..then renewing it, the same day it expires.

In this way, the USA president has secret powers to do anything they want.

To keep this going, they limit their excursions into doing whatever they may be doing..into areas and places that are not easy for the public to find out about or know about.


IF..one is to look into what the presidents are doing, this 'declaration of a state of emergency'.... in a continually done repeated way..they find out, to their horror...that this is indeed TRUE.

This secret agreement with the crown still owning the USA, legally and also financially, this is apparently very true.

But the thing about the declaration of a state of emergency, this is provable. That single point that is on record is the ONLY clue of what is really going on. One clue, one clue only, that periodically comes up and is signed into effect, again and again. Hiding in plain sight in the presidential singed directive records.

And one of our authors, It is either Jim Marrs, or possibly Author Greg Palast..they found out that this is indeed true: That the USA does not have voting and elections, they have a hidden dictatorship, with a rotating figurehead..a dictatorship running in the background with the illusion of democracy.

I'm pretty sure THE QUEEN still holds the rights to the 'land' of Manhattan. Not the real estate as such but the land itself. Will try and find something on that: There were things available to look at on CROWN PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT but that got 'amended' and some stuff about Canada and Australia deleted about 8 years ago. Who'd have thunk it? ;)

love

K

[K626]

would be interesting to gain access to a detailed list of prior vetoed laws and legislations just to see exactly HOW MUCH influence HAS been exerted in the past

would be a real eye opener for the uninitiated

There will a more detailed release on the 25th of Sept.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/interactive/2012/aug/31/ruling-royal-veto-guidelines


love

K

[K626]

Very interesting indeed. Do the royals have still the same input as well in the ex colonies? Namely Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand amongst others.

I was once with Americans from the South (SC and FL) and we were talking about different business when I mention one Canadian business as a "crown corporation". They had no idea what I was talking about, I had to explain "pertaining to the Crown of England" and they laughed telling me they thought I might be mixing in the crown for our teeth. lol I also realised that I had been quite brainwashed myself into accepting that there were crown corporations and crown lands, etc.

You know what, I think the English monarchy still has these powers in the ex colonies, through their non elected representative which can abolish a parliament if necessary. I should verify if laws are passed through that person before being voted on.

This is a good place to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_land

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2162667/Queen-given-reason-smile-Jubilee-year-Crown-Estate-profits-rise-36m.html


love

K

[Andrew]

If they own it they control it. I wonder what shares the crown has ( I bet all the major companies)? Aren't share holders hidden owners? Isn't Mi5-6 the crowns assassin guild? Who owns the universities? is there really a public owned service or do we just pay them for the privilege? Who's treasury does the tax payers money go into? I presume if it has the crowns seal on any of this they own it. Who owns the printing presses to make money?

Really hasn't it always been private? Is the NHS free? is it hell, its like when you buy a new carpet but fitting is free, who pays the fitter?

The commoners have been taken for a ride. Think everyone should watch Robin Hood again.
Commoners should of built there own castles back in the day... but they never taught the masons to read or write so they couldn't hehe, same **** different century.

Have you ever tried to start your own lottery or open your own Bank? :nono:

The commoner world and the real world, totally different perspectives.

[K626]

If they own it they control it. I wonder what shares the crown has ( I bet all the major companies)? Aren't share holders hidden owners? Isn't Mi5-6 the crowns assassin guild? Who owns the universities? is there really a public owned service or do we just pay them for the privilege? Who's treasury does the tax payers money go into? I presume if it has the crowns seal on any of this they own it. Who owns the printing presses to make money?

Really hasn't it always been private? Is the NHS free? is it hell, its like when you buy a new carpet but fitting is free, who pays the fitter?

The commoners have been taken for a ride. Think everyone should watch Robin Hood again.
Commoners should of built there own castles back in the day... but they never taught the masons to read or write so they couldn't hehe, same **** different century.

Have you ever tried to start your own lottery or open your own Bank? :nono:

The commoner world and the real world, totally different perspectives.

Even Richard Branson couldn't swing that. :rolleyes: