Forwarded from :Luke Skytalker
When folks claim Magna Carta doesn’t exist because a foreign influence and power annulled it.
Why the annulment had no lawful effectin Constitutional terms
1️⃣ Magna Carta was a contract between the King and the realm — not the Church
The Pope had no lawful authority to annul an agreement made between the Crown and the barons on behalf of the People.
It was not a religious document.
It was not created by the Vatican.
It was not subject to Papal jurisdiction.
2️⃣ The King held his position under constitutional conditions
Even in 1215, the constitutional principle existed that:
The King is bound by the law of the land.
The Magna Carta simply reaffirmed this.
A foreign cleric could not reverse the constitutional settlement of the realm.
3️⃣ The annulment was rejected in practice — Magna Carta was reissued repeatedly
After King John’s death, the Charter was:
Reissued in 1216
Reissued in 1217
Reissued in 1225
Confirmed dozens of times by later monarchs
If it had been truly “nullified,” it would not have been reissued & reaffirmed over 800 years.
4️⃣ Constitutional interpretation: annulment void due to lack of sovereignty
Sovereignty rests with the People
No external authority can override the constitutional order of a realm
The Magna Carta expressed People’s rights against arbitrary rule.
Thus a foreign religious figure attempting to annul the rights of the People is constitutionally void and ultra vires.
❗ Key Point: A Papal Bull is not higher than the Constitution or the People
Even if historically issued, the Bull had no supremacy over:
The Common Law
The constitutional traditions of England
The sovereignty of the People
The contractual limitations on the Crown
🔥Additional constitutional angle: Treason
If Parliament claiming “sovereignty” over the People is a constitutional inversion,
Then a Pope claiming sovereignty and annulling the People’s Charter is even more unconstitutional.
Attempting to annul constitutional rights granted by the People could be construed as an external act attempting to subvert the constitutional order — i.e., an act of constructive treason.
✅ Summary
✔️ Historically accurate:
Yes, Innocent III issued a Papal Bull claiming to annul Magna Carta 1215.
❌ Constitutionally meaningless:
The Bull had no lawful authority to cancel an agreement between the King and the People.
✔️ The Papal Bull is irrelevant:
Magna Carta is foundational to constitutional law.
🔥 Constitutionally:
Any attempt (foreign or domestic) to remove the People’s rights is void and could be seen as treasonous in principle
Why the annulment had no lawful effectin Constitutional terms
1️⃣ Magna Carta was a contract between the King and the realm — not the Church
The Pope had no lawful authority to annul an agreement made between the Crown and the barons on behalf of the People.
It was not a religious document.
It was not created by the Vatican.
It was not subject to Papal jurisdiction.
2️⃣ The King held his position under constitutional conditions
Even in 1215, the constitutional principle existed that:
The King is bound by the law of the land.
The Magna Carta simply reaffirmed this.
A foreign cleric could not reverse the constitutional settlement of the realm.
3️⃣ The annulment was rejected in practice — Magna Carta was reissued repeatedly
After King John’s death, the Charter was:
Reissued in 1216
Reissued in 1217
Reissued in 1225
Confirmed dozens of times by later monarchs
If it had been truly “nullified,” it would not have been reissued & reaffirmed over 800 years.
4️⃣ Constitutional interpretation: annulment void due to lack of sovereignty
Sovereignty rests with the People
No external authority can override the constitutional order of a realm
The Magna Carta expressed People’s rights against arbitrary rule.
Thus a foreign religious figure attempting to annul the rights of the People is constitutionally void and ultra vires.
❗ Key Point: A Papal Bull is not higher than the Constitution or the People
Even if historically issued, the Bull had no supremacy over:
The Common Law
The constitutional traditions of England
The sovereignty of the People
The contractual limitations on the Crown
🔥Additional constitutional angle: Treason
If Parliament claiming “sovereignty” over the People is a constitutional inversion,
Then a Pope claiming sovereignty and annulling the People’s Charter is even more unconstitutional.
Attempting to annul constitutional rights granted by the People could be construed as an external act attempting to subvert the constitutional order — i.e., an act of constructive treason.
✅ Summary
✔️ Historically accurate:
Yes, Innocent III issued a Papal Bull claiming to annul Magna Carta 1215.
❌ Constitutionally meaningless:
The Bull had no lawful authority to cancel an agreement between the King and the People.
✔️ The Papal Bull is irrelevant:
Magna Carta is foundational to constitutional law.
🔥 Constitutionally:
Any attempt (foreign or domestic) to remove the People’s rights is void and could be seen as treasonous in principle
Forwarded from Mind Control, MK Ultra, Monarch, Ritual, TI
Far-left journalist among four arrested over alleged satanic paedophile ring https://www.noticer.news/sydney-international-satanic-paedophile-ring/
The Noticer - We notice what other news sites don't
Far-left journalist alleged led satanic paedophile ring
A far-left homosexual aboriginal journalist has been charged over an alleged international satanic paedophile ring along with three other men in Sydney.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Late great George Carlin ❤️
Forwarded from Natural holistic health and wellbeing (tracyfeathers)
💫💫🌀🌀
The Autoimmune
Solution Cookbook
By Amy Myers (2018)
🌀🌀💫💫
🌀🌀✨✨
This cookbook shows
how to repair your
body and reverse
symptoms by eating
good health
With grain-free
recipes designed to
prevent and reverse
the full spectrum of
autoimmune diseases
✨✨🌀🌀
💫💫✨✨
There are more than
one hundred
autoimmune diseases,
and no matter which
part of your body is
under siege, the culprit
is your immune system
This means that in order
to treat, prevent, and
reverse autoimmune
disease, you need to
get your immune system
back in balance
✨✨💫💫
The Autoimmune
Solution Cookbook
By Amy Myers (2018)
🌀🌀💫💫
🌀🌀✨✨
This cookbook shows
how to repair your
body and reverse
symptoms by eating
good health
With grain-free
recipes designed to
prevent and reverse
the full spectrum of
autoimmune diseases
✨✨🌀🌀
💫💫✨✨
There are more than
one hundred
autoimmune diseases,
and no matter which
part of your body is
under siege, the culprit
is your immune system
This means that in order
to treat, prevent, and
reverse autoimmune
disease, you need to
get your immune system
back in balance
✨✨💫💫
❤1
Forwarded from My Nemesis lives in my tiny mind 24/7/365 RENT FREE
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Stuck in a weirdo cult and dont know how to escape? We can help.
😁2
Forwarded from My Nemesis lives in my tiny mind 24/7/365 RENT FREE
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Trapped in a weirdo cult and dont know how to escape? We can help
👍2
Forwarded from My Nemesis lives in my tiny mind 24/7/365 RENT FREE
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Trapped in a weirdo cult and dont know how to escape? We can help
Bullingdon Boys Club Oxford
Blue arrow = George Farmer.
Circled right = Nathan Rothschild Jr
Circled Left = (George Osborne's so who's name I've forgotten)
Blue arrow = George Farmer.
Circled right = Nathan Rothschild Jr
Circled Left = (George Osborne's so who's name I've forgotten)
👀1
Forwarded from foxblog channel
Women’s Institute will no longer accept trans women as members from April https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/03/womens-institute-no-longer-accept-trans-women-members-april
the Guardian
Women’s Institute will no longer accept trans women as members from April
Exclusive: CEO says decision taken with ‘utmost regret and sadness’ after supreme court ruling on definition of a woman
😢1
Forwarded from exspiner (F)
🏳️🌈 Berlin: CDU und SPD legen Antrag zu möglichem Verbotsverfahren gegen die AfD vor
CDU und SPD haben im Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus einen Antrag zu den Voraussetzungen eines Parteiverbotsverfahrens vorgelegt. Die AfD wird darin nicht genannt. Gemeint scheint sie dennoch zu sein.
...
Der Antrag beginnt mit dem Hinweis auf die „wehrhafte Demokratie“. Genannt wird, dass ein Parteiverbot oder der Ausschluss von der staatlichen Finanzierung als „Ultima Ratio“ in Betracht kommen können. Voraussetzung sei, dass eine Partei bestrebt ist, die freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung zu beeinträchtigen oder zu beseitigen oder den Bestand der Bundesrepublik zu gefährden.
...
weiterlesen
Die SED ist in Panik wie selten. Wenn der Volkswille schon nicht gebrochen werden kann muß er eben verboten werden 👿
CDU und SPD haben im Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus einen Antrag zu den Voraussetzungen eines Parteiverbotsverfahrens vorgelegt. Die AfD wird darin nicht genannt. Gemeint scheint sie dennoch zu sein.
...
Der Antrag beginnt mit dem Hinweis auf die „wehrhafte Demokratie“. Genannt wird, dass ein Parteiverbot oder der Ausschluss von der staatlichen Finanzierung als „Ultima Ratio“ in Betracht kommen können. Voraussetzung sei, dass eine Partei bestrebt ist, die freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung zu beeinträchtigen oder zu beseitigen oder den Bestand der Bundesrepublik zu gefährden.
...
weiterlesen
Die SED ist in Panik wie selten. Wenn der Volkswille schon nicht gebrochen werden kann muß er eben verboten werden 👿