Has the Queen signed her sovereignty away?
I know Gerrard Batten is not too popular on this forum but this from him seems to make good sense.
The link only goes to he webpage and not to any article!!
Not many people know this as they say, but HM the Queen is a citizen of the European Union. Somewhere in my archives is a letter from the then Minister for Europe, Tristan Garel-Jones, confirming that Her Majesty was made a citizen of the European Union under the Maastricht Treaty (1993). Independent Labour Peer, Lord Stoddart of Swindon recently enquired of HM Government how one may renounce EU citizenship? Home Office Minister, Lord Henley, replied for the Government that, “It is not possible to renounce European citizenship while remaining a UK national”. According to her Government, the Queen, like the rest of us, could only renounce EU citizenship by renouncing her British citizenship first, and therefore her status as a ‘UK National’, and becoming a stateless person. Our ‘Sovereign’ Head of State is the subject of a foreign state and cannot renounce her EU citizenship without renouncing her birth-right of English nationality handed down over 1,500 years. What exactly was it we were supposed to be celebrating in the Jubilee?
Mr Batten is a little confused, Mrs Elizabeth Windsor is not a 'subject' of the EU but a citizen. A citizen possesses rights within the law which can only be removed by a far reaching legislative majority or plebiscite for consitutional change.
A subject of the crown has no rights except those bestowed by favour from the exectutive. These can be removed at anytime by the executive excercising the crown's Royal Perogative.
The concept of being a subject to a tribal leader, supposedly annointed by God, is only really supported by superstitous headhunters in the darkest jungles of Borneo and brown-nosing Royal correspondents on the BBC.
Great, can you imagine the super big smug grin that 2hat Blair would have had, had he become president of the UK, heaven knows what sort of corruption and draconian laws he would have single handedly passed.
Originally Posted by president
I'll stick the the present lot, just wish she would use her constitutional powers more often and heel this lot in.
If the Queen wasn't a traitor then she would of pulled the emergency cord and probably risked all for the country, like a true monarch should. Sadly, she only thinks of herself and her disgusting family.
Mr Batten is also confused about HMTQ's birthright of English nationality.
Originally Posted by youngian
Since the Peace of Westphalia, which is when we date the concept of sovereign states from, there has not been such a thing as an independent England. The English and Scots crowns were united at the time, although the Acts of Union uniting the Parliaments weren't passed until 1706/7. The King was Scottish and British subjects were precisely that.
In 512 AD, 1500 years ago as referred to by Mr Batten, there was no England as such nor were there any English. Angles were moving into East Anglia, Saxons were occupying the south-east of Britain, Jutes were in the middle whilst much of the north was still occupied by British tribal peoples, who also occupied Cornwall and swathes of the south-west as well as Wales. Welsh was spoken in what is now Yorkshire and the first written Welsh poem is from that area. England, as we understand it, was a creation of Alfred the Great who united areas that had previously been ruled over by their own princes and kings. Even then Northumberland, Westmoreland and Cumberland were still Scottish and a Welsh dialect was used in Cumbria (Cymru - Wales - and Cumbria have the same origins).
I think Mr Batten makes himself look foolish being a UKIP MEP, but having no idea how the United Kingdom arose in the first place. He needs to go back to the history books.
I think you mean British was spoken. At the time is was British, the few people left that still speak it are in Wales. But at that time, it was definitely British, the language of the British, before the Angles and Saxons invaded.
Originally Posted by Aardvark
At that time, Britain/Britannia, meant England & Wales and the people that resided there. Scotland was separate.
Scotland had picts didn't it.
You are correct. The name Welsh is from the Saxon.
Originally Posted by Road_Hog