A tribute to one amazing lady who stood up to the government and the EU about the Council Tax and the British Constitution


Digg This  Reddit This  Stumble Now!  Buzz This  Share on Facebook  Bookmark this on Delicious  Share on LinkedIn  Post on Twitter  Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)  
A tribute to a great lady -  Elizabeth Beckett 29th July – 7th February 2009
We have recently read about a lady called Elizabeth Beckett who was a champion of the British Constitution at the age of 83 she fought the system on her own yet this story was not covered by any of the news channels even though a small report was done this was not aired, WHY.   Here is her story

“I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you,
that you have broken your oath to us your people.”

~ (Elisabeth Beckett’s last letter to the Queen January 21st 2009)

Mrs Elizabeth Beckett’s legitimate Constitutional stance against an illegal tax system and treasonous government.

A story that should be on the front page of every newspaper, but has remained unreported! This amazingly selfless lady has studied the British Constitution in great depth. Her initial interest in the law began when she was a District Officer’s wife in India where her father, a High Court Judge for many years, was party to drawing up the 1935 India Act of Independence.

Since our last issue, Elizabeth was summoned to appear in court at Carlisle on the 24th July, a distance from her home of approximately 55 miles. Without hesitation or complaint, this remarkable 83 year old lady, who in her own words is lame, (she cannot walk very well without aid, due to a painful hip), took a taxi on her own, to the court where a judge listened to her appeal against a threatened bankruptcy order by her local council, for refusing to pay her Council Tax. Her refusal was based on the following objections:

“It is illegal to pay a tax to destroy my country.”

Later she discovered just how illegally councils are acting.

Elizabeth has received very little mainstream media reporting, the little she has had has only been at local level. Nationally, the BBC televised 30 seconds on the Politics Show. Even though she was interviewed by a reporter, the BBC editor refused point blank to broadcast her interview. It was withdrawn. We ask, could this be because of the influence of Common Purpose?

We at Namaste have tried to present Elizabeth’s story to various national newspapers: They were not interested. In fact the News Desk of the Daily Mail in Manchester thought our information about Elizabeth’s Constitutional Rights and the Act of Treason committed against the people of the British nation, was far fetched! We put it to the News Desk that we do indeed have a Constitution. This was also dismissed.

We ask, could this be because of the influence of Common Purpose?

It is quite clear that we are dealing with mindset which is at best totally ignorant and, at worst, working deliberately to subvert our ancient Constitutional history – The Birth Right of the People of England, (1700). This is still the law of the land today! How could this happen? The plan has been carefully contrived. The journalist Stewart Alsop wrote: “Knowledge is power and power is the most valuable commodity in government. So whoever knows the secrets controls the knowledge and therefore holds the power…”

This would help to explain why Harold Wilson removed the teaching of the Constitution from the British education curriculum, in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Today, Britain’s universities DO NOT teach treason laws, the greatest crime against a nation; hence today, we find our nation and our freedom in the most critical situation. How could this happen you may ask? The answer to this can be found in the descriptively accurate words of Cicero Marcus Tullius, born on 3 January, 106 BC and murdered on 7 December, 43 BC:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”

The following information is from Namaste Publishing

Unquestioning, Unwilling to Research – This is so precisely true of what is taking place today, not only in Britain, but other countries of the Commonwealth, and the USA – this is the Common Purpose. Unmasking Common Purpose (page 36) We and our colleagues both in the UK and USA, are deeply concerned with the direction that both our nations are heading, yet so many seem woefully ignorant. This is not because people are stupid but they lack time and interest to inform themselves, largely because of the education system and mass media control with mind manipulations. We see and hear people acting like sheep, unheeded by the ever emerging totalitarian state, unquestioning, unwilling to research and blindly accepting lies and half-truths from those who can only be best described at misinformed and in the main, deliberate liars.
Part of this disinformation relates to our Council Tax in the UK. For the benefit of our overseas readers, Council Tax is a tax on domestic property collected by local councils in the UK. The council is supposed to use this revenue to pay for local services such as schools, rubbish (garbage) collection, roads and street lighting, etc.

Fiscal Prerogative – Elizabeth felt driven to research the issue of Council Tax accounts, having observed various related, suspicious news articles in the press one of which involved the North West Regional Council of the UK purchasing a house in Brussels, a totally inappropriate action in view of the sufferings of the Cumbrian fishermen and farmers. This alarmed her to the fact that she might well, as a law abiding honest Council Tax payer, be assisting in the potential breakup of her country. We must emphasise that Constitutional Law is not a matter of politics, whether one votes to drive on the left or the right, but a matter of law like the dividing of Britain into ‘Lander’ such as the county of Kent becoming part of France, and Wales becoming part of Ireland etc. That is against our law and Elizabeth said she could not pay for the destruction of the sovereignty of this country. She then asked for full disclosure of how her Council Tax is being spent. This has not been forthcoming because of the liability order against her; the order is an executive order and in Britain alone is governed by the Royal Prerogative. The Enforcement Officer and people in charge of the courts refused to admit that the Liability Order could be challenged in any way. According to the Petition of Right of 1627 all taxation should be honoured by Parliament, under the Royal Assent and Parliament cannot pass acts that are against our Constitution.

Elizabeth further discovered a covert plan to do with the regional assemblies. These are voluntary bodies that are designed to break up England, e.g. Northumberland up to Carlisle will became part of Germany. This was not mentioned in the Labour Party manifesto.

Amongst the papers she handed to the judge at her trial, were the details of Common Purpose and their assemblies, which have increased by 500% since the year 2000. Taxation emanates from the Chancellor’s Office and these are illegal under what is known as the ‘fiscal prerogative’ and the ‘Petition of Right’. Because these assemblies are voluntary bodies, they are not available for funding by the taxpayer. Our Constitution states that ‘all laws’ that go through Parliament ‘must have Royal Assent, in order to become law.’ Instead, they are now validated on a false claim that the Royal Assent is automatic. However, the power to grant this is part of the prerogative, which it impassable.
The automatic assent was invented by the Fabian Prime Minister Asquith who gave the qualification based on the premise that Queen Ann had been the last monarch to send back a bill. The implication being that the monarch could not send back bills, whereas in fact, their power lies in the support of our Constitutional Laws by refusing to give Assent to bills that are unconstitutional.

The Parliament Act -

Elizabeth felt driven to research the issue of Council Tax accounts, having observed various related, suspicious news articles in the press one of which involved the North West Regional Council of the UK purchasing a house in Brussels, a totally inappropriate action in view of the sufferings of the Cumbrian fishermen and farmers. This alarmed her to the fact that she might well, as a law abiding honest Council Tax payer, be assisting in the potential breakup of her country. We must emphasise that Constitutional Law is not a matter of politics, whether one votes to drive on the left or the right, but a matter of law like the dividing of Britain into ‘Lander’ such as the county of Kent becoming part of France, and Wales becoming part of Ireland etc. That is against our law and Elizabeth said she could not pay for the destruction of the sovereignty of this country. She then asked for full disclosure of how her Council Tax is being spent. This has not been forthcoming because of the liability order against her; the order is an executive order and in Britain alone is governed by the Royal Prerogative. The Enforcement Officer and people in charge of the courts refused to admit that the Liability Order could be challenged in any way. According to the Petition of Right of 1627 all taxation should be honoured by Parliament, under the Royal Assent and Parliament cannot pass acts that are against our Constitution.

Elizabeth further discovered a covert plan to do with the regional assemblies. These are voluntary bodies that are designed to break up England, e.g. Northumberland up to Carlisle will became part of Germany. This was not mentioned in the Labour Party manifesto.

Amongst the papers she handed to the judge at her trial, were the details of Common Purpose and their assemblies, which have increased by 500% since the year 2000. Taxation emanates from the Chancellor’s Office and these are illegal under what is known as the ‘fiscal prerogative’ and the ‘Petition of Right’. Because these assemblies are voluntary bodies, they are not available for funding by the taxpayer. Our Constitution states that ‘all laws’ that go through Parliament ‘must have Royal Assent, in order to become law.’ Instead, they are now validated on a false claim that the Royal Assent is automatic. However, the power to grant this is part of the prerogative, which it impassable.
The automatic assent was invented by the Fabian Prime Minister Asquith who gave the qualification based on the premise that Queen Ann had been the last monarch to send back a bill. The implication being that the monarch could not send back bills, whereas in fact, their power lies in the support of our Constitutional Laws by refusing to give Assent to bills that are unconstitutional.

Common LawElizabeth’s Plaint lays the ground for important legal and Constitutional constraints which are being side-stepped and their legal validity is being denied by our present legal system and government. The fact they are still part of our British Common law is undeniable, Sir Edward Coke said, “The Royal Prerogative is part of the Personality of the Monarch and could not be taken from them even by an Act if Parliament” which the Law Lords Halbury and Jowitt agree. (Halbury’s Laws, The Birth Right of the People of England (These are legal reference books of great prestige).

Since the Assent is given under the regal ‘Prerogative Power,’ it is invalid if it is given to an unconstitutional act. So in a different way, both Counsel’s opinion and Elizabeth’s lead to the same conclusion. Therefore, she says that one can conclude that ALL of the bills that have been made law since 1911, which includes 1972 entry into Europe, and all that follows, together with the Civil Contingencies Bill, the Constitutional Reform Act, Equality Act and the Immigration Act ARE VOID.
It is clear that our entry into the European Union is INVALID, ILLEGAL and against our Constitution. (see article page 31)

Since our last issue, Elizabeth has spent many weeks preparing for her appeal to the Royal Courts of Justice. As we write today 16th November, her leave for Judicial Review has been granted. Furthermore it has arrived just in time to save her house from being taken over. Elizabeth heard her news whilst in hospital with an embolism she is unbelievably grateful to all those readers who have been kind enough to send donations.

She says: “It has been so heart warming and encouraging to know people are supporting me”. It came as such a surprise to her and beyond her expectations to receive donations from our readers.

Elizabeth is determined and optimistic as ever. The money we sent to her she says has enabled her to pay for the court application, photocopying, postage, telephoning and travel in order to put together her appeal to the Royal Courts of Justice.

Elizabeth’s Plaint is clear, Treason has been committed and should be remedied.
Abbe Talleyrand de Perigord said to Mme Recamier in the early nineteen hundreds :


“Understand this, if the English Constitution is destroyed so will be the civilisation of the world”

If the Supremacy of Parliament is to rest on treason, it will help no one.
As of the time of writing this article, Elizabeth has still not received a date for her appeal in the High Court. We ask readers to please continue to check the Namaste website www.namastepublishing.co.uk for an update with details. As MANY people as possible should attend. We ask if people would try their best to attend the hearing, and to invite others. If anybody knows of any contacts who might help in funding for a good legal counsel, we implore you to let us know. Your freedom and that of future generations hangs in the balance. Elizabeth cannot do this without the support of the people – your support. Her stance is for everyone. Will we support her, or has it become our custom to turn our heads and look the other way? If we think that we British have no need to be concerned and our lives are just fine, we have our holidays, we have work, if not we get benefits and above all we are entertained, so why should we bother with all of this? Well, the zombification of Britain is well in place and the future is not as pretty as people think. Do not be deterred, our freedom hangs by a thread! BEWARE, by 2009 it will BE TOO LATE.

Why are you making this potentially dangerous and difficult stance at your time of life?

Elizabeth:
“I do it for my children, grandchildren and for all our ancestors – all those who have died for our freedom. Do you want to see your children in chains? I was in India during the war and knew about the fight against the Japanese and I knew about the earlier war and I quote John Edmonds..
. ‘When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say,
For Their Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today’”
~ John Maxwell Edmonds (1875 -1958)

Namaste: What can readers do to help you?

Elizabeth: “Talk about the Constitution. Research it. Know it. Know that it exists and help to keep it alive against the evil forces dedicated to its destruction. Please send donations however small, to Namaste Magazine for the Elizabeth Beckett Constitutional Legal Fund”

Press Release
by Namaste Team

The passing of a great Lady – Elisabeth Beckett.
I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you, that you have broken your oath to us your people.” ~ (Elisabeth Beckett’s last letter to the Queen, 21st January, 2009)

It is with great sadness that we share the news of the passing of Mrs Elisabeth Beckett after her fight against leukemia. Elisabeth was the daughter of a High Court judge. The fact she managed one last shot across the bows of the nation’s ever-dwindling sovereignty says so much about her steadfastness.

She went on the offensive when she discovered that her Council Tax bill was being used as a vehicle to extract money from her (and every other resident of this nation) for the European Union inspired Regional Assemblies. She took a one woman’s legal stance, using her profound knowledge of the British Constitution against her local Eden District Council, and refused to pay her Council Tax whilst under the threat of bankruptcy. Elizabeth launched four legal cases against the government citing Erosion of the Constitution, Breach of Contract, Breach of Trust and for Treason and Legal Fraud. She also took out an injunction against Prime Minister Gordon Brown for Treason against the British People.

In 2007, Namaste Magazine launched an appeal for funds to avert her bankruptcy, which was successful. The funds enabled her to start the process to appeal to the High Court. Whilst working with her she became our latter day Boudica. The depth of Elisabeth’s Constitutional knowledge coupled with her courage and her unfailing determination to protect our country and its people from the loss of British Sovereignty against the relentless ever invading totalitarian powers of the EU, is testament to her uniqueness.

It has been an honour and privilege to have known and worked with her. Thank you, dear Elisabeth, for your sterling efforts. You will be very sadly missed.

All who read this obituary can only have the utmost respect and admiration for such a great lady and the passionate, abiding love which she had for this country and its people.

http://ukcolumn.org

http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Elizabeth%20Beckett%20-%20News%20Black%20Out.htm

http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Tribute%20to%20Elisabeth%20Beckett.htm

http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Elizabeth.htm

The following is the last letter Elisabeth’s son was able to read to his mother on the morning of
the 7th Febraury, the day before she passed away.

My dear Elisabeth,

I have read your letter of 21st January to the Queen, sent to me with the email of 2 February.
It seems that leukaemia cannot stop your mind working or your determined action in pursuit of your longstanding defence of our constitution, institutions and law. You are marvellous.

Love Leo
(Leoline Price)”

Above:
Mrs Elisabeth Beckett handing over a letter to a Police Sergent in Penrith, Cumbria, asking the Chief Constable to protect her rights under the Constitution.

Her Majesty The Queen
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

21 January 2009

Madam

Unconstitutional reign


Giving careful consideration to the mode of address in this letter, although in courtesy I have addressed it in conventional manner, it is clear that having, in effect, abdicated by failure to perform your coronation oath you leave the people of this nation without effective titular head to whom we may address our petitions. I write to you only in your pre-eminence in Common Law.
I write on Edmund Burke’s remark that for evil to flourish it is sufficient for good men to do nothing.
At your coronation you swore on oath to rule this country according to our laws and customs. This contract with us was written clearly in Magna Carta and replicated by Edward I in 1274. After saying that he would give no such oath, the archbishops, bishops, barons and freemen said that, in this case, they would get another king.

In Magna Carta it was made clear that if the monarch went against this oath then chapter 61 would apply, the contract would be broken and the monarch would have to give up his position and possessions. You have, throughout your reign, disregarded our laws and customs in the legislation that has gone through Parliament.

I believe that you have done this on the basis of the Fabian inspired Parliament Act of 1911 which argued untruthfully that since royal assent had never been denied by a monarch since 1707 (when Queen Anne sent back a Bill) the use of the royal assent had fallen into abeyance. This claim was untrue and treasonable. Only the year before, Asquith had been forced to go to the country by Edward VII who sent back the same Bill to Parliament. And indeed monarchs had refused assent on at least six other occasions since 1707. On each occasion this refusal of assent was because the Bills concerned breached our constitution.
In other words, the 1911 claim, is incorrect and the monarch’s assent was never and can never be deemed unnecessary or automatic, even though George V chose to accept that the royal assent was now a formality and that the monarch could not, in reality refuse assent – as in the Northern Ireland Bill.

Despite all the long years of your reign this method of agreement, either forced on you, or under “automatic assent” nevertheless cannot be upheld as lawful.

Many people who have written to you on constitutional matters have received replies from your secretary (most recently, Sonia Bonici) saying that their letter had been forwarded to the government department misleadingly called the Department of Constitutional Affairs and Ministry of Justice. Your compliance with this has permitted the judiciary under these government departments to claim, as in the Chagos Archipelago appeal, that our fundamental liberties do not exist and that the peoples of these islands have no rights under our law.

I am old and now seriously ill. I cannot die without making clear to you that you have broken your oath to us your people.

The 1911 act purports to permit taxes to be levied on us merely by a majority in the House of Commons and without reference to the upper chamber. This again is against our constitution and specifically not permitted by our Petition of Right of 1627. The most serious instance of this is the use of our taxes to fund the banking system of this country: this is being explained to the electorate as a step which will in some way make us rich, whilst in fact it is not only unlawful, but a most serious abrogation of our rights and your duties under our constitution.


Your contract with the people of this country and the colonies and dominions cannot be destroyed by the chicanery of the Fabians in the 1911 Act, nor by subsequent legislation. If you have the courage to fulfil your contract, however belatedly, you could prorogue Parliament now and have a free election with or without party divisions so that this country can go forward in a proper and united way to remove us from the difficulties that have ensued since the 1911 Parliament Act.

Yours Faithfully,


Elisabeth Beckett

Copy to:
The Archbishop of Canterbury

Thank you to Namaste Publishing for this story. www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Elizabeth%20Beckett%20-%20News%20Black%20Out.htm

Leave a Reply