Published on 17 Jun 2012 by crazyforcanada
THIS VIDEO IS EVIDENCE IN COURT AND IS PUBLIC.
Queen Elizabeth II delivers a speech in the Quebec Legislature on 10 October 1964, the 100th anniversary of the first set of 72 draft resolutions on which the Confederation of Canada will be developed. Changes were made to the Resolutions at London in 1866, and again in UK Parliament where the British North America Act, 1867 emerged with 147 numbered articles, more than double the number of the original Resolutions. As constitutional law professor, F. R. Scott said in his 1951 Introduction to the Index to the 1865 Debates on Confederation, the constitutional “law” of Canada thus derives from Imperial enactment, and not from a pact, or draft resolutions.
In this video, Queen Elizabeth alleges that the “role of constitutional monarchy” is to “sanction legitimate authority”. She emphasizes “democracy” and implies an upcoming plebiscite in Quebec. She encourages Quebec nationalism and declares the legally extant Constitution of Canada to be an old “protocol” out of date by 100 years. She urges Quebecers to “keep the dialogue” going, implying that they must let their demand be known for a new constitution (to replace Confederation). She falsely declares that Confederation was founded by “two races”, and appears to revise a statement made by Attorney General George Etienne Cartier in the Debates, where he mentioned “4 races” in Confederation, being at least 3 of British origin, and at least one of French origin. Mrs. Windsor’s use of a totally absurd “two-race” theory is typical of a recourse to something called the “compact theory”, whose only purpose is to pretend to dissolve Confederation by claiming that it is based not on a law passed in 1867, but on pre-Confederation “negotiations”. There is no legal power to dissolve or terminate Canada, yet there always appear to be proponents of the irrational idea that the Constitution is not a fundamental statute at all, but just a set of temporary arrangements. Mrs. Windsor also had no business essentially announcing the “compact theory” of Canada as “founded by two races”, not only because she is wrong, but because constitutional interpretation is the privilege of Canada’s Superior Courts, established by s. 96 of the British North America Act, 1867.
The Queen speaks a few words in English only, which the French newspaper, Le Droit, does not reproduce when it publishes the “official” French version of the largely French speech. This, together with the fact that her English remarks are only published “officially” in the English-language, Canada-wide Globe and Mail, suggests that these few words were only intended by the Queen for her English Canadian audience. In English, she urges “all sections of the community” (i.e., all English Provinces) to “co-operate”, while simultaneously implying Quebec will vote to dissolve Confederation, and she will use her “monarchical” powers to “sanction” the new constitution.
It should be observed that “constitutional monarchy” is “limited monarchy” whose powers were expressly and deliberately curtailed in the 1700 Act of Settlement which is part of Canada’s constitutional law. One problem this Act was passed to resolve was the tendency of the Stuart monarchs to suspend or dispense with parliamentary law, as it pleased them. It would seem that Mrs. Windsor, i.e., Queen Elizabeth II, has resumed this old practise of the Stuart Kings. Canada ceased being a colony subject to the UK in 1931; Mrs. Windsor, as Queen, is the Queen of Canada, not the Queen of an Imperial Parliament in UK with powers to unilaterally dispose of a colonial Canada by dissolving Confederation.
All persons elected or appointed under the Constitution of Canada are subject to it, and have no legal power over it, other than for minor alterations known as constitutional amendments. No executive, federal or provincial, has any legal power to dissolve or replace Confederation, although it has been their self-serving policy for decades to give the false impression that they do.
In any event, the powers of government are set out in the British North America Act, 1867; our officials can do nothing else. They have no power to terminate Canada; and Mrs. Windsor has, and had, no “monarchical” power to “sanction” a referendum in Quebec or even in all of Canada to replace the Constitution with a new one. This is nothing short of a coup d’état, using the people in a plebiscite as a front to cover the fact that the “replacement” of Confederation with some other system is high treason.
Drop by my new WordPress blog: http://www.nosnowinmoscow.com
Kathleen Moore
HABEAS CORPUS CANADA
The Official Legal Challenge
To North American Union
http://www.habeascorpuscanada.com
Main blog: http://habeascorpuscanadacomments.blogspot.com
