How do you know that the evidence was suppressed by the OSA if you don’t know?

Or are you just speculating because, well, I’m not sure why actually. Unless it’s a sort of internalised tourette’s syndrome or something.

Not just idle conjecture all told

it’s odd to think that mentor to Prince Charles, Lord Mountbatten, who introduced Jimmy Savile to the Royal Family and has been linked to paedophile spy rings operating from Kincora and nationwide, would also be involved in a plot to overthrow the Prime Minister.

More reasonable deduction…

Deaf, too.

More reasonable deduction…

Lord Mountbatten, who introduced Jimmy Savile to the Royal Family and has been linked to paedophile spy rings operating from Kincora and nationwide, would also be involved in a plot to overthrow the Prime Minister.

So your idea of “reasonable deduction” is to accuse someone, without any actual evidence, of being behind a coup that didn’t happen, because he knew Jimmy Savile, and some other things you don’t have any actual evidence of.

BUT….. he took his grandson on a boat, so….. ya’ know… *nudge nudge.

Confused

Given the all pervading power of the royal family, and their complete control of the police, judicial system and government, as admirably demonstrated by JHJ

How come the Supreme Court have.ruled the black spider letters have to be released?

Confused
Given the all pervading power of the royal family, and their complete control of the police, judicial system and government, as admirably demonstrated by JHJ
How come the Supreme Court have.ruled the black spider letters have to be released?

That’s what they want you to think….. Or something.

How do you know that the evidence was suppressed by the OSA if you don’t know?

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.

any actual evidence of

Is this the bit where you suggest a dictionary as suitable evidence again?

Crazy to think a couple of years ago there was minimal actual evidence of a global surveillance network run by several governments of which the Queen is head of state… even after evidence was presented to the Guardian, Her Majesty’s government made them destroy hard drives containing evidence.

But let’s not sweat significant details, we should celebrate!!

After all it’s a grand day for democracy…

(after a hard fought 10 year tax payer funded battle over multiple elected administrations)

Yippee!!

Let’s hope they don’t redact the letters too heavily eh

Crazy to think a couple of years ago there was minimal actual evidence of a global surveillance network run by several governments of which the Queen is head of state… even after evidence was presented to the Guardian, Her Majesty’s government made them destroy hard drives containing evidence.

So your logic boils down to.

1. Previously we didn’t know “a” was true, but now we do know “a” is true.

2. Therefore, anything we don’t know now, must be true. We don’t need evidence (see point 1)

Have I summed that up ok ?

Not on your nelly, neally you numpty!!

The plot behind the coup does have reasonable levels of evidence to back it up… the link is already up there, so I won’t bother wasting my time attaching it again.

What’s more, the fresh admissions that Special Branch were spying on Left Wing MPs give further gravitas to the allegations made regarding Harold Wilson.

After all, throughout that time, there has been only one Monarch~to whom all Police and intelligence Officers pledge allegiance.

Could their logos give us any clues who they work for?

, the fresh admissions that Special Branch were spying on Left Wing MPs give further gravitas to the allegations made regarding Harold Wilson

What a strange conclusion!

Sitting here with my very thick, very heavy copy of the authorised history of Mi5, published several years ago, it makes no secret whatsoever of the monitoring of MP’s, and the circumstances in which it was done, and the checks and balances in place to prevent the abuse of. It also shows that over the years a number of Politicians (of all parties) were proven to be leaking information to foreign governments.

That this was a surprise to anyone is strange, indeed there was a famous court case in the eighties with Harperson and Hewitt (yes, the NCCL people involved in supporting PIE) challenging The home office via the ECHR over their files

authorised history of Mi5

Hmm…

Authorised by who and on who’s behalf?

After all, throughout that time, there has been only one Monarch~to whom all Police and intelligence Officers pledge allegiance.

Could their logos give us any clues who they work for?

So after all that, we are back to you claiming that the Queen is in charge of everything ?

You really are a waste of Bandwidth.

So after all that, we are back to ……

😆

You expected to be somewhere else?

Honestly, this all powerful Queen is losing her grip

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03/26/prince-charles-loses-10ye_n_6945650.html?1427364034

First tiny Carribean nations start ditching her, now this…..

So after all that, we are back to you claiming that the Queen is in charge of everything ?

With such a polarized perspective, you’re a waste of braincells

I haven’t claimed the Queen is in charge of everything, but it’s fairly evident that Special Branch and MI5 spying on MPs has been a procedure in place for a long period of time, spanning several elected governments and continues regardless of which political party is in power.

It’s a reasonable assumption that similar activities take place across the many other governments of which the Queen is Head of state, over whose armed forces she has authority.

Honestly, this all powerful Queen is losing her grip

Due in no small part to this thread no doubt…

that’s the power of exposure for ya

8)

that’s the power of exposure for ya

In all honesty. If there is an all powerful Queen controlling everything.

You work for her, it’s the only reasonable explanation for your discrediting of the theory that she’s really in charge.

You really are a waste of Bandwidth

Now I really want a Like button!

I haven’t claimed the Queen is in charge of everything, but it’s fairly evident that Special Branch and MI5 spying on MPs has been a procedure in place for a long period of time, spanning several elected governments and continues regardless of which political party is in power.

It’s a reasonable assumption that similar activities take place across the many other governments of which the Queen is Head of state, over whose armed forces she has authority.

So it is “fairly evident” that the Queen is instructing Special Branch and MI5 to spy on MPs then?

All the while making sure that paedophile MPs have easy access to children of course.

Now I really want a Like button!

THEY don’t want you to have one.

THEY don’t want you to have one

OMG, it just seems so obvious when you put it like that!

OMG, it just seems so obvious when you put it like that!

That’s not all. LOOK! JUST LOOK!

Both based on circles. Makes you think, doesn’t it?

With such a polarized perspective…

I have a “polarised perspective” ?

Are you saying I have multiple personality disorder and have two differing opinions at the same time ?

Or are you just struggling with your words.

IT’S TOO MUCH! Why can’t you just leave me to work it out for myself like the other guy?

That’s not all. LOOK! JUST LOOK!

Now that’s why I don’t trust the CIA !

Just look at the badge, the EAGLE is in charge of everything !!!

It must be, they wouldn’t put it on the logo if it wasn’t basically in charge would they!!

I like eagles…

Here is an example of a polarized perspective:

Flipside yo…

Crazy to think there is a whole planet in between

It’s really not crazy at all

Here is an example of a polarized perspective

So why do you think I have two opposing opinions at the same time then ?

What have I said to suggest that.

Good trolling, but even you’re not that dumb

Eh ?

That’s what you said

That I had a polarised perspective.

What do you think that means.

I know what it means… what do you think it means?

Prime Minister of Her Majesty’s Government ‘asks’ Queen to dissolve Parliament:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcxZVNp2l00[/video]

No polarized perspectives please people, let’s see the whole picture

For starters, go away and read the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011.

Or don’t, I don’t care.

This is the UK parliament, passing a law that says that the Queen does not have the authority to dissolve Parliament on the request of the Prime Minister except under the rules set down in the legislation. That Parliament can tell the Queen that she cannot dissolve it makes sense if you think (as everyone else has done for quite a while) that Parliament is sovereign.

it makes sense if you think

Seems unlikely that this will happen. I admire your hope though!

Or rather parliament acting within the bounds of its authority as granted to it by the Monarch. The UK is a constitutional monarchy not a democratic republic; therin lies the devil in the detail.

The Queen has dissolved Parliament ??? Well when Charles I dissolved Parliament in 1629 it eventually resulted in his execution.

I think we can now expect a protracted civil war, I’m backing Parliamentarians – anyone going to support the Royalists ?

And what say all the disbelievers on here who dismissed JHJ as some sort of cranky conspiracy theorist in light of this chilling new development, eh ?

The detail being parliament has killed one king for being naughty and replaced a few others . The Fixed Term Parliaments Act is pretty compelling as to where power lies as Liz cannot dissolve parliament at will.