1 vote

Magna Carta discussion

Had a discussion with a junior high public school teacher this evening.

Anyway, he briefly showed me one of the tests he prepared on civics. I saw a few little questions on the Magna Carta and complimented the curriculum for still mentioning it and told him I was surprised to see it on there.

Get this response, "Well we only briefly touch upon it and it basically is reserved for the history courses."

To top it off, I think he knew what I was hinting and seemed delighted to give this reply. To make a long story short I have ...nada respect for this person as a teacher.

Just wanted to share.

p.s. I should have told him that I really don't blame him since he does not hold the position to set the curriculums lol

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Magna Carta has no power or

Magna Carta has no power or influence in giving any rights to any peoples.

Our Constitutional Republic was influenced by the magna carta and thus has a big impact on the United States of America Republic; however, in England, when the people revolted against the king and forced him to sign, they never finished the job by taking his head. He subsequently had the revolter's rounded up and killed thus sacrificing no rights.

Its well known in Law that a signature is only one if it is done willingly with full disclosure, you can not force someone to provide a signature. When the people held a sword to his head and forced him to sign he did so out of duress and not out of freewill (hence why they had to kill him to seal the deal for the new king coming into the thrown with that Magna Carta as a prerequisite to his title thus solidifying the rights of the people through that document). Because the king was not killed, and he declared his signature a scribed name, he was able to retain his rights.

However, the Magna Carta played a significant role in the foundation of our Constitutional Republic.

I reserve the right to govern myself.

Great Charter

Has be re-confirmed at least 33 times. Any law in Britain over 500 years old is still on the books. btw, customs are also laws as I understand it.

Great Charter is also a re-statement of King Alfred's Law of 871 which Henry II restated around 1100.

This is what King John got for bringing foreign mercenaries against his subjects lol

donvino

Ok, So Who Do We Get To Sign This Time Before We Take Her Head?

The Queen and The Rothschild's heads I guess would be proof of surrender today. You are right. None of the paper "rights" declarations mean anything because the King did not sign them and we did not sign them meaning we are not a party to any of those contracts anyway. Whether or not some long dead King rescinded his Signature doesn't really matter if none of us signed it.

The Magna Carta did however inspire generations of people to claim rights they already naturaly had and to enforce those rights against the King. It also inspired the merchants to claim their rights to keep their stolen largess!

It is an operation of Law that he who claims no rights has none.
So you only have those rights that you can claim and defend. All Law is contract and all Law is also Natural Law in that those who have the Natural ability to enforce their rights do and those that don't don't.

If you go along to get along and Let TSA feel you up what does that say about your ability to claim and defend any rights at all?

Law is both in writing and in action. By acting as if you have no rights at all you create a contract where YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS AT ALL! This is a very dangerous precedent which you must reverse immediately or else the next step is the President will just believe he can kill people who say things he doesn't like and get away with it because they have no rights at all, oops we just passed that point too.

King John acquiesed while the sword was at his throat then turned around and killed the Barons who took his rights, so you are correct The Crown recovered and retained it's rights and The Magna Carta is little more than an inspirational idea left over from an incomplete rebellion.

So The Constitution for The United States of America is also void because King George and the Crown Bankers turned right around and declared The United States in Default of that contract in 1792, 1812, 1859. The King and The Crown Bankers had no intention of ever letting the goldmine that is America or it's people go free. They were not defeated or killed by the Revolutionary War and thus The American Revolution was never completed and any "liberties" promised to the American People remained solely by the good Grace of the King and The Crown Bankers.
I think they have long since withdrawn the grace the offered us.

This why that throughout history the only release from tyranny has been to kill the tyrant and his offspring. Short of that they always come back and reneg on their bogus agreements to free their subjects.

Tyrants must meet a tyrants end or else they will just just grow back like a cancer. The current tyranny goes back all the way to Babylon and Egypt. Many of today's Elite Tyrants can and do proudly trace their bloodlines back all the way through Rome and into houses of ill repute from Egypt and Babylon.

We never beat them, we have always merely run away or "cut a deal" which means nothing to psychopaths.

The Oracle

Here's an article

about Tony Blair repealing the Magna Carta in 2007 for the new world order.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/britain_to_repeal_magna_carta/

ummm

I think that is what they call an act of ....treason :O ... if I am not mistaken.

Taking any rights away from the Queen does this in my humble opinion.

donvino

Are You A Student Or A Parent Or????

Ask what rights the Magna Carta Established in writing for the Merchants doing business in England.

The Magna Carta is the source of many of our banking and mega corporation woes today.

The Oracle

An olde acquaintance

I thought the MC was a remedy against tyranny.

Anyway, here is a good work on the English Constitution whether it is considered written or not.

http://www.archive.org/stream/englishconstitu00ashwgoog#page...

donvino

The Magna Carta Gave Protections To Merchants and Landowners

The Merchants (bankers) then took over England and America. The protections afforded to merchants tipped the scale in the merchant's favor over the Landowners. The Merchants were using unlimited leveraged currencies while the Landowners were using limited substance money.
The result we are living with today was mathematically inevitable once the Magna Carta protected the criminal merchant (banking) cartels.
Like cancer, once you remove the body's ability to attack the cancer cells (bloodsucking bankers) they will eat the host alive.
So the merchant cartels grew like a cancer until they consumed the governments and all the people of Earth.

So the Magna Carta is a big source of things like due process afforded to corporations. Today the corporations are protected from the people, however, the people of the land are NOT being protected from the corporations.

So one half of the Magna Carta is alive and well today. The part that protects the Merchants is being enforced by the Bankers (merchants) that control the governments of the world today.

Now how do you reconcile a document that protects the lawful people of the land from the pirates with the same document that protects the criminal people of the sea from the people of the land?

Could someone please explain that political pandering nonsense to me?

The Oracle

I would be interested to read...

...your views on the Articles of Confederation?

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

Have a Visit To ATG Press.com, Read The Informer

I concur with the authors on ATG Press.com and Civil-Liberties.com.

The Articles of Confederation were just that a confederation. Once the Nation State The United States was set up that was a whole new animal, essentially a coup against the American People right under our noses.
New Rome they call it on the old maps, and that is exactly what it is, a military and revenue outpost of the Vatican and the British Crown Corporations.

The Constitution For The United States is a debt instrument, a bond for seventy years. It makes me wonder just how much of "The Revolution" was a planned in advance act and who knew that the Crown plan was to set up a "local" Crown subsidiary staffed with "Natives" to collect the Crown's tribute.

I would like to look into the Governor Morris plan for government. He had a much less centralized plan but that is not what Rothschild and King George dictated in The Constitution FOR The United States of America.

The Articles of Confederation were too decentralized to collect the payments for the debt and eternal tribute payments owed back to Rothschild and King George and The Vatican. The Plantation Owners threatened to resume the war if a more binding debt instrument wasn't put upon the people to collect the rent.
So The United States is the son of the Rothschilds and King George, always has been. Probably the Articles of Confederation would have worked ok if there had been no debt to repay and if King George and the Pope had been killed during the Revolution, barring that they demand and get eternal tribute payments to this day.

The Oracle