Follow by Email

Sunday, 8 March 2015

What they don't want to tell us!!

We live in a world that is governed by laws. People will say that things are "against the law" or "you have broken the law" but is the law one thing?
 The fact of the matter is really quite simple. There are two laws in play, right now as you sit reading this blog post. There is the Law of the Land (English Law or common law) and there is the Merchant Admiralty Law (Commercial Law). How possibly can the "law of the seas" be in action on the land, I hear you say..
Well it is a long and devious plot that has been going on for thousands (yes thousands) of years and in its simplest terms is all a play on words.. 
for commercial law, that includes, Acts of Parliament and Statutes, to take "jurisdiction" one of two things are required. 
Consent
or a Contract.
(Or of course if you break the divine law of "Cause no Harm" then you deserve to have a book thrown at you)
Here's where the deceit comes in.. The words that are used in regard to "legality" (commercial law) do not always mean what you might think and we, the people, are quite literally enslaved to the commercial system, through our birth certificates. 

In an attempt to understand this fraud, i have spent some time studying a legal dictionary for the true definition of the words associated with our birth certificates.
We are told by our government that we “must” get a birth certificate. Which btw is Crown Copyright…. checkout .gov about birth certificates..
Here is the definition of birth certificate, from Black's law Dictionary.

Birth Certificate. A “formal” document that records a person's birthdate, birthplace, and parentage.

formal, adj. (14c)
1. “Pertaining” to or following established “proceduralrules, customs, and practices.
2.  Ceremonial.
 (Pertain, vb. To relate to; to concern.)  (procedural law. 1896 The rules that prescribe the steps for having a right or duty judicially enforced, as opposed to the law that defines the specific rights or duties themselves. Also termed adjective law. Cf. SUBSTANTIVE LAW. [Cases: Statutes (;::J242.]) 

may, vb. (bef. 12c) 1. To be permitted to <the plaintiff may close>.
2. To be a possibility <we may win on appeal>. Cf. CAN.
3. Loosely, is required to; shall; must <if two or more defendants are jointly indicted, any defendant
who so requests may be tried separately>. _ In dozens of cases, courts have held may to be synonymous with shall or must, usu. in an effort to effectuate legislative intent. [Cases: Statutes

So we "may get a birth certificate and it is not against the "law" to not do so.. It is a trick and it is a fraud.

Is legal lawful??
Blacks law dictionary
legal, adj. (lSc) 1. Of or relating to law; falling within the province of law <pro bono legal services>.
2. Established, required, or permitted by law; LAWFUL <it is legal to carry a concealed handgun in some states>.
3. Of or relating to law as opposed to equity. [Cases: Action C=>21.J
lawful, adj. (13c) Not contrary to law; permitted by law <the police officer conducted a lawful search of the premises>. See LEGAL.

In a courtroom you enter into a "legal" jurisdiction and the court is based on assumptions. We all have a legal status, (again through the birth certificate) a persona and you are immediately considered the trustee of your affairs. This is where you need to be aware of your dominion and act as the Executor and Sole Beneficiary of your affairs. 

dominion. (l4c) 1. Control; possession <dominion over the car>
 2. Sovereignty <dominion over the nation>.

Whenever you enter a court of a legal matter, enter in "propria persona" and be aware of your inalienable rights
inalienable, adj. (l7c) Not transferable or assignable

propria persona (proh-pree-Ol p;>r-soh-nOl), adj. & adv. [Latin] In his own person; PRO SE. -Sometimes shortened to pro per. Abbr. p.p. [Cases: Attorney and Client (;.-::>62.]status. (I7c) 1. A person's legal condition, whether personal or proprietary;( proprietary power. See power coupled with an interest. public power. A power vested in a person as an agent or instrument of the functions of the state. -Public powers comprise the various forms of legislative, judicial, and executive authority. [Cases: Officers and Public Employees <8=> 103.] )      the sum total of a person's legal rights, duties, liabilities, and other legal relations, or any particular group of them separately considered <the status of a landowner>.
2. A person's legal condition regarding personal rights but excluding proprietary relations <the status of a father> <the status of a wife>
 3. A person's capacities and incapacities, as opposed to other elements of personal status <the status of minors>
. 4. A person's legal condition insofar as it is imposed by the law without the person's consent, as opposed to a condition that the person has acquired by agreement {the status of a slave}.
"By the status (or standing) of a person is meant the position that he holds with reference to the rights which are recognized and maintained by the law -in other words, his capacity for the exercise and enjoyment of legal rights." James Hadley, Introduction to Roman Law 106 (1881).
"The word 'status' itself originally signified nothing more than the position of a person before the law. Therefore, every person (except slaves, who were not regarded as persons, for legal purposes) had a status. But, as a result of the modern tendency towards legal equality formerly noticed, differences of status became less and less frequent, and the importance of the subject has greatly diminished, with the result that the term status is now used, at any rate in English Law, in connection only with those comparatively few classes of persons in the community who, by reason of their conspicuous differences from normal persons, and the fact that by no decision of their own can they get rid of these differences, require separate consideration in an account of the law. But professional or even political differences do not amount to status; thus peers, physicians, clergymen of the established Church, and many other classes of persons, are not regarded as the subjects of status, because the legal differences which distinguish them from other persons, though substantial, are not enough to make them legally abnormal. And landowners, merchants, manufacturers, and wage-earners are not subjects of the Law of Status, though the last-named are, as the result of recent legislation, tending to approach that position." Edward Jenks, The Book of English Law 109 (P.B. Fairest ed., 6th ed. 1967). status, law of. See LAW OF STATUS. 

 The birth certificate is not you it is an artificial person that happens to have the same name as you. To understand what this means you need to first understand capitis deminutio.. this is basically the capitalization of all or part of your name on the birth certificate. This is the artificial person..it is the artificial person that a court will try to attach to a natural being YOU!!

"Capitis deminutio" is the destruction of the 'caput' or legal personality. Capitis deminutio, so to speak, wipes out the former individual and puts a new one in his place, and between the old and the new individual there is, legally speaking, nothing in common. A juristic personality (legal fiction) may be thus destroyed in one of three ways:
(1) by loss of the status libertatis. This is the capitis deminutio maxima;
(2) by loss of the status civitatis. This is the capitis deminutio media (magna);
(3) by severance from the agnatic family. This entails capitis deminutio minima." Rudolph Sohm, The Institutes: A Textbook of the History and System of Roman
Private Law 178-79 Uames Crawford Ledlie trans., 3d ed. 1907).

persona
"So far as legal theory is concerned, a person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights and duties. Any being that is so capable is a person, whether a human being or not, and no being that is not so capable is a person, even though he be a man. Persons are the substances of which rights and duties are the attributes. It is only in this respect that persons possess juridical significance, and this is the exclusive point of view from which personality receives legal recognition." John Salmond, Jurisprudence 318 (Glanville L Williams ed., 10th ed. 1947).

artificial person. (17c) An entity, such as a corporation, created by law and given certain legal rights and duties of a human being; a being, real or imaginary, who for the purpose of legal reasoning is treated more or less as a human being .• An entity is a person for purposes of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses but is not a citizen for purposes of the Privileges and Immunities Clauses in Article IV § 2 and in the Fourteenth Amendment -Also termed fictitious person; juristic person; juridical person; legal person; moral person. Cf. LEGAL ENTITY. [Cases: Corporations (::::;> 1.1(2).]
persona (pdr-soh-nd), n. [Latin] Roman law. A person; an individual human being.
persona designata (pdr-soh-nd dez-ig-nay-td). [Latin]
A person considered as an individual (esp. in a legal action) rather than as a member ofa class.
persona dignior (pdr-soh-nd dig-nee-or). [Latin] Hist. The more worthy or respectable person; the more fitting person.
persona ficta (pdr-soh-nd fik-td). [Latin "false mask"] Hist. A fictional person, such as a corporation.
"But units other than individual men can be thought of as capable of acts, or of rights and liabilities: such are Corporations and even Hereditates lacentes. Accordingly the way is clear to apply the name of person to these also. The mediaeval lawyers did so, but as they regarded Corporations as endowed with personality by a sort of creative act of the State, and received from the Roman lawyers the conception of the hereditas iacens as representing the persona of the deceased rather than as itself being a person, they called these things Personae Fictae, an expression not used by the Romans." WW. Buckland, Elementary Principles of the Roman Private Law 16 (1912).

And just so any reader that gets this far, here are all the jurisdictions listed in Black's Law Dictionary!!


jurisdiction
juris (joor-is), adj. [Latin]!.
1.       Of law.
2.       Of right.
juris divini (di-vI-m). Roman law. Of divine right; subject to divine law. -The phrase appeared in reference to churches or to religious items that could not be privately sold.
juris positivii. Of positive law.
juris privati (pri-vay-tI). Of private right; relating to private property or private law.
juris publici (p~b-li-Sl). Of public right; relating to common or public use, or to public law.
juriscenter (joor-;;l-sen-t<lr or joor-;;l-sen-t"r), n. Conflict of laws. The jurisdiction that is most appropriately considered a couple's domestic centre of gravity for matrimonial purposes. [Cases: Divorce <>:::2; Marriage 3.]
jurisconsult (joor-is-kon-s<llt or -k;m-s~lt). One who is learned in the law, esp. in civil or international law; JURIST.
jurisdictio contentiosa (joor-is-dik-shee-oh k<'ln-tenshee-oh-s3). [Latin] Roman law. Contentious as opposed to voluntary jurisdiction. See contentious jurisdiction (1) under JURISDICTION.
jurisdictio emanata (joor-is-dik-shee-oh em-a-nay-t<l). [Law Latin "a jurisdiction emanating from the court"] Hist. A court's inherent jurisdiction, esp. to punish a contemner. See CONTEMNER.
jurisdictio in consentientes (joor-is-dik-shee-oh in k<lnsen-shee-en-teez). [Law Latin "jurisdiction over parties by virtue oftheir consent"] Scots law. Consensual jurisdiction. See consent jurisdiction under JURISDICTION.
jurisdiction, n. (14c)
1. A government's general power to exercise authority over all persons and things within its territory; esp., a state's power to create interests that will be recognized under common-law principles as valid in other states <New Jersey's jurisdiction>. [Cases: States C=>1.]
 2. A court's power to decide a case or issue a decree <the constitutional grant of federal-question
jurisdiction>. -Also termed (in sense 2) competent jurisdiction.; (in both senses) coram judice. [Cases: Courts C-=>3; Federal Courts C=>3.1, 161.]
"Rules of jurisdiction in a sense speak from a position outside the court system and prescribe the authority of the courts within the system. They are to a large extent constitutional rules. The provisions of the U.S. Constitution specify the outer limits of the subject-matter jurisdiction of the federal courts and authorize Congress, within those limits, to establish by statute the organization and jurisdiction of the federal courts. Thus, Article III of the Constitution defines the judicial power of the United States to include cases arising under federal law and cases between parties of diverse state citizenship as well as other categories. The U.S. Constitution, particularly the Due Process Clause, also establishes limits on the jurisdiction of the state courts. These due process limitations traditionally operate in two areas: jurisdiction of the subject matter and jurisdiction over persons. Within each state, the court system is established by state constitutional provisions or by a combination of such provisions and implementing legislation, which together define the authority of the various courts Within the system." Fleming James Jr., Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr. & John leubsdorf. Civil Procedure § 2.1, at 55 (5th ed. 2001). jurisdiction
3. A geographic area within which political or judicial authority may be exercised <the accused fled to another jurisdiction>.
4. A political or judicial subdivision within such an area <other jurisdictions have decided the issue differently>. Cf. VENUE.
jurisdictional, adj. agency jurisdiction. The regulatory or adjudicative power of a government administrative agency over a subject matter or matters. [Cases: Administrative Law and Procedure ~303,447.]
ancillary jurisdiction. (1835) A court's jurisdiction to adjudicate claims and proceedings related to a claim that is properly before the court. • For example, if a plaintiff brings a lawsuit in federal court based on a federal question (such as a claim under Title VII), the defendant may assert a counterclaim over which the court would not otherwise have jurisdiction (such as a state-law claim of stealing company property). The concept of ancillary jurisdiction has now been codified, along with the concept of pendent jurisdiction, in the supplemental-jurisdiction statute. 28 USCA § 1367. See supplemental jurisdiction. Cf. pendent jurisdiction. [Cases: Admiralty ~1(3); Courts ~27, 201; Equity ~35; Federal Courts ~20.]
anomalous jurisdiction. (1864)
1. Jurisdiction that is not granted to a court by statute, but that is inherent in the court's authority to govern lawyers and other officers of the court, such as the power to issue a pre-indictment order suppressing illegally seized property. [Cases: Criminal Law ~394.5(1); Federal Courts ~7;Searches and Seizures ~84.]
2. An appellate court's provisional jurisdiction to review the denial of a motion to intervene in a lower-court case, so that if the court finds that the denial was correct, then its jurisdiction disappears -and it must dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction -because an order denying a motion to intervene is not a final, appealable order. See ANOMALOUS-JURISDICTION RULE. [Cases: Federal Courts ~555.]

appellate jurisdiction. (18c) The power of a court to review and revise a lower court's decision.
• For example, U.S. Const. art. III, § 2 vests appellate jurisdiction in the Supreme Court, while 28 USCA §§ 1291-1295 grant appellate jurisdiction to lower federal courts of appeals. Cf. original jurisdiction. [Cases: Appeal and Error ~17; Courts ~203-209; Federal Courts ~541.]
arising-in jurisdiction. A bankruptcy court's jurisdiction over issues relating to the administration of the bankruptcy estate, and matters that occur only in a bankruptcy case. 28 USCA §§ 157, 1334. [Cases: Bankruptcy ~2043-2063.]
assistant jurisdiction. The incidental aid provided by an equity court to a court of law when justice requires both legal and equitable processes and remedies. Also termed auxiliary jurisdiction.
common-law jurisdiction.
1. A place where the legal system derives fundamentally from the English common-law system <England, the United States, Australia, and other common-law jurisdictions>.
 2. A court's jurisdiction to try such cases as were recognizable under the English common law <in the absence of a controlling statute, the court exercised common law jurisdiction over those claims>. complete jurisdiction. A court's power to decide matters presented to it and to enforce its decisions. [Cases: Admiralty ~5(3); Courts ~1; Equity ~ 39.]
concurrent jurisdiction. (l7c)
1. Jurisdiction that might be exercised simultaneously by more than one court over the same subject matter and within the same territory, a litigant having the right to choose the court in which to file the action. [Cases: Admiralty ~1(1); Courts ~472,489, 510; Federal Courts ~1131.]
2. Jurisdiction shared by two or more states, esp. over the physical boundaries (such as rivers or other bodies of water) between them. -Also termed coordinate jurisdiction; overlapping jurisdiction. Cf. exclusive jurisdiction. "In several cases, two States divided by a river exercise concurrent jurisdiction over the river, no matter where the inter·state boundary may be; in some cases by the Ordinance of 1787 for organizing Territories northwest of the Ohio River, in some cases by Acts of Congress organizing Territories or admitting States, and in some cases by agreements between the States concerned." 1Joseph H. Beale, A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws § 44.3, at 279 (1935).
consent jurisdiction. (1855) Jurisdiction that parties have agreed to, either by accord, by contract, or by general appearance
• Parties may not, by agreement, confer subject-matter jurisdiction on a federal court that would not otherwise have it. [Cases: Courts ~ 22.]
contentious jurisdiction.
1. A court's jurisdiction exercised over disputed matters.
2. Eccles. law. The branch of ecclesiastical-court jurisdiction that deals with contested proceedings.
continuing jurisdiction. (1855) A court's power to retain jurisdiction over a matter after entering a judgment, allowing the court to modify its previous rulings or orders. See CONTINUING-JURISDICTION DOCTRINE. [Cases: Courts ~30; Federal Courts ~26.1.]
coordinate jurisdiction. See concurrent jurisdiction.
criminal jurisdiction. (16c) A court's power to hear criminal cases. [Cases: Criminal Law ~83.]
default jurisdiction. Family law. In a child-custody matter, jurisdiction conferred when it is in the best interests of the child and either
 (1) there is no other basis for jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act or the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act, or
(2) when another state has declined jurisdiction in favour of default jurisdiction.

• Jurisdiction is rarely based on default because either home-state jurisdiction or significant-connection jurisdiction almost always applies, or else emergency jurisdiction is invoked. Default jurisdiction arises only if none of those three applies, or a state with jurisdiction on any of those bases declines to exercise it and default jurisdiction serves the best interests of the child. [Cases: Child Custody C=>730, 731.]

EDUCATE YOURSELF AND BE AWARE OF YOUR DOMINION!!!!!
research the law of the sea and it will start you on a journey to enlightenment!!

Sunday, 13 October 2013

What's really going on in the world!!

It doesn't take a genius to work out that a lot of what happens on the international political stage, revolves around oil and political power. How far though do we think, that our "leaders" would go, to achieve their objectives.

Question!! Who carried out the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers in New York?
The answer to that question of course comes into the realms of conspiracy theory and sub diffuse but Is it so off the wall to think that the American establishment would orchestrate such a heinous crime against so many innocent people? Well just hunt around on the internet and you'll find the evidence there.
Why would the US govt. do such a thing? Answer!! Pure GREED!!
America is the only remaining super power but what is the use of being a super power if there is no one to be a super power against.. Enter Al Qaeda.. Ah the war on terror, what an excellent way to keep the money flowing through the arms industry in the US. The aftermath of the 9/11 attacks gives the US justification to introduce draconian powers and detain people, without charge, under new terrorism laws. This will only get worse. We are gradually, quietly slipping toward living in police states. The reaction and effect on people in the Islamic world, to drone strikes by the US is the radicalization of young people, who since 9/11 have resorted to terrorism. The 9/11 plan is working.
The "Free" world is fighting this new war on terror but to what end. Soon the troops will pull out of Afghanistan and the Taliban will return. What a waste of life, all around. All to keep the weapons flowing off the production line.

If you are in any doubt consider this. On 9/11 a plane "allegedly" smashed into the Pentagon. Question!! Find a picture of that plane!! Surely there must be a photo of a massive passenger plane flying into one the heaviest guarded air spaces in the world. Surely!!

But no...

There is no picture because there was no plane.. A missile strike yes!! Plane, NO!

So what can we do about it??
Answer: Absolutely nothing.. unless you want the men in black turning up at your door, best thing is to keep quiet and scrape a living as best you can and give thanks that you live in a country that is not a war zone. People don't care, people just care about their own shit in life. A shame isn't it but that's the reality of the situation. There are some that try to bring these facts to the world at large but it is so easy to discredit the out spoken and marginalise any resistance to the status quo.

I for one however have my eyes wide open and will continue to spread the word of truth, to anyone who can be bothered to listen.

Friday, 9 November 2012

There should be a public enquiry into the Constitutional Status of Cornwall.


There should be a public enquiry into the Constitutional Status of Cornwall.
There is no documentary evidence stating that Cornwall has ever been a part of England, the evidence shows quite clearly that Cornwall is a Sovereign State of Great Britain. Prince Charles, Duke of Cornwall enjoys the privileges associated with Cornwall being a Duchy, which include the power to veto Government Legislation and the ability to avoid paying taxation from the Duchy to the Government.
Cornwall is a nation and should be recognised as so. Attempts to obtain documents relating to this matter under the freedom of information act have been rejected on the grounds that they are “not in the public interest”. MP’s are forbidden from asking questions in the House of Commons in relation to Cornwall’s constitutional position. This is un-democratic and the truth should be exposed immediately. Whatever you political stance in Cornwall, be you a Nationalist, Devolutionist or Unionist, we all share one thing in common, at the very least. The Recognition of Cornwall as a nation.

This issue should become depoliticised and we should all push to achieve the first step to full independence. After this step those that do not believe can fall by the wayside but achieving the first step of recognition will help the devolution cause and then the republic cause.
We must not be get so wrapped up in political issues to ignore the fact that full independence would, most likely, require a referendum, which at the moment would probably not be supported by a majority of the people of Cornwall.

MK please support me on this because I know, there are plenty enough Cornish folk that would support it, that don't vote MK in elections.
Also the wording of the petition itself opens up the door to people outside of Cornwall supporting it as it is a matter of democracy. The govt. say we are part of England, so let's play them at their own game and gain English peoples support.
Don't think that I have any other kind of hidden agenda here, I would vote yes in a referendum on independence,  but I do not like our nation status getting lost in politics. I hope that you can at least understand that. 

I got fed up of hearing Cornish people reject nationalism time and time again, so I'm just trying to find a way to motivate them ALL.
If you don't get behind it then this will probably be the last time, that I attempt to influence the matter and I will probably become, like so many, accepting of the staus quo.

If anyone even reads this.. :S

Sunday, 28 October 2012

The Cornish Issue

Being an economic migrant living in England has one significant down side. I don't see any Cornish people, read any Cornish newspapers or Listen to any Cornish Radio stations. Then again the big advantage is that I can easily look at the general overview of the Cornish situation, in a reasonably objective manner.

I could spend the next 2000 words explaining why I am Cornish and not English, thankfully others have done that already. So i I will keep it brief and to the point I am trying to make. So as you know my favourite football match was Germany 1-5 England so don't think i am anti English, far from it.

Cornwall is Cornwall.. Pick one of six variations of our Celtic language and study the Kingdom of Wessex in relation to Cornwall, if you really want to go into it. Fact is this, in the 14th Century, after around 350 years of the King of Cornwall paying homage to Wessex its predecessor in title (and all that jazz). Cornwall was made a Duchy (in 1337 apparently).
So what does that mean?
Well it meant that Cornwall was not part of the English Royal Estate. Long story short. Any kind of taxation that would be payable to England was constitutionally paid, legitimately to the Duke of Cornwall. If you die in England with no Heir apparent, guess who gets it all. The Queen!! In Cornwall it goes to the Duke of Cornwall.
OK with me so far?
There have been many acts of parliament etc. that have maintained that Cornwall is not part of England. For the most accurate website, backed up by genuine sources go to >> http://www.duchyofcornwall.eu/index.php


The Duke of Cornwall has a propoganda website that im sure you can find if you cared to.

Now about a decade or so ago the national press got onto this tax avoidance issue by the Duke of Cornwall and as a result he started making voluntary contributions. Good I hear you say!
Well the problem is that whilst Charles Windsor, the Duke of Cornwall and all the dukes before him have enjoyed the benefit of Cornwall being a Duchy (A sovereign state of Britain) the people of Cornwall have gradually been absorbed into England and are not recognised as Cornish..
A MASSIVE CONTRADICTION
This contradiction is SUCH a massive crime against the Cornish and guess what, MP's are banned from asking questions in the House of Commons in regard to the Cornish Constitution.
Efforts have been made to see documents relating to this issue under the Freedom of Information Act and have been rejected as "Not being in the public Interest"
There was me thinking that we live in a Democracy!
So why would anyone care if you aren't Cornish?
Well google how much money Cornwall has provided to the Prince of Wales over the centuries and you'll get an idea as to just how big a crime has been committed..
The whole situation is a total scandal and the only people to have suffered are the people of Cornwall. If Cornwall is a Sovereign State of Great Britain then it's people should be recognised as so. We can't even register ourselves as Cornish on the census returns that we are all compelled to fill in, we have to put "other".. Something I will be campaigning to change over the next few years.
Well there you go I have tried to keep it as brief as possible a potted history of Cornwall.
If you are interested in finding out more, Wikipedia has some excellently sourced pages about the Cornish language, culture and the Duchy of Cornwall.
The fight for
#CornishRecognition
will never end!!




Sunday, 28 August 2011

How Cornish do you feel?


There always in life, seems to be something that makes the wheels come off. Yesterday a guy posted on the “Kernow Branch of the Celtic Leagues” FB page, an e-mail response from someone that has contact with an MP, who is fighting for Minority Status. To summarize that e-mail, the petition I started to “Recognise Cornwall as a National Minority”, is “worded incorrectly” and is “premature.”

He also suggests that there is “cautious optimism” in regard to the Cornish achieving “Minority Status” and that the Minister in charge is currently considering the cause.
The fact of the matter is that the Govt. is preparing yet another draft for the United Kingdom’s “National Minority Status” groups, to present to the Council of Europe.  According to the Cornish Ethnicity Data Tracking Group, the recent draft that was released three weeks ago seemed to go backwards in terms of clearly defining what Minority Status means and what effect it will have on each group.

http://www.minelres.lv/reports/uk/UK_Cedtag_2009.pdf  This is the report by CEDTG and it clearly sets out the issues that there are with the Govt. and its handling of “Minority Status.”
The UK Government has admitted to signing the Convention not to protect minorities but to “underline its commitment to tackle racial discrimination.” 
This one statement alone makes the whole issue become clouded. What is the govt. trying to achieve with Minority Status??
I am slowly but surely beginning to believe that “Minority Status” may well be granted to the “Cornish” but why is it I get this feeling that as part of that step Cornwall will remain part of England. A kind of, “We’ll give you Minority Status but Cornwall stays English!” A nice pacifier for the Cornish.

So what now?
I think the first thing that needs to be done is that some kind of classification needs to be created, as to what it is exactly the people of Cornwall want. From my own experience, it depends very much on what part of Cornwall you come from. I was born in Helston and lived in Falmouth from the age of 9, my mother is from Camborne and my Father lived in Penzance. Generally speaking there is a far greater Nationalist outlook in Camborne, Penzance and Helston than there is in Falmouth. I had many friends in school who were born in Cornwall but whose parents were not Cornish. Can you expect incomers to have the same passion for devolution or independence as a proper Cornish “Born and Bred” person?
I noticed that on some forums discussing the petition that there was a sense that the people of Cornwall should have a vote on the subject. I also noticed that the automatic assumption of a lot of people looking into this debate is that it is another cause initiated by the “Whining Nationalists.”

Redefinition is needed!
I feel that we can very basically split the Cornish debate into four categories which roughly encompass everybody but certainly not all.

1.    1.   No change. Those that believe Cornwall is part of England and that there is no need for any change.

2.     2.  Unionists--Cornish not English. Those that are quite happy that Cornwall is part of Great Britain and happy that Cornwall is part of the UK but would love to see Cornwall separated from England.

3.    3.   Devolutionists. Basically all that is in 2 (probably wouldn’t describe themselves as Unionists). But would also welcome some kind of Assembly in Cornwall.

4.     4.   Nationalists.  Want full independence from England and the United Kingdom.

This is a very rough breakdown and most people might be unable to categories their feelings into these simple boundaries. The key here is that we need to discover just how “Cornish” the people of Cornwall consider themselves. Any change to the status of Cornwall or its people needs to happen with a consensus of opinion. There must be a mandate that is supported by the majority for change to be successful.
I personally fall into category 2. I consider myself a Unionist, but want separation from England. The term “Unionist” is an expression that, as far as I can see, is one that is not used in Cornwall to categories people. Maybe it is about time it should! I have no statistics to back up this claim but I would hazard a guess that a very large chunk of people in Cornwall would fall into this category.

The waiting game.
There is certainly a groundswell of Cornish opinion that would like to see at the very least a separation from England. This is the approach everyone who is not a category 1. person in Cornwall should take. I get this strong gut feeling that Minority Status will only give us a status as a minority group but Cornwall itself will still remain part of England. Will that not serve to enrage us yet further? There is nearly a year before the Minority Status e-petition runs out and it gives us time to get the message out there that change is needed. Certainly from my own point of view, I have networked with like-minded people and I will be promoting the Unionist approach.

Cheering for Cornwall!
For me, and I believe for a lot of young people and moderates, separation from England opens the door for our sporting teams to represent our fine Duchy on the International stage. I’ve started a FB page “Cornish Pride, Cornish Recognition” and will be trying hard to branch out to the disenfranchised masses in Cornwall and get them interested in a separate Cornwall through non-political methods.
Please help me spread the word especially to those who don’t seem bothered by Cornish history.

Devils Advocate!
I’m already aware that my opinions have annoyed some Cornish Campaigners, believe me my heart says that I should fight strongly on the Nationalist front. However, my head tells me to achieve what we all desire first, separation from England, then we simply must attempt to involve more Cornish people, who ordinarily are turned off by those very things that makes Cornwall what it is.

Thanks especially to Rob @Cernyw for his support.  http://robscornishblog.blogspot.com/
Let’s keep up the good work!

Tuesday, 23 August 2011

Cornwall draw England in World Cup Qualifier Group..

Jubilation went around the Duchy yesterday as the draw for the group stage of the World Cup qualifiers was made in Switzerland. With Recognition of Cornwall as a Nation achieved early last year and acceptance into FIFA and UEFA following shortly after, the new kids on the international block and their army of followers have eagerly awaited the draw, as it would determine who the Cornish would play in their first competitive international football match Ever.

Top seeded team England fell into Group 6 and when Cornwall’s number came out of pot 5 and matched us up with Terry, Rooney and co. a huge cheer went up from the Cornish contingent at the ceremony. The Vice President of the Cornish National Football Council said “It is like a fairy tale! They’ll hear the roar from The Cornwall Stadium in London, when they come down!” A sentiment echoed across the Cornish media and social networking sites in the last 18 hours.

Business leaders in the Duchy have predicted a huge financial benefit to the local economy from being finally recognised as a nation and with this added bonus of being in England’s group for the World Cup Qualifiers, expect an even bigger influx of tourists to visit the Duchy.

As for the chances of Cornwall in the group! Well there is no doubt Cornwall will struggle to get out the group stage but I certainly think our home games will give the team 12 men and well you never know. Northern Ireland upset the form books a few years ago by beating England 1-0 in a qualifier. With a guaranteed capacity house of 10,000 the tickets are going to be in hot demand. Early indications are that 500 tickets will be allocated to the English FA but there is likely to be a spattering of English fans in amongst the Cornish. 

Nigel Martyn, Helston born former England goalkeeper has been quoted as saying that the game is likely to be similar to the F.A. Cup finals in the 80s between Liverpool and Everton. Certainly the atmosphere will be friendly and electric and here’s hoping that Cornwall Captain Matty Etherington and co. can pull off a shock result.

Well I am a fantasy writer!

This might not be the truth as it stands at the moment. BUT it IS something that could very certainly happen in the future, if the Cornish are ever given the recognition they deserve.
I started campaigning for the recognition Cornwall as a nation of the United Kingdom over 20 years ago and to be honest I got totally disillusioned with the attitude of my Cornish brothers and sisters. A total sense of apathy was the overriding feeling I got, an attitude of “I don’t care” was the main sentiment.

Why the Apathy?
Playing Devil’s Advocate..

Theram ow Labma!
This will upset some of the best campaigners for Cornish recognition but the Cornish language itself is one of the biggest turn offs for young Cornish people. The vast majority of people I’ve spoken too about the Cornish language are completely disassociated with it. Unfortunately the assimilation of the Cornish into English culture was so ruthless, so successful, that to most, learning the Cornish language is unnecessary and as alien to them as learning Lithuanian.  Now that’s not to say that the language has no place in Cornish culture, it is the reborn proof that the Cornish people were invaded, marginalised and assimilated. It is believed that the language died in just five generations, the last person to only speak Cornish died in 1777 (Dolly Pentreath)and John Davey of Boswednack (1812-1891), was 'the last to possess any considerable traditional knowledge of the Cornish Language'. Now It is seen very much as a rural passion and put simply, the townies just aren’t bothered. The same way the vast majority of English speaking Welsh people aren’t bothered about their language. Very sad but unfortunately true! I’m quite sure that the Cornish Language will continue to grow organically and when we achieve Recognition there will be a boost in young people interested in learning.

Vote for Me
Politics is another sure fire way of hitting the standby button in most young people’s brains. Most young people really aren’t bothered, Fact! So mention to them Mebyon Kernow and you might as well start a conversation with them about the Kurdish people. I am a life member of MK but unfortunately “The Party for Cornwall” is seen by many as a one policy party. Politicians full stop; don’t carry much appeal with the young. Which again, will annoy the dozen or so councillors, we have representing Cornish tradition throughout the duchy but it really isn’t going to help us gain mass support.


Engaging the young.
The big question is, what is it that makes us feel Cornish, what is it that gives us that gush of national pride?
I can only draw on my own experience. Yes we have our own language, yes we are a Celtic nation but there was one pivotal moment for me that hammered home my sense of being and feeling Cornish. Namely the County Championship Rugby finals of the late 80s and early 90s. 3 out 4 years, Cornwall reached the Final and quite literally Trelawney’s army descended upon London.  For anyone fortunate enough to have attended any of the 3 finals, you could not have left London without an overwhelming sense of national pride and a feeling that a County Championship Final simply wasn’t enough. I wanted more; I wanted Cornwall playing in the then 5 nations. We could fill the millennium stadium if it was in Cornwall!!
I believe that sport is the only thing that will bring about a mass change in the attitude of the Cornish people in regard to our Nation status, especially with the young.

The Way Forward
Luckily we have seen a massive leap forward for our two most prominent sporting teams in the last few years.
The Cornish Pirates (formerly PZ & Newlyn RFC) who had a great chance to qualify to enter the top flight on merit (although the Pirates would have been prevented from going into the Premiership on ground criteria) but fell at the last hurdle.
 And our major football team Truro City FC who have started strongly in their current bid to enter the national leagues. Plans are afoot for a National Stadium near Truro which will benefit both and you can be assured that there will be enough bums on seat for both teams because both give the Cornish a sense of identity and a sense of representation.

This is the angle of approach that should be taken by all Cornish people who crave Recognition, Devolution and/or Independence when it comes to raising awareness. Minority status is a European idea that may become irrelevant to the argument anyway, seeing as the Government seem to be able to base their categorisation of Minorities on the Race Relations act of 1977. If they keep moving the goal posts, what chance do we have!

The Numbers Game
Obtaining 100,000 signatures’ is unlikely without the media getting involved. If the papers, tv and radio do not inform the public in Cornwall that such a petition exists, then how will it ever muster 20% of the population to its cause. Gaining support through social networking only goes so far and it’s easy to be dismissed as a spammer and get blocked or frozen out by the providers, something I’ve experienced first-hand.

BUT

That doesn’t mean we just quit. We need to keep slowly spreading the word.

We need to write letters, the old fashioned type, to editors, producers, and anyone else that has some kind of platform in Cornwall.

We need to keep reminding the powers that be in Europe. We have received a lot of help and gained many allies in Brussels.

We need to throw ourselves behind our sports teams and promote the idea that one day Cornwall will have International teams and that it is not just a pipe dream, it is a reality!! Most people wanted to play for their country when they were a kid, whatever sport it may have been. We need to let kids know that playing international sport for Cornwall is possible and that their chances of being an international increase 100 times if Cornwall has Nation Recognition.

Finally we need to accept that it is not about not supporting England. If England went to the World Cup and Cornwall did not, I’d be there cheering on Stevie G and Jack Wilshire. In the same way I watched Gary Linekar grab the golden boot, Owen score a Hat-trick in Munich, Wilkinson drop goal, to stuff it up the Aussies and Strauss taking his boys to number 1 in the world.

We all want the same thing and to get to that destination, we literally need a fifth of Cornwall’s population to jump aboard. It’s a long bumpy road but if enough people desire something is there really anything a government can do to stop it? At the moment a fraction of the people needed for the government to sit up and take note support Recognition..
Fetch my quill!