[continued from previous message]

dynamic) OF THE FAITH: DIEU ET MON DROIT conforming to a SUPERORDINATE
TRIPARTITE NUMBER CONSTRUCT.

"THE JEWS ANSWERED HIM, WE HAVE A LAW, AND BY OUR LAW HE OUGHT TO DIE,
BECAUSE HE MADE HIMSELF THE #415 - *SON* (ie. FOSTERING (yǎng): to
raise; to *BRING* *UP* (*CHILDREN*, animals); to give birth / #81 - 𝍖
養 = #532 - shâbar (H7665): *BRING* *TO* *THE* *BIRTH*) OF GOD... AND
WENT AGAIN INTO THE JUDGMENT [#1521 = praitṓrion (G4232):
'HEAD-QUARTERS' IN A ROMAN CAMP; MAGNIFICENT PALACE OF HEROD (son of a
hero) THE GREAT; #341 - MAIN CATHEDRAL (TO THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST)
OF THE RUSSIAN ARMED FORCES *CONSECRATION* ON 14 JUNE 2020 / #387 -
*VICTORY* *DAY* WHEN CONSTRUCTION OF THE CATHEDRAL WAS COMPLETED ON 9
MAY 2020] HALL ...

#509 - *YAHAD* (JEWISH / CHRISTIANS) / #516 - *METAKOSMEO* ASSOCIATOR
= 3 APRIL 33 AD

     #232 - *CUNNING* *PLAN* / NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 20 JUNE 2023 as >> [#20, #100, #1, #60, #1, #50] /
     #237 - *USE* *OF* *FORCE* / NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 20 JUNE 2023
as [#5, #20, #100, #1, #60, #1, #50] = krázō (G2896): {UMBRA: #928 %
#41 = #26} 1) to croak; 1a) of the *CRY* *OF* *A* *RAVEN*; 1b) hence,
to cry out, cry aloud, vociferate; 1c) *TO* *CRY* *OR* *PRAY* *FOR*
*VENGEANCE*; 2) to cry; 2a) *CRY* *OUT* *ALOUD*, speak with a loud voice;

BUT THE JEWS *CRIED*-G2896: OUT, SAYING IF THOU LET THIS MAN GO, THOU
ART NOT CAESAR'S FRIEND: WHOSOEVER MAKETH HIMSELF A KING SPEAKETH
AGAINST CAESAR." [John 19:7, 12]

It ought to be understood that #237 - USE OF FORCE is a conceptual
form presently deployed by our state police whose motto is TENEZ LE
DROIT / UPHOLD THE RIGHT that is also an ontic / deme boundary and a
general principle of #491 - AGENCY (ie. no less applicable to
healthcare) capacity in conformity to [... #40 - LAW / MODEL (FE)] as
then a functional #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST which is distinct to
the #111 - FALLACIOUS OR VACUOUS assertion that attaining #71 -
*DOMINION* [#38 - FULLNESS (SHENG), #33 - CLOSENESS (MI)] is judgement
sensibility's ultimate end as it's centre of value.

#71 as [#1, #30, #10, #30] /
#73 as [#6, #1, #30, #6, #30] /
#81 as [#1, #30, #10, #30, #10] /
#111 as [#1, #30, #10, #30, #600] /
#123 as [#2, #1, #30, #10, #30, #10, #600] = ʼĕlîyl (H457): {UMBRA:
#71 % #41 = #30} 1) of nought, *GOOD* *FOR* *NOTHING*, worthless; 1a)
*OF* *PHYSICIANS*, a shepherd, *A* *DIVINATION*; 1b) of false gods;

Which is also a requisite for GNOSIS EX MACHINA being a nomenclature
provision of acceptable meta descriptors for articulating the viable
boundary (ie. SUGGESTED BY THE EXPRESSION nán táo fǎ wǎng (難逃法網):
[#79 - 𝍔難 = #530 / #49 - 𝌶逃 = #500 / #40 - 𝌭法 = #491] - IT IS HARD
TO ESCAPE THE DRAGNET OF THE LAW; THE LONG ARM OF THE LAW) of
consciousness instantiation, having a correspondence to the
cosmological primitives (ie. LAWS OF NATURE: fǎ dù (法度):  [#40 - 𝌭法
= #491 / #52 - 𝌹度 = #503] - (A) LAW / chéng wén fǎ (成文法):  [#73 -
𝍎成 = #524 / #47 - 𝌴文 = #498 / #40 - 𝌭法 = #491] - STATUTE) published
within the CANON OF SUPREME MYSTERY (太玄經) TETRADS of 4 BCE.

It is therefore UNLIKELY (in my humble opinion) that you'll find a
COMPETENT JUDGE let alone a PROSECUTOR who could make any
determination of WAR CRIMES in the circumstance of a BIPARTITE NUMBER
ICONOCLASM against the TRIPARTITE NUMBER premise such as the #451 -
PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY.

Such a pity then that you would not be able to prosecute WAR CRIMES on
the basis of either NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER or any
PREDISPOSITION TO ADVERSE BEHAVIOURAL REINFORCEMENT BY METAKINESIS
(ie. war) as an ICONOCLASM against FREEWILL from a BIPARTITE NUMEBR
worldview such as ISLAM which claims a piety established upon a
metaphorical root (eg: #232 - METEOR IDOL SECRETED WITHIN THE KAABA)
and a demanded SUBJUGATED WILL.

However if misconduct occurred in the advancement of the SEDITIOUS
CAUSE relating to the IRISH CATHOLIC REPUBLICANISM / KNIGHTS TEMPLAR
(THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST) RENEWED ON 11 APRIL 201,5 I would then
prosecute.

Otherwise, I would propose the adoption of a #237 - USE OF FORCE /
#277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST methodology as an effective means for
assaying and negation by the introduction of an alternative postulate
upon the thinking dynamic concept of #123 - INTELLECT and its
relationship to #164 - DOMINION as impetus for #205 - STRATEGIC ACTION.

Towards that end I have provided defence media with the ONTIC as
MATHEMATICAL IDEA TEMPLATE to QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT which as
ANTHROPOLOGICAL SINGULARITY and ONTIC VARIANCE provides a CENTRAL
means for FACILITATORS / ARBITRATORS of FREEWILL.

Those philosophical contemplations which have now taken some
considerable time (many years) to formulate into a comprehensive,
substantial and persuasive jurisprudent argument was then the basis as
to the nature of a disclosure recorded within A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
REQUEST INTO THE INCIDENT AT THE STAR HOTEL, 173 RAYMOND STREET, SALE
@ 1130 TO 1245 HOURS ON SUNDAY 26 MARCH 2017:

"Have dealt with the male customer once prior, where  ... [CENSORED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 33(1)] ...  On this particular occasion, he
mentioned having been up since 2 AM working on ANTI-TERRORISM
documents, that he was a very important person to the county and had
UNUSUAL SKILLS, etc.  All of which he revealed in a quick conversation
before ordering."

Is it not as "ANTI-TERRORISM" action, by an "UNUSUAL SKILL" to
exercise faith in GOD with the intellectual and spontaneous capacity
in writing a POEM constituting a dialectic depth of fifteen lines
including consecutive WORDS OF THE DAY for 8 to 12 DECEMBER 2016;
www.dictionary.com and then weaponise it subsequently, with just a
TITLE CHANGE on 6 MARCH 2022 as [#371, #392, #424, #492] for the
occasion of an important anniversary, as resonance to the RUSSIAN DAY
OF REMEMBRANCE AND SORROW (the day Germany invaded the Soviet Union in
1941) on 22 JUNE 2023?

TRIPLE F (#666) CAFE: “Why did you put this rubbish on our Triple F
Cafe Facebook Page?”

<https://www.facebook.com/Triple-F-Cafe-freshfastfood-225837177482258>

DOLF: "Because that is what occupied my mind (ie. it is a demand of
compliance which was made to 1.6 billion people) when I came into your
cafe this last morning CAROL (manly, strong)...

NOTE: The POEM was initially written as empathetic response to a
PERVERSE JUDGMENT on 9 DECEMBER 2016 by the DUTCH COURTS within CASE
NUMBER: 09/837304-15 against GEERT WILDER'S public speech on 19 MARCH
2014:

On 12 MARCH 2014 the Dutch politician GEERT WILDERS and several
members of his party, PVV, also known as The Freedom Party, visited a
market in The Hague. Part of their visit was broadcast on national TV
and GEERT WILDERS said that his party would make the city more safe,
more sociable, and if possible, make it a city with fewer Moroccans.
When later confronted with his statement WILDERS held that he had
merely referred to criminal Moroccans and Moroccans receiving benefits
from the state.

On 19 MARCH 2014 the Freedom Party held an election rally at CAFÉ DE
TIJD in The Hague. During the meeting, GEERT WILDERS held a speech
which was recorded and broadcast on TV. In his speech he stated:
“Before I go, I would like everyone here to answer the following three
questions. Three questions, please give a clear answer which defines
our party, the PVV. Do you want more or less European Union?” The
crowd present repeatedly shouted “less”. WILDERS then went on to pose
the second question: “Do you want more or less Labour Party?” The
crowd again shouted “less”. WILDERS continued: “And the third question >> is, and actually I’m not allowed to say it, because you get reported
to the police, and maybe there are even D66 prosecutors who will
launch a case, but freedom of expression is a great good and we
haven’t said anything that isn’t allowed, we haven’t said anything
that’s incorrect, so I ask you: do you want more or fewer Moroccans in
this city and in the Netherlands?”. The crowd repeatedly shouted
“less”. GEERT WILDERS then concluded his speech with the words: “Nah, >> we’ll arrange it”.

At the election meeting a coordinator (witness 3) from the PVV had
been aware that WILDERS would ask the public whether they wanted fewer
Moroccans. The coordinator had been asked (by witness 4) to instruct
the public in advance of the question and answer. Before the speech
witness 4 had heard GEERT WILDERS emphasize that it should be as
strong as possible so the content would be picked up by the press and
broadcast. The legal implications of the speech had not been
discussed. The issue of including the topic of Moroccans or criminal
Moroccans was discussed and there was some concern whether there would
be a prompt response from the public. This was the reason why witness
4 called witness 3 and asked him to ensure that a proper interaction
would take place.

Among the many Dutch politicians who have had a FATWA [Arabic: فتوى,
TELOS: #487 - RITUAL ADMINISTRATION (#36 - STRENGTH: CH'IANG); MALE:
#237 - USE OF FORCE; FEME: #163 - ANGRY, RAGING, VEXED; ONTIC: #156 -
LIVING SUBSTANCE; DEME: #548 - COMMANDMENT] issued against them,
possibly the best-known internationally is GEERT WILDERS. In 2008
WILDERS received 285 death threats, with a further 264 aimed at all
Dutch politicians. There were a total of 145 protection orders for
WILDERS in 2006; in 2005 there were 110.



<https://gatesofvienna.net/2010/09/australian-fatwa-behead-wilders/>

An Australian imam named FEIZ MUHAMMAD who as head of the Global
Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, a suburb of Sydney is viewed by
intelligence agencies worldwide as one of the main jihadist
ideologues, a great inspiration for young Western Muslim radicals had
issued a FATWA calling for the Dutch politician’s beheading.

According to Dutch newspaper Elsevier on 3 SEPTEMBER 2010: "PVV leader
GEERT WILDERS [was] angry at the Dutch Intelligence Service [AIVD].
The AIVD is in the possession of a sound recording on which WILDERS is
threatened with death by the imam on a secluded site of jihadists, in
response to questions by Dutch radicals says:

“WE SEE THE #271 / 348 / #372 - *EVIL* FILTH OF PEOPLE SUCH AS THAT
FILTHY DUTCH POLITICIAN. ANYONE WHO #238 / #485 - *MOCKS* OUR
LEARNING, LAUGHS AT THE ISLAM AND DEGRADES IT MUST ENTER DEATH,
DECAPITATE HIM, CUT OFF HIS HEAD.”

The PVV leader was only informed in detail about the matter around 2
SEPTEMBER 2010. Accordingly WILDERS says he is shocked, and last night
consulted ERIC AKERBOOM, National Coordinator for Counterterrorism
(NCTb).

“I urgently want to know why the NCTb and AIVD never informed me about
this.”

He also asked “what kind of consequences this has for me,” and called
the recording “terrible”."
<http://www.elsevier.nl/web/Nieuws/Nederland/274863/Radicale-imam-adviseert-Geert-Wilders-te-onthoofden.htm> [Link no longer active]

DOES THE GOVERNOR GENERAL HAVE AN EX-JUDICIAL AUTHORITY TO ORDER
*BIRCHING*?

If one considers as corporal punishment the legal precedent of the cat
o' nine tails, which is a type of multi-tailed whip or flail. It
originated as an implement for severe physical punishment, notably in
the Royal Navy and British Army, and as a judicial punishment in
Britain and some other countries.

The term judicial birch generally refers to the severe type in use for
court-ordered *BIRCHINGS*, especially the Manx hazel birch. A 1951
memorandum (possibly confirming earlier practice) ordered all UK male
prisons to use birches (and cats-o'-nine-tails) from only a national
stock at South London's Wandsworth prison, where they were to be
'thoroughly' tested before being supplied in triplicate to a prison
whenever required for use as prison discipline.

FOSTER V MINISTER FOR CUSTOMS AND JUSTICE B92/1999 [2000] HCATRANS 121
(23 MARCH 2000)

KIRBY J: I think the question is still relevant because we have to
test your theory of the section against the possibility that the
Minister has to, as it were, speculate not only on what the discretion
that will be exercised by the sentencing judge will be, not only what
might be the subject of some review of the sentence, but what factors
would enter into the sentence, such as offers of return to people who
have been defrauded or a pleading of guilty and so on.

Are any of the other matters that have to be considered under the
section of this problematical class? In other words, the death
penalty, well, one just looks that up. But are any of the other
matters that the Minister has to take into account of this variable
malleable content? Torture, for example. Would one know whether in a
particular case for particular offences - I suppose you could have
some offences where even in oppressive countries there is no torture
but in such countries there is for particular offences having a
political character, so presumably - - -

MR SOFRONOFF: Your Honour, the direct answer is none of the other
specific matters that are addressed in section 22 are of that flexible
kind. With respect to torture, one can readily see that say a sentence
of *BIRCHING* might be regarded here as torture and if that is
possible under an enactment of a foreign country, then that is readily
ascertainable as a matter of objectivity. However, although we are
speaking of Commonwealth countries here, some of them from time to
time are in such a state that one could readily accept that in some of
them, despite the absence of the provision for lawful imposition of
torture, there may be a risk that that would occur and that would be
something that - - -

KIRBY J: There was a report only last week of one Commonwealth country
where they were going to cut the person up and do it in public and do
other such things to the person, so I assume it just depends from time
to time on the evidence available.

MR SOFRONOFF: Yes, and in our submission, although it is true that the
actual sentence that would be passed would depend upon a great number
of matters, some of which will not be known until much later, it is
always possible for a range to be given by those who are familiar with
such things, such that for the broad purposes that the Attorney is
required to consider it is possible to conclude that no oppression
would result because some significant gaol term would, nevertheless,
be imposed - 3 months, 4 months, 5 months, whatever it might be such
that the arguments - - -

...

KIRBY J: Does *BIRCHING* come up under any other head or is it only
available - - -

MR SOFRONOFF: It could only be torture, your Honour. If it is not
torture, and minds could differ about that - they obviously do
because, as we all know, somebody was caned in Singapore a few years
ago. If it is not torture then it is certainly a matter that would be
- as a likely or possible punishment, ought to be considered by the
Minister before sending - in that case it was a youthful offender. It
was not extradited but if it were an extradition case she would have
to consider whether that was a matter that would render it oppressive.

The purpose of my mentioning severe punishment is this, once one
admits that a severe punishment may be material, one admits that
punishment is material and once one admits that punishment is material
it can be readily accepted, in our submission, that if what is being
sought is extradition in circumstances where no significant punishment
will be imposed, the Minister may consider that that is something that
renders the surrender oppressive or too severe a punishment.

McHUGH J: But does not your argument lead to the conclusion that the
Attorney or Minister must examine the weight of the evidence to see
whether or not the person may be convicted?

MR SOFRONOFF: No, your Honour.

McHUGH J: Why not?

MR SOFRONOFF: Because one thing that does emerge from the Extradition
Act is that one does not have an occasion ever to test guilt or
innocence.

McHUGH J: But why should not the Attorney have that obligation? If he
has got an obligation to consider the sentence, why should he not have
an obligation to consider the likelihood of conviction?

MR SOFRONOFF: Your Honour, I would answer the question that she would
have an obligation to consider the likelihood of conviction only if it
can be demonstrated that there is no real likelihood of conviction.
That would be a rare case, but I say that because there is authority
in this Court that that would be a matter that would render an
extradition oppressive. The case is - - -

HAYNE J: But that is likely, is it not - that is likely to take you
over to accusation not made in good faith? If there is no realistic
prospect of conviction, one is at once perhaps into the field of
accusation not in good faith and, if you are not in that territory,
then where lies the middle ground? [Copyright in the High Court of
Australia, TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS. AT CANBERRA @ 1451 HRS ON
THURSDAY 23 MARCH 2000]

<http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCATrans/2000/121.html>

I have followed GEERT WILDERS on TWITTER for the last year at least
and am aware by his RETWEETS that he indeed does continue to receive
the most graphically violent and depraved of death-treats (ie. having
had #419 - SLAUGHTERED MEAT placed in my mailbox on 15 NOVEMBER 2017 I
know how he feels), and his blog entry @ 0930 HRS ON 25 MAY 2023 which
was only on 24 JUNE 2023 accessed by a BING search, himself states:

"I RECEIVE THOUSANDS OF DEATH THREATS FROM MUSLIMS IN THE NAME OF THE
PROPHET MUHAMMAD. BUT WHO WAS HE REALLY?"

We would submit that since the OFFICE OF GOVERNOR GENERAL has an
EX-JUDICIAL AUTHORITY as implication established by #940 - RIGHT TO
RULE and according to #902 - RULE OF LAW, that in order to preserve
the ANTHROPOCENTRIC SINGULARITY FIRST PRINCIPLES being the #451 -
PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY which as metakosemeo is constitutionally the
product of a CAESAROPAPISM as intrinsic to QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS
PATENT and the ontology of the human being (ie. homosapiens)
reflecting IMAGO DEI, within the circumstance of ICONOCLASM AGAINST
THOSE FIRST PRINCIPLES being the nature to "THOUSANDS OF DEATH THREATS
OF THE MOST GRAPHIC AND BESTIAL KIND" as the consequence of a FATWA
calling for the Dutch politician’s beheading by an Australian IMAM
named FEIZ MUHAMMAD to meet the threshold of a demand for ACTION by
the GOVERNOR GENERAL authorising the *BIRCHING* of all such persons
engaged in that ex-judicial impiety by FATWA.

The notion of 'boy-pussy' was a smaller version of the
cat-o-nine-tails as known to being a colonial authoritative punishment
instrument of slavery / shipping and gave rise to the expression:

'Take it like a man'!

The last *BIRCHING* sentence in Jersey was carried out in 1966.
*BIRCHING* was abandoned as a policy in 1969 but lingered on the
statute books. Obsolete references to corporal punishment were removed
from remaining statutes by the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous
Provisions) (No. 2) (Jersey) Law 2007.

Formal floggings — those ordered by the ex-judicial authority of the
captain or court martial — were administered ceremonially on deck, the
crew being summoned to "witness punishment" and the prisoner being
brought forward by marines with fixed bayonets.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birching>

RESUME TRIPLE F (#666) CAFE DIALOG: "Why should you, in relation to
what things are mine and not yours, then dictate what ought to be on
my mind?

Such rubbish as YOU CALL IT because of your abject ignorance which you
make despite the absolute command given under SECTION VIII of the
Letters Patent to be "obedient, aiding and assisting", can earn you a
criminal charge of TREASON and 25 years imprisonment (if I wish to
pursue that matter against you), as a contempt of your life and
business towards the AUTONOMY OF WILL being the MATERIA PRIMA of the
SOVEREIGN PRINCIPLES encapsulated within the LETTERS PATENT to the
FEDERATION of the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA OF 1901.

Why did you celebrate Christmas with a lunch on this 14 DECEMBER, 2016
when are you given to such hypocrisy and depravity of being with no
claim that you can make of Jesus Christ as you are a hypocrite and a
godless liar?

Stick to croissants and coffee--but leave the things which are mine to
my concern."

DOLF: “Who was it who wrote those ignorant comments in relation to my
attendance here yesterday?”

TRIPLE F (#666) CAFE: “I want you to leave my business now or I will
call the police.”

[Showed a contemptuous disdain by a backhanded flicking refuse away
gesture towards these documents as if it was sh@t]

DOLF (paraphrase): “That is fine by me.

Because whether it is yourself, POLLYANNAR BIG PICTURE PHOTOGRAPHER or
REDD CATT CAFE, I will neither keep the company with fascist whores
nor to transact any business with those who come here to this country
so as to show such disrespect for the SOVEREIGN PRINCIPLES of our
COMMONWEALTH.

You cannot thereby claim any piety, specially Christian identity (but
not limited to), your house is now desolate and anyone who does
business with you will now similarly lose their prospect of eternity.”

CHORUS OF PATRONS @ TRIPLE F (#666) CAFE: “Out!”

DOLF: “Go back to where you came from."

DATE OF SERVICE @ 1345 HOURS ON 29 DECEMBER 2016 OF COMPLAINT AS TO
INFERRED RACIAL HATRED BY PUBLIC EXCORIATION DIRECTED AS ANTI-SEMITISM
(#509 - YAHAD as JEWISH / CHRISTIANS) AND AGAINST DUTCH HERITAGE AND
THEIR FORTHRIGHT MANNER OF SPEECH BEING IMPLICIT TO CULTURAL IDENTITY
AGAINST JINGOISM CAROL @ TRIPLE FFF (#666) CAFE: "In Australia, a
lieutenant-governor is a standing appointment for a deputy governor of
a state, who acts in place of the governor if the governor is unable,
unavailable or unwilling to act.

In Victoria, there is a lieutenant-governor and an administrator. The
Chief Justice of Victoria is ex officio the administrator, unless he
or she is the lieutenant-governor, in which case, the next most senior
judge is the administrator. The lieutenant-governor takes on the
responsibilities of the governor when that post is vacant or when the
governor is out of the State or unable to act. The administrator takes
on those duties if both the governor and lieutenant-governor are not
able to act for the above reasons.

The lieutenant-governor is appointed by the governor on the advice of
the Premier of Victoria. Appointment as lieutenant-governor of itself
confers no powers or functions. If there is no governor or if the
governor is unavailable to act for a substantial period, the
lieutenant-governor assumes office as administrator and exercises all
the powers and functions of a governor. If expecting to be unavailable
for a short period only, the governor with the consent of the premier,
usually commissions the lieutenant-governor to act as deputy governor,
performing some or all of the powers and functions of the governor.

Marilyn Warren, the CHIEF JUSTICE OF VICTORIA (ie. in 1934 the *CHIEF*
*JUSTICE* had *FASCIST* *AFFILIATIONS*), is the current
lieutenant-governor.

As of 28 MARCH 2014, the Commonwealth deputies of the Governor-General
are Dame MARIE BASHIR AD CVO and ALEX CHERNOV AC QC. Further deputies
are appointed to exercise narrow powers, such as convening executive
meetings, opening parliament and swearing in new politicians.

There is no lieutenant-governor.

State governors hold a dormant commission to act as Administrator of
the Commonwealth should the governor-general die, resign, or be absent
overseas or on leave. By convention, the longest-serving state
governor acts as administrator.

Presently, the longest-serving state governor is ALEX CHERNOV, who has
been Governor of Victoria since 8 APRIL 2011. The second
longest-serving state governor is PAUL DE JERSEY, who has been
Governor of Queensland since 29 JULY 2014.

On 1 August 2015, PAUL DE JERSEY assumed the administration of the
Government of the Commonwealth of Australia."

TRIPLE F (#666) CAFE @ 1213 HOURS: “You might like to visit the police
station as we have reported you and I will take out an intervention
order against you if you persist in this manner.”

DOLF: “Since my actions and statements @ 0813 HOURS of this day have
been entirely in compliance with NATURE, LAW, ORDER and the JUSTICE of
this LAND as SOVEREIGN PRINCIPLES which are defined by a Natural /
Common Law statement as to the existence of an egalitarian right and
that was in accord with such mathematical theoretical noumenon as
Intellectual Property of mine, and with specific regard to the
computed CATEGORY OF UNDERSTANDING of #287 given as:

     #87 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 24 JUNE 2023 as [#1, #50, #1, #3,
#20, #1, #10, #1] /
     #287 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 0813 HOURS as [#1, #50, #1, #3,
#20, #1, #10, #1, #200] = anagkaios (G316): 1) necessary; 1a) what one
can not do without, indispensable; 1b) connected by bonds of nature or
friendship; 1c) *WHAT* *OUGHT* *ACCORDING* *TO* *THE* *LAW* *OF*
*DUTY* *BE* *DONE*

As that which was required as action of mindful compliance given by
you in the circumstances AS MY LAWFUL demand granted in the prudent
and reasonable exercise of MY PREROGATIVE AS AUTHORITY made in regard
to a submission given to SECTION VIII of the Letters Patent as
defining the AUTONOMY OF WILL being the MATERIA PRIMA of the SOVEREIGN
PRINCIPLES encapsulated within the LETTERS PATENT to the Federation of
the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA OF 1901.

Should your improper, impertinent, unrepentant and bellicose as
threatening public conduct such as this statement: “I will take out an
intervention order against you if you persist in this manner” continue.

I will recommend to the magistrate that a charge of TREASON pursuant
to Section 9A of the Crimes Act (1958) Victoria be brought against you
and that all the necessary documents relative to any successful
prosecution to the charge (as referenced here) have been already
served on you.

I will bring your fascist conduct therefore into a proper mindfulness
of contrition and a duty before the law.

Do you understand that?”

DESPITE A SUMMARY OF THE INITIATING SITUATION WITH CAROL @ TRIPLE F
(#666) CAFE OCCURRING ON 15 DECEMBER 2016 OF A BIGOTED ANTI-SEMITISM
AND PREJUDICE TOWARDS AN IMPLICIT AND PROUD DUTCH IDENTITY BY
JINGOISTIC ICONOCLASM AGAINST QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT AS FIRST
PRINCIPLES TO ANY JUSTIFIED EXISTENCE WITHIN STATES OF THE
COMMONWEALTH WAS MADE ON 23 DECEMBER 2016.

I was on 2 JANUARY, 2017 served with an APPLICATION AND SUMMONS FOR AN
INTERVENTION ORDER in CASE NUMBER: G13559325 dated 30 DECEMBER 2016 so
as present myself by 0930 HOURS on 11 JANUARY, 2017 before the Sale
Magistrate's Court in the determination of the matter and any DECISION
to make a final determination is the issuing of a Personal Safety
Intervention Order.

The material details of that Application are as follows: "The
RESPONDENT is a customer at my cafe, [whom] I have known of the
RESPONDENT for [more than] 2 months. On 23 DECEMBER 2016 the
RESPONDENT came into my cafe to deliver me a copy of an indictment he
said [that] he was [lawfully] up[on] me. The RESPONDENT became enraged
when I told him to leave the premises and threw his papers in the bin.
I was actually serving elderly customers at the time and they were
very upset as were staff.

On 22 DECEMBER 2016 when I was on my way to an appointment, the
RESPONDENT yelled abuse at me on the street, the RESPONDENT has done
the same before and has left a couple of ranting messages on my
business page on Facebook.

I think the RESPONDENT will continue these behaviours as I have looked
into his Facebook [page] and Googled him, [and found in my view that]
he is a religious fanatic.

I reported the first incident [occurring on 15 DECEMBER, 2016] to
[the] police.

I don't wish to engage in mediation as the RESPONDENT is very volatile
in his anger and for his religious beliefs, the RESPONDENT me.

I require an order as the RESPONDENT has entered my place of work
twice, the RESPONDENT is scaring my staff, my customers and myself.
Even approaching me [with]in the street.

I feel the RESPONDENT will persist until he feels he is proven right,
it is religious based.

THE POLICE REFERRED ME TO THE COURT [SO AS] TO MAKE THIS APPLICATION."

WE NOTED THAT THE MAGISTRATE BEING LIKELY OF AN IRISH DECENT /
CATHOLIC BELIEF IN GRANTING OF AN INTERVENTION AND PERSONAL SAFETY
ORDER AS CASE NUMBER G13559325 UPON 11 APRIL 2017, THAT SUCH JUDICIAL
ACTION UNUSUALLY DOVETAILED WITH BOTH THE DATE OF A PAPAL BULL
*MISERICORDIAE* *VULTUS* FOR INDICTION OF THE EXTRAORDINARY JUBILEE OF
MERCY (ANNOUNCED: #449 - 13 MARCH 2015 / DECLARED: 2ND EASTER SUNDAY
ON 11 APRIL 2015 - MARKING RENEWAL OF THE KNIGHTS TEMPLARS: SOLDIERS
OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION) AND ITS EVENT OCCURRING AFTER ITS CONCLUSION
AS DURATION FROM #355 - 8 DECEMBER 2015 (Feast of the Immaculate
Conception) to #355 - 20 NOVEMBER 2016.

WHICH ARE ENTIRELY ESTABLISHED UPON NON-JUSTICIABLE GROUNDS AS BEING
ANTI-SEMITIC AND IMPLICITLY A RACIALISM DIRECTED AGAINST A FORTHRIGHT
CHARACTERISTIC OF DUTCH CULTURAL IDENTITY AS THEN SLANDER SWORN BY
OATH AND A CONTEMPT AGAINST THE ONTIC FIRST PRINCIPLES TO QUEEN
VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT AS THEN AN UNEQUIVOCAL CRITERIA FOR
EXISTENCE WITHIN THE AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH, THEREBY GIVING CAUSE FOR
THE REASONABLE ACCUSATION THAT THE MAGISTRATE BEING LIKELY OF AN IRISH
DECENT / CATHOLIC BELIEF AND BY NATURE COULD BE INFERRED WAS ADVANCING
AN IRISH REPUBLICAN ACTIVIST / WORLD WAR ONE 2018 HIJACKING SEDITIOUS
/ TREASONOUS COMMON CAUSE.

#364 - QUESTION OF #430 - LAW APPEAL DERIVED FROM THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNT
WHICH IS AGAINST THE UNIQUE INTERSECTION WITHIN NOUMENON AS
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The #364 - QUESTION of #430 - LAW appeal derived from the Biblical
account which is against the unique intersection within NOUMENON as
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY related to the technologizing of QUEEN
VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT dated 29 OCTOBER 1900 given the earlier date
21 AUGUST 1770 then relates to CAPTAIN COOK's diary entry of DUTCH
PRIOR DISCOVERY and POSSESSION having a LEGAL PRECEDENT applicable to
PAPAL BULL dated 1493.



<http://www.grapple369.com/?date:2023.8.21&prototype:torah&idea:303,328,364,430>

.jackNote@zen: 4, row: 4, col: 8, nous: 55 [DATE: 2023.8.21, SUPER:

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)