[continued from previous message]

The predicate of an affirmative analytical judgment is already contained
in the concept of the subject, of which it cannot be denied without *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as
#310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*,
*CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}. All analytical judgments are a priori.

c. Synthetical judgments require a principle that is different from the
law of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147):
{#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}.

@1. Judgments of experience are always synthetical.

Analytical judgments are not based on experience. They are based merely
on the subject's concept.

@2. Mathematical judgments are all synthetical.

Pure mathematical knowledge is different from all other a priori
knowledge. It is synthetical and cannot be known from mere conceptual analysis. Mathematics require the intuitive construction of concepts. Arithmetical sums are the result of the addition of intuited counters. Geometrical concepts, such as "shortest distance," are known only
through intuition.

@3. Metaphysical judgments, properly so called, are all synthetical.

Concepts and judgments pertaining to metaphysics may be analytical.
These may not be metaphysical but can be combined to make a priori, synthetical, metaphysical judgments. For example, the analytical
judgment "substance only exists as subject" can be used to make the
judgment "all substance is permanent," which is a synthetical and
properly metaphysical judgment.  [Wikipedia 2018:Prolegomena_to_Any_Future_Metaphysics]

ON THE TYPE OF COGNITION THAT ALONE CAN BE CALLED METAPHYSICAL

(a) On the distinction between synthetic and analytic judgments in general

#267 as [#6, #5, #2, #200, #4, #10, #600] = bârôd (H1261): {UMBRA: #206
% #41 = #1} 1) spotted, marked;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #206 % #41 = #1 - To Guide with Names, Reason's Realisation;
I-Ching: H58 - Joy, Open, Lake; Tetra: 24 - Joy;
THOTH MEASURE: #1 - Oh thou of long strides, who makest thine appearance
in Annu; I am not a doer of wrong.

    #VIRTUE: If it is Center (no. #1), then yang begins.
    #TOOLS: With Center (no. #1), it begins.
 #POSITION: If it is Response (no. #41), then yin is born.
    #TIME: With Full Circle (no. #2), it wheels back.
    #CANON: #45 ONTIC_OBLIGANS_45@{
   @1: Sup: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#1); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#1),
   @2: Sup: 2 - FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#3); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#2),
   @3: Sup: 43 - ENCOUNTERS: YU (#46); Ego: 41 - RESPONSE: YING (#43),
   @4: Sup: 45 - GREATNESS: TA (#91); Ego: 2 - FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#45 - I AM NOT A DOER OF WRONG {%1}),
   Male: #91; Feme: #45
} //
#45

H1261@{
   @1: Sup: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6); Ego: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6),
   @2: Sup: 11 - DIVERGENCE: CH'A (#17); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#11),
   @3: Sup: 13 - INCREASE: TSENG (#30); Ego: 2 - FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#13),
   @4: Sup: 51 - CONSTANCY: CH'ANG (#81); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#51),
   @5: Sup: 55 - DIMINISHMENT: CHIEN (#136); Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#55),
   @6: Sup: 65 - INNER: NEI (#201); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS,
DISTORTION: HSIEN (#65),
   @7: Sup: 17 - HOLDING BACK: JUAN (#218); Ego: 33 - CLOSENESS: MI (#98),
   Male: #218; Feme: #98
} // #267

"And it came to pass at the time that the cattle conceived, that I
lifted up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the rams which
leaped upon the cattle were ringstreaked, speckled, and grisled {#267 as
[#6, #5, #2, #200, #4, #10, #40] = barod (H1261): grisled}." [Genesis
31:10 (KJV)]

"And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap
upon the cattle are ringstreaked, speckled, and grisled {#267 as [#6,
#5, #2, #200, #4, #10, #40] = barod (H1261): grisled}: for I have seen
all that Laban {white; shining; gentle; brittle} doeth unto thee."
[Genesis 31:12 (KJV)]

Metaphysical *COGNITION* *MUST* *CONTAIN* *NOTHING* *BUT* *JUDGMENTS*
*A* *PRIORI*, *AS* *REQUIRED* *BY* *THE* *DISTINGUISHING* *FEATURE* *OF* *ITS* *SOURCES*. But *JUDGMENTS* may have any origin whatsoever, or be constituted in whatever manner according to their logical form, and yet
there is nonetheless a distinction between them according to their
content, by dint of which they are either merely explicative and add
nothing to the content of the cognition, or ampliative and augment the
given cognition; the first may be called analytic *JUDGMENTS*, the
second synthetic.

#267 as [#200, #7, #10, #700] = râz (H7328): {UMBRA: #207 % #41 = #2} 1) *SECRET*;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #207 % #41 = #2 - Contrast of Terms, Self-Culture; I-Ching: H11 - Peace, Pervading, Greatness; Tetra: 16 - Contact;
THOTH MEASURE: #2 - Oh thou who boldest the fire, and makest thine
appearance in Cher-aba; I am not a man of violence.

    #VIRTUE: With Full Circle (no. #2), a return to virtue.
    #TOOLS: With Defectiveness (no. #10), the crooked.
    #POSITION: With Going to Meet (no. #42), a counter turn towards punishment.
    #TIME: With Bold Resolution (no. #30), the straight?
    #CANON: #84
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_84@{
   @1: Sup: 2 - FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#2); Ego: 2 -
FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#2),
   @2: Sup: 12 - YOUTHFULNESS: T'UNG (#14); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#12),
   @3: Sup: 54 - UNITY:
K'UN (#68 - I DO NOT THAT WHICH OFFENDETH THE GOD OF MY DOMAIN {%42});
Ego: 42 - GOING TO MEET: YING (#54),
   @4: Sup: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#71); Ego: 30 - BOLD RESOLUTION: YI (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}),
 Male: #71; Feme: #84
} // #84

H7328@{
   @1: Sup: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#38); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#38),
   @2: Sup: 45 - GREATNESS: TA (#83); Ego: 7 - ASCENT: SHANG (#45 - I
AM NOT A DOER OF WRONG {%1}),
   @3: Sup: 55 - DIMINISHMENT: CHIEN (#138); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#55),
   @4: Sup: 26 - ENDEAVOUR: WU (#164); Ego: 52 - MEASURE: TU (#107),
   Male: #164; Feme: #107
} // #267

"Daniel {judgment of God; God my judge} answered in the presence of the
king, and said, The secret {#267 as [#200, #7, #10, #50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret} which the king hath demanded cannot- the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, show unto the king; But
there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets {#267 as [#200, #7, #10,
#50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret}, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar {tears and groans of judgment} what shall be in the
latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are
these; As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy
bed, what should come to pass hereafter-: and he that revealeth secrets
{#267 as [#200, #7, #10, #50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret} maketh
known to thee what shall come to pass. But as for me, this secret {#267
as [#200, #7, #10, #50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret} is not revealed
to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but for their
sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that
thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart." [Daniel 2:27-30 (KJV)]

"The king answered unto Daniel {judgment of God; God my judge}, and
said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of
kings, and a revealer of secrets {#267 as [#200, #7, #10, #50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret}, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret
{#267 as [#200, #7, #10, #50] = raz (Aramaic) (H7328): secret}." [Daniel 2:47]

Analytic *JUDGMENTS* say nothing in the predicate except what was
actually thought already in the concept of the subject, though not so
clearly nor with the same consciousness. If I say: All bodies are
extended, then I have not in the least amplified my concept of body, but
have merely resolved it, since extension, although not explicitly said
of the former concept prior to the judgment, nevertheless was actually thought of it; the judgment is therefore analytic. By contrast, the proposition: Some bodies are heavy, contains something in the predicate
that is not actually thought in the general concept of body; it
therefore augments my cognition, since it adds something to my concept,
and must therefore be called a synthetic judgment. [CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN
THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics,
IDEA @267]

(b) The common principle of all analytic judgments is the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as
#310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*,
*CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}

All analytic judgments rest entirely on the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23}
1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*} and are by their nature a priori cognitions, whether the concepts that serve for their material be empirical or not. For since
the predicate of an affirmative analytic judgment is already thought beforehand in the concept of the subject, it cannot be denied of that
subject without *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}; exactly so is its opposite necessarily denied of the subject in an analytic, but negative, judgment, and indeed also according to the principle of *CONTRADICTION*
{#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23}
1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}. So it stands with the propositions: Every body is
extended, and: No body is unextended (simple).

#268 as [#4, #10, #1, #50, #70, #10, #3, #70, #50] = dianoígō (G1272): {UMBRA: #948 % #41 = #5} 1) to open by dividing or drawing asunder, to
open thoroughly (what had been closed); 1a) a male opening the womb (the closed matrix), i.e. the first-born; 1b) of the eyes and the ears; 1c)
*TO* *OPEN* *THE* *MIND* *OF* *ONE*, *ie*. *TO* *CAUSE* *TO*
*UNDERSTAND* *A* *THING*; 1c1) *TO* *OPEN* *ONE'S* *SOUL*, *ie*. *TO*
*ROUSE* *IN* *ONE* *THE* *FACULTY* *OF* *UNDERSTANDING* *OR* *THE*
*DESIRE* *OF* *LEARNING*;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #948 % #41 = #5 - Natural Guidance, Function of Emptiness;
I-Ching: H63 - Ferrying Complete, Completion & After, Already Fording;
Tetra: 73 - Already Fording, Completion;
THOTH MEASURE: #5 - Oh thou of Serpent face, who makest thine appearance
at Re-Stau; I am not a slayer of men.

    #VIRTUE: Keeping Small (no. #5) means the minute first signs.
    #TOOLS: Greatness (no. #45) means battening.
    #POSITION: As to Accumulation (no. #60), it is the many, but
    #TIME: As to Keeping Small (no. #5), it is the few.
    #CANON:
#115
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_115@{
   @1: Sup: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#5); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#5),
   @2: Sup: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING: T'ANG (#55); Ego: 45 - GREATNESS: TA (#50),
   @3: Sup: 29 - DECISIVENESS:
TUAN (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}); Ego: 60 - ACCUMULATION:
CHI (#110),
   @4: Sup: 34 - KINSHIP: CH'IN (#118); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
   Male: #118; Feme: #115
} // #115

G1272@{
   @1: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#4); Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#4),
   @2: Sup: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#18); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#14),
   @3: Sup: 15 - REACH: TA (#33); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#15),
   @4: Sup: 65 - INNER: NEI (#98); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING: T'ANG (#65),
   @5: Sup: 54 - UNITY: K'UN (#152); Ego: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#135),
   @6: Sup: 64 - SINKING: CH'EN (#216); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#145),
   @7: Sup: 67 - DARKENING: HUI (#283); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#148 - I
AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%12}),
   @8: Sup: 56 - CLOSED MOUTH: CHIN (#339); Ego: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#218),
   @9: Sup: 25 - CONTENTION: CHENG (#364); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS /
WASTING: T'ANG (#268),
   Male: #364; Feme: #268
} // #268

"And their eyes were opened {#268 as [#4, #10, #1, #50, #70, #10, #3,
#70, #50] = dianoigo (G1272): open}, and they knew him; and he vanished-
out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened {#268
as [#4, #10, #1, #50, #70, #10, #3, #70, #50] = dianoigo (G1272): open}
to us the scriptures?" [Luke 24:31-32 (KJV)]

"Then opened {#268 as [#4, #10, #1, #50, #70, #10, #3, #70, #50] =
dianoigo (G1272): open} he their understanding, that they might
understand the scriptures," [Luke 24:45 (KJV)]

"And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened
{#268 as [#4, #10, #1, #50, #70, #10, #3, #70, #50] = dianoigo (G1272): open}, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul."
[Acts 16:14 (KJV)]

For that reason all analytic propositions are still a priori judgments
even if their concepts are empirical, as in: *GOLD* is a yellow metal;
for in order to know this, I need no further experience outside my
concept of *GOLD* {ie.

@1 + @41 + @81 + @369 INCLUSIVE OF A COSMOLOGICAL VIEW:

#71 #1 #11
#61 #81 #21
#51 #41 #31 = #369 AS THE WORLDVIEW [#205 / #164] OF QUEEN VICTORIA'S
LETTERS PATENT: #71 + #1 + #11 + #21 = @104 - *PRESENTS* / @491 -
PRINCIPLE OF CONTINUITY {@84 - *GOLD* + @86 + @102 + @104 - *PRESENTS* (DIDOMI: G1325) + @115 - *DIGNITY* *ROYAL*}) *CHIH*

= #492 - VOLUNTARY FREE WILL

}, which includes that this body is yellow and a metal; for this
constitutes my very concept, and I did not have to do anything except
analyze it, without looking beyond it to something else.

(c) Synthetic judgments require a principle other than the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as
#310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*,
*CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}

#268 as [#6, #1, #60, #200, #1] = ʼĕçâr (H633): {UMBRA: #261 % #41 =
#15} 1) interdict, decree, decree of restriction;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #261 % #41 = #15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse, Revealers of
Virtue; I-Ching: H61 - Inner Trust, Inner Truth, Center Returning;
Tetra: 1 - Centre;
THOTH MEASURE: #15 - Oh Lord of Righteousness, who makest thine
appearance in the place of Righteousness; I am not a land-grabber.

 #VIRTUE: With Reach (no. #15), daily increasing its kind.
    #TOOLS: With Diminishment (no. #55), daily depleting its type.
    #POSITION: With Resistance (no. #22), intolerance, but
    #TIME: With Unity (no. #54), magnanimity.
    #CANON: #146
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_146@{
   @1: Sup: 15 - REACH: TA (#15); Ego: 15 - REACH: TA (#15),
   @2: Sup: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#85); Ego: 55 - DIMINISHMENT: CHIEN (#70),
   @3: Sup: 11 - DIVERGENCE: CH'A (#96); Ego: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#92),
   @4: Sup: 65 - INNER: NEI (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}); Ego: 54 - UNITY: K'UN (#146 - I AM NOT A
LAND-GRABBER {%15}),
   Male: #161; Feme: #146
} // #146

H633@{
   @1: Sup: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6); Ego: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6),
   @2: Sup: 7 - ASCENT: SHANG (#13); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#7),
   @3: Sup: 67 - DARKENING: HUI (#80); Ego: 60 - ACCUMULATION: CHI (#67),
   @4: Sup: 24 - JOY: LE (#104 - I COMMIT NO FRAUD {%7}); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#105),
   @5: Sup: 25 - CONTENTION: CHENG (#129); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#106),
   Male: #129; Feme: #106
} // #268

"All the presidents of the kingdom, the governors, and the princes, the counsellors, and the captains, have consulted together to establish a
royal statute, and to make a firm decree {#268 as [#6, #1, #60, #200,
#1] = 'ecar (Aramaic) (H633): decree}, that whosoever shall ask a
petition of any God or man for thirty days, save of thee, O king, he
shall be cast into the den of lions." [Daniel 6:7 (KJV)]

There are synthetic judgments a posteriori whose origin is empirical;
but there are also synthetic judgments that are a priori certain and
that arise from pure understanding and reason. Both however agree in
this, that they can by no means arise solely from the principle of
analysis, namely the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100,
#200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*};
they demand yet a completely different principle, though they always
must be derived from some fundamental proposition, whichever it may be,
in accordance with the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100,
#200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}; for nothing can run counter to this principle, even though everything cannot
be derived from it. I shall first classify the synthetic judgments. [CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, IDEA @268]

#THREE: [#40, #81 - FOSTERING (YANG), #32, #73, #42, #1, #50, #9, #41] - SYNTHESIS (#123)

[#40, {@1: Sup: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#40); Ego: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#40)}
#81, {@2: Sup: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#80); Ego: 81 - FOSTERING: YANG (#121)} #32, {@3: Sup: 72 - HARDNESS: CHIEN (#152); Ego: 32 - LEGION: CHUANG
(#153)}
#73, {@4: Sup: 64 - SINKING: CH'EN (#216); Ego: 73 - ALREADY FORDING, COMPLETION: CH'ENG (#226)}
#42, {@5: Sup: 25 - CONTENTION: CHENG (#241); Ego: 42 - GOING TO MEET:
YING (#268: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 2)}
#1, {@6: Sup: 26 - ENDEAVOUR: WU (#267: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 2);
Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#269: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 2)}
#50, {@7: Sup: 76 - AGGRAVATION: CHU (#343: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION
53); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING: T'ANG (#319: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA
SECTION 36)}
#9, {@8: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#347: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 53);
Ego: 9 - BRANCHING OUT: SHU (#328: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 40)}
#41] {@9: Sup: 45 - GREATNESS: TA (#392); Ego: 41 - RESPONSE: YING
(#369: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA)}

1. Judgments of experience are always synthetic. For it would be absurd
to base an analytic judgment on experience, since I do not at all need
to go beyond my concept in order to formulate the judgment and therefore
have no need for any testimony from experience. That a body is extended,
is a proposition that stands certain a priori, and not a judgment of experience.

For before I go to experience, I have all the conditions for my judgment already in the concept, from which I merely extract the predicate in accordance with the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100,
#200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}, and
by this means can simultaneously become conscious of the necessity of
the judgment, which experience could never teach me.

#269 as [#5, #100, #40, #8, #50, #5, #10, #1, #50] = hermēneía (G2058): {UMBRA: #219 % #41 = #14} 1) *INTERPRETATION*; 1a) *OF* *WHAT* *HAS*
*BEEN* *SPOKEN* *MORE* *OR* *LESS* *OBSCURELY* *BY* *OTHERS*;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #219 % #41 = #14 - Praising the Mysterious (Metaphysics);
I-Ching: H19 - Overseeing, Approaching, Nearing, The forest; Tetra: 9 - Branching Out;
THOTH MEASURE: #14 - Oh Eater of Livers, who makest thine appearance at Mabit; I deal not fraudulently.

    #VIRTUE: With Penetration (no. #14), grasping the one, but
    #TOOLS: With Unity (no. #54), the Grand Accord.
    #POSITION: With Divergence (no. #11), self-loathing.
 #TIME:
With Embellishment (no. #61), self-love.
    #CANON: #140 ONTIC_OBLIGANS_140@{
   @1: Sup: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#14); Ego: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#14),
   @2: Sup: 68 - DIMMING: MENG (#82); Ego: 54 - UNITY: K'UN (#68 - I DO NOT THAT WHICH OFFENDETH THE GOD OF MY DOMAIN {%42}),
   @3: Sup: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}); Ego: 11 - DIVERGENCE: CH'A (#79),
   @4: Sup: 59 - MASSING: CHU (#220 - I CURSE NOT A GOD {%38}); Ego: 61 - EMBELLISHMENT: SHIH
(#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY {%14} / I AM NOT AN EAVES-DROPPER {%16}),
   Male: #220; Feme: #140
} // #140

G2058@{
   @1: Sup: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#5); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#5),
   @2: Sup: 24 - JOY: LE (#29); Ego: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#24),
   @3: Sup: 64 - SINKING: CH'EN (#93); Ego: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#64),
   @4: Sup: 72 - HARDNESS: CHIEN (#165); Ego: 8 - OPPOSITION: KAN (#72),
   @5: Sup: 41 - RESPONSE: YING (#206); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING: T'ANG (#122),
   @6: Sup: 46 - ENLARGEMENT: K'UO (#252); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#127),
   @7: Sup: 56 - CLOSED MOUTH: CHIN (#308); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#137),
   @8: Sup: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU (#365); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#138),
   @9: Sup: 26 - ENDEAVOUR: WU (#391); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING:
T'ANG (#188),
   Male: #391; Feme: #188
} // #269

"To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another
the interpretation {#269 as [#5, #100, #40, #8, #50, #5, #10, #1, #50] = hermeneia (G2058): interpretation} of tongues:" [1Corinthians 12:10 (KJV)]

"How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath
a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation {#269 as [#5, #100, #40, #8, #50, #5, #10, #1, #50] = hermeneia (G2058): interpretation}. Let all things be done unto
edifying." [1Corinthians 14:26 (KJV)]

2. Mathematical judgments are one and all synthetic. *THIS*
*PROPOSITION* *APPEARS* *TO* *HAVE* *COMPLETELY* *ESCAPED* *THE* *OBSERVATIONS* *OF* *ANALYSTS* *OF* *HUMAN* *REASON* *UP* *TO* *THE* *PRESENT*, *AND* *INDEED* *TO* *BE* *DIRECTLY* *OPPOSED* *TO* *ALL* *OF* *THEIR* *CONJECTURES*, *ALTHOUGH* *IT* *IS* *INCONTROVERTIBLY* *CERTAIN* *AND* *VERY* *IMPORTANT* *IN* *ITS* *CONSEQUENCES*. Because they found
that the inferences of the mathematicians all proceed in accordance with
the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*} (which, by nature,
is required of any apodictic certainty), they were persuaded that the fundamental propositions were also known through the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as
#310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*,
*CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}, in which they were very
mistaken; for a synthetic proposition can of course be discerned in accordance with the principle of *CONTRADICTION* {#312 as [#2, #100,
#200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23} 1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}, but
only insofar as another synthetic proposition is presupposed from which
the first can be deduced, never however in itself.

First of all it must be observed: that properly mathematical
propositions are always a priori and not empirical judgments, because
they carry necessity with them, which cannot be taken from experience.
But if this will not be granted me, very well, I will restrict my
proposition to pure mathematics, the concept of which already conveys
that it contains not empirical but only pure cognition a priori.

One might well at first think: that the proposition 7 {#175} + 5 {#65} =
12 is a purely analytic proposition that follows from the concept of a
sum of seven and five according to the principle of *CONTRADICTION*
{#312 as [#2, #100, #200, #10] = qeriy (H7147): {#9 as #310 % #41 = #23}
1) *OPPOSITION*, *CONTRARINESS*, *ENCOUNTER*, *CONTRARY* *OR* *HOSTILE* *ENCOUNTER*}. However, upon closer inspection, one finds that the
concept of the sum of 7 and 5 contains nothing further than the
unification of the two numbers into one, through which by no means is
thought what this single number may be that combines the two. The
concept of twelve is in no way already thought because I merely think to myself this unification of seven and five, and I may analyze my concept
of such a possible sum for as long as may be, still I will not meet with twelve therein. [CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, IDEA @269]

#269 as [#80, #1, #100, #5, #50, #5, #3, #20, #5] = paraphérō (G3911): {UMBRA: #1587 % #41 = #29} 1) to bear to, bring to, put before; 2) to
lead aside from the right course or path, to carry away; 3) to carry
past, lead past; 3a) to cause to pass by, to remove;

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #1587 % #41 = #29 - Deeming, Non-Assertion; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking / Darkening of the Light, Brilliance injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 67 - Darkening;
THOTH MEASURE: #29 - Oh Kenemtu, who makest thine appearance in Kenemit;
I am not given to cursing.

    #VIRTUE: With Decisiveness (no. #29), numerous affairs, but
    #TOOLS: With Exhaustion (no. #69), not a single happiness.
    #POSITION: With Change (no. #28), creating the new.
    #TIME: With Constancy (no. #51), cleaving to the old.
 #CANON:
#177
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_177@{
   @1: Sup: 29 - DECISIVENESS: TUAN (#29); Ego: 29
- DECISIVENESS: TUAN (#29),
   @2: Sup: 17 - HOLDING BACK: JUAN (#46); Ego: 69 - EXHAUSTION: CH'IUNG (#98),
   @3: Sup: 45 - GREATNESS: TA (#91); Ego: 28 - CHANGE: KENG (#126),
   @4: Sup: 15 - REACH: TA (#106); Ego: 51 - CONSTANCY: CH'ANG (#177 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO CURSING {%29}),
 Male: #106; Feme: #177
} // #177

G3911@{
   @1: Sup: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#80); Ego: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#80),
   @2: Sup: 81 - FOSTERING: YANG (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES
{%9}); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#81),
   @3: Sup: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#180 - I COMMIT NOT ADULTERY WITH ANOTHER'S WIFE {%19}); Ego: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#100),
   @4: Sup: 24 - JOY: LE (#204); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#105),
   @5: Sup: 74 - CLOSURE: CHIH (#278); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING:
T'ANG (#155),
   @6: Sup: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#357); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#160),
   @7: Sup: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#358); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#163),
   @8: Sup: 21 - RELEASE: SHIH (#379); Ego: 20 - ADVANCE: CHIN (#183),
   @9: Sup: 26 - ENDEAVOUR: WU (#405); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#188),
   Male: #405; Feme: #188
} // #269

"And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take
{#269 as [#80, #1, #100, #5, #50, #5, #3, #20, #5] = paraphero (G3911):
take} away {#269 as [#80, #1, #100, #5, #50, #5, #3, #20, #5] =
paraphero (G3911): take} this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will,
but what thou wilt." [Mark 14:36 (KJV)]

"Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove {#269 as [#80, #1, #100, #5,
#50, #5, #3, #20, #5] = paraphero (G3911): take} this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done." [Luke 22:42 (KJV)]

*ONE* *MUST* *GO* *BEYOND* *THESE* *CONCEPTS*, *IN* *MAKING* *USE* *OF*
*THE* *INTUITION* *THAT* *CORRESPONDS* to one of the two, such as one’s five fingers, or (like Segner in his arithmetic) five points, and in
that manner adding the units of the five given in intuition step by step
to the concept of seven. One therefore truly amplifies one’s concept through this proposition 7 {#175} + 5 {#65} = 12 and adds to the first concept a new one that was not thought in it; that is, an arithmetical proposition is always synthetic, which can be seen all the more plainly
in the case of somewhat larger numbers, for it is then clearly evident
that, though we may turn and twist our concept as we like, we could
never find the sum through the mere analysis of our concepts, without
making use of intuition.

Nor is any fundamental proposition of pure geometry analytic. That the straight line between two points is the shortest is a synthetic
proposition. For my concept of the straight contains nothing of
magnitude, but only a quality. The concept of the shortest is therefore wholly an addition and cannot be extracted by any analysis from the
concept of the straight line. *INTUITION* *MUST* *THEREFORE* *BE* *MADE* *USE* *OF* *HERE*, *BY* *MEANS* *OF* *WHICH* *ALONE* *THE* *SYNTHESIS*
*IS* *POSSIBLE*.

    #266 as [#40, #70, #6, #50, #50, #10, #600] /
    #272 as [#6, #40, #70, #6, #50, #50, #10, #600] = ʻânan (H6049): {UMBRA: #170 % #41 = #6} 1) (Piel) to make appear, produce, *BRING* (*CLOUDS*); 2) (Poel) to practise soothsaying, conjure; 2a) to observe
times, practice soothsaying or spiritism or magic or augury or
witchcraft; 2b) soothsayer, enchanter, sorceress, diviner,
fortuneteller, barbarian, Meonenim (participle);

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #170 % #41 = #6 - Female Superiority, Completion of Form;
I-Ching: H25 - No Errancy, Without Embroiling, Innocence, Pestilence;
Tetra: 66 - Departure;
THOTH MEASURE: #6 - Oh thou of Lion form, who makest thine appearance in Heaven; I am not fraudulent in measures of grain.

    #VIRTUE: With Contrariety (no. #6), internal contradiction.
    #TOOLS: Enlargement (no. #46) means external opposition.
    #POSITION: As to Watch (no. #63), it is the apparent.
    #TIME: As to Darkening (no. #67), it is the indistinct.
    #CANON: #182
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_182@{
   @1: Sup: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6); Ego: 6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#6),
   @2: Sup: 52 - MEASURE: TU (#58); Ego: 46 - ENLARGEMENT: K'UO (#52),
   @3: Sup: 34 - KINSHIP: CH'IN (#92); Ego: 63
- WATCH: SHIH (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
   @4: Sup: 20 - ADVANCE: CHIN (#112); Ego: 67 - DARKENING: HUI (#182 - I AM NOT
FRAUDULENT IN MEASURES OF GRAIN {%6}),
   Male: #112; Feme: #182
} // #182

    H6049@{
   @1: Sup: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#40); Ego: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#40),
   @2: Sup: 29 - DECISIVENESS: TUAN (#69); Ego: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#110),
   @3: Sup: 35 - GATHERING: LIEN (#104 - I COMMIT NO FRAUD {%7}); Ego:
6 - CONTRARIETY: LI (#116),
   @4: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#108); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING:
T'ANG (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11}),
   @5: Sup: 54 - UNITY: K'UN (#162); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS / WASTING:
T'ANG (#216),
   @6: Sup: 64 - SINKING: CH'EN (#226); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS, DISTORTION: HSIEN (#226),
   @7: Sup: 16 - CONTACT: CHIAO (#242); Ego: 33 - CLOSENESS: MI (#259),

[continued in next message]

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

[continued from previous message]

@1 - SEMINAL
@41 - ONTIC DIALECTIC (@660)
@81 - REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR
@369 - [#205 - PRINCIPLE OF PERSISTENT SUBSTANCE / #164 - PRINCIPLE OF
MATERIALITY]
@491 - PRINCIPLE OF CONTINUITY {@84 - *GOLD* + @86 + @102 + @104 -
*PRESENTS* (DIDOMI: G1325) + @115 - *DIGNITY* *ROYAL*}

A common misconception as the cause for a delusional claim to a @1 -
SELF ENTITLEMENT which is made against the #68 - RIGHT of the @115 -
DIGNITY ROYAL (ie. DIEU ET MON DROIT) itself is a consideration of
broader governance issue related to BEHAVIOURAL METHODOLOGY (#114 -
PERNICIOUS ACCUSATIONS / TEMPORAL PROMISCUITY v's #113 - ETHICAL
ENGAGEMENT —> #115 - DIGNITY ROYAL).

#27 - DUTIES: THE COMMONWEALTH SHALL NOT MAKE ANY LAW FOR ESTABLISHING
ANY RELIGION,

#82 - PRINCIPLE OF CONTINUITY (#491): OR FOR IMPOSING ANY RELIGIOUS
OBSERVANCE,

#68 - RIGHT: OR FOR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE OF ANY RELIGION,

@171 - I AM NOT UNCHASTE WITH ANY ONE: AND NO RELIGIOUS TEST SHALL BE
REQUIRED AS A QUALIFICATION FOR ANY OFFICE OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE
COMMONWEALTH.

Is the notion that NO TEST is REASONABLY applicable to both the
RATIONALITY and the NATURE as any GROUNDING of the RELIGIOUS BELIEF
and its OATH relative to the viability as continuity of the #71 -
WORLDVIEW of #81 - COMMONWEALTH by exhibiting a fidelity of SAPIENT
COMPLIANCE with the requirements of #27 - DUTIES / #68 - RIGHT
relevant to #902 - RULE OF LAW WITH ITS #1364 - PARADIGM FOR TOOLS OF
#491 - RULE {@82 - TERMS OF CONTINUITY} and #873 - COMPASS OF PROBITY
{@205 - PRINCIPLE PERSISTENT SUBSTANCE} WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL
ENTITLEMENT TO @492 - VOLUNTARY FREEWILL {@369 / @123 - JUDGMENT
SENSIBILITY (#3 x #3 - CENTRE INTERLOCK)} AS FOUNDATIONAL STONE:

'I *SWEAR* by him who the TETRAKTYS (#10) = {#5 - DODECAHEDRON + #7 -
ICOSAHEDRON} found,
Whence all our wisdom springs and which contains
PERENNIAL NATURE'S FOUNTAIN, CAUSE AND ROOT.'
#1 + #25 {5x5: #65 - SOLDIER / DODECAHEDRON} + #49 {7x7: #175 -
MARRIAGE / ICOSAHEDRON} x 2 = #150}

Which is a misnomer derived from a plain reading of SECTION 116 to the
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT: "THE COMMONWEALTH SHALL
NOT MAKE ANY LAW FOR ESTABLISHING ANY RELIGION, OR FOR IMPOSING ANY
RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE, OR FOR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE OF ANY
RELIGION, AND NO RELIGIOUS TEST SHALL BE REQUIRED AS A QUALIFICATION
FOR ANY OFFICE OR PUBLIC TRUST UNDER THE COMMONWEALTH."

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion,
{@1: Sup: 35 - GATHERING: LIEN (#35); Ego: 27 - *DUTIES*: SHIH (#27)}

or for imposing any religious observance, {@2: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN
(#39); Ego: 55 - DIMINISHMENT: CHIEN (#82 - *PRINCIPLE* *OF*
*CONTINUITY* / #491 - SECTION IX <— TERMS OF CONTINUITY: @84 + @86 +
@102 + @104 + @115 = #491)}

or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, {@3: Sup: 68 -
*RIGHT* / DIMMING: MENG (#107); Ego: 36 - STRENGTH: CH'IANG (#118)}

and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any
office or public trust under the Commonwealth. {@4: Sup: 64 - SINKING:
CH'EN (#171 - I AM NOT UNCHASTE WITH ANY ONE {%20}); Ego: 42 - GOING
TO MEET: YING (#160)}

ONTIC CHECKSUM TOTAL: #171 as [#30, #40, #90, #6, #5] = mitsvâh
(H4687): {UMBRA: #27 as #141 % #41 = #18} 1) commandment; 1a)
commandment (of man); 1b) the commandment (of God); 1c) *COMMANDMENT*
(*OF* *CODE* *OF* *WISDOM*);

THAT OUR SABBATH KEEPING PEOPLE FOUGHT FOR SUCH LEGISLATIVE ADOPTION
WITHIN 1900 FOR THE CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AGAINST
*PILLORY* AS *EXCRUCIATION* FOR VIOLATION OF THEIR HOLY SUNDAY.

BOTH MORAN AND THE ANGLICAN ARCHBISHOP, SAUMAREZ SMITH, WERE IN FAVOUR
OF SECTION 116 OF THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH PREVENTED SABBATARIAN
LEGISLATION, AND ENSURED THAT THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL COULD NOT PROCLAIM
DAYS OF HUMILIATION AND #1827 - *THANKSGIVING* / EUCHARISTIA (G2169).
THE ISSUE OF PRAYERS  IN PARLIAMENT, AND QUESTIONS OF ECCLESIASTICAL
PRECEDENCE , CAUSED SOME DISCUSSION, BUT THE LATTER WAS A PREROGATIVE
MATTER.  NEVERTHELESS, IT CAUSED CONSIDERABLE TENSION, BECAUSE OF THE
SYMBOLIC IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED.

'The Seventh-day Adventists had managed a very effective counter
campaign.  They were painfully aware that William and Henry Firth had
been sentenced to the stocks in Parramatta on 22 April 1894.  <--
*PILLORY*

They had been prosecuted by the New South Wales Council of Churches
for working on Sunday.  In addition to their in-house paper, the Bible
Echo, they also published the Quarterly Sentinel, and Herald of
Liberty, modeled on a similar journal in the United States of America.

It reached a circulation figure of 4,000 and its emphases were
welcomed by some of the major dailies.

The small Seventh-day Adventist Church was able to exercise such
leverage ... [in] distribut[ing] tracts door-to-door in tens of
thousands and, as a result, won over 22,000 signatures to their
petition against any religious clause or declaration of the belief in
the Constitution.

Even the Bulletin approved of their common sense, but the recognition
petition still managed to gain more than twice the number of
signatures, as well as some weighty political supporters.'

*MORAN* *REFUSED* *TO* *SHARE* *IN* *THE* *OFFICIAL* *INAUGURATION*
*CEREMONY* *WHEN* *HIS* *CLAIM* *TO* *PRECEDENCE* *ON* *SENIORITY*
*WAS* *REJECTED*.  SMITH READ THE PRAYER ON 1 JANUARY.

PRESBYTERIANS ALSO HAD SOME CLAIM TO PRECEDENCE BECAUSE OF LINKS WITH
THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, BUT FAILING THAT THEY ARGUED FOR EQUALITY.  AT
THE OPENING OF PARLIAMENT, LORD HOPETOUN READ A PRAYER, WHICH CREATED
AN IMPORTANT PRECEDENT. ['A History of the Churches in Australasia'
(1991 edition), 'Churches and Federation', by Ian Breward, pages 219
to 221]

HYPOTHESIS ON KANT'S PROLEGOMENA BEING IMPETUS FOR CHRISTCHURCH
MASSACRE (A *COMPLETE* *MATCH* *AGAINST* *MY* *ONTIC* *DIALECTIC*
#1292 - DEVIATING FROM THE PRESCRIBED ORDER OR RULE):

YOU OUGHT TO THEN NOTE THAT WHITE NATIONALIST BRENTON TARRANT'S
BLESSING OBTAINED BEFORE THE CHRISTCHURCH #419 - SLAUGHTER EVENT IS
SIMILARLY ALIGNED WITH A CATHOLIC MILITARY ORDER OF KNIGHTS TEMPLAR
AND THEREFORE HAS A GROUNDING AS UNLAWFUL USE OF MY INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT TO THE
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA.

THE CONTEXT OF MY APPEALS IS THAT IMPOSTS HAVE BEEN HABITUALLY
(INCESSANT AS OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE) MADE AS TARGETING UPON MY AUTONOMY
AND VOLUNTARY FREE WILL (NOTE THE EQUIVALENCE OF HAND GESTURES), AND
THE POLICE MEMBER I SPOKE TO DIDN'T GRASP THE REALITY THAT THESE
PERSONS HAVE STOLEN MY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SO AS TO PERPETUATE
MALEFICENCE AND ONE CANNOT EASILY DISMISS THE NEXUS with the
*CHRISTCHURCH* event as a "terrorist attack" *THAT* *ALTHOUGH* *NOT*
*ORDERED* *BY* *ANY* *GROUP* *AS* *A* *DECISION* *TARRANT* *MADE*
*HIMSELF*, *HE* '*DID* *CONTACT* *THE* *REBORN* *KNIGHTS* *TEMPLAR*
*FOR* *A* *BLESSING* *IN* *SUPPORT* *OF* *THE* *ATTACK*, *WHICH* *WAS*
*GIVEN*.' [cf: Tarrant's Manifesto emailed to Ardern, page 9 of 73]



<http://www.grapple369.com/images/ProtoHumanHand.jpg>

[IMAGE: "My Hand Upon The Waters" by Aboriginal [I don't remember his
name] artist, Kings Cross, Sydney / Aboriginal Reconciliation requires
conscious agreeable action / A symptom of diminished association to
the circle of consciousness as water of life which leads to a loss of
self identity as formula of autonomy]

On Saturday 16 MARCH 2019 the White Nationalist BRENTON TARRANT, 28yo
FROM AUSTRALIA appeared within a CHRISTCHURCH COURT charged with an
initial count of murder and was pictured conveying in addition to a
conjoined *FIST* (SEE: *FUSILLADE* on 17 MARCH 2017) whilst handcuffed
a purposed as distinctive *HAND* *SIGN* in being equivalent to *MY*
*HAND* *WITHIN* *ABORIGINAL* *ART* depicted within my 25 OCTOBER 2017
narrative titled: "RECONCILIATION SUMMARY OF OUR WORLD IS GUIDED BY
TWO PRINCIPLES: {@1 - CARDINAL SIN AS WICKEDNESS OF PRELATES / @5 -
IMMUTABLE SELF-CENTREDNESS THAT STANDS IN THE PLACE OF GOD} WHICH NOW
HAS NO OPPORTUNITY FOR GOD ALMIGHTY'S GRACE"



<https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/15/new-zealand-terrorist-makes-white-power-hand-symbol-court-8911986/>


[IMAGE: (A SYMBOL OF ABORIGINAL RECONCILIATION BEING DEPLOYED BY WHITE
SUPREMACISTS IN *OPERATION* *O-KKK* AS SPECIFIC TARGETING BY
DEFECATION / *TOILETING* AGAINST THE DIGNITY OF SACRED INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY AS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE)

YOUTUBE: "Johnny Cash - Ring of Fire"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WyLhwYFgmk>

Beginning in 2017, the gesture was at the center of an online prank in
meme culture related to alt-right and white supremacy originating from
anonymous message board posts on the website 4chan. The Boston Globe
reported that users on 4chan's "/pol/" (Politically Incorrect) board
were instructed in February 2017 to 'flood Twitter and other social
media websites...claiming that the OK hand sign is a symbol of white
supremacy,' as part of a campaign dubbed "*OPERATION* *O-KKK*"]

LET'S GO COMMANDO [[email protected] / [email protected]] @ 2150
HOURS [#343 = @168 - I AM NOT THE CAUSE OF WEEPING TO ANY {%26} + @175
- I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%22}] ON 19 NOVEMBER 2017: "I know this
person - and have details.

It is hard to state what I know without violating privacy policy but
if you look closely at his posts you will find that:

He is a Telstra customer - account number: 221530570

Numerous people have intervention orders against him, and he has
several breaches of said orders.

He operates www.grapple369.com

I have much more - but do not wish to come to his attention or violate
any laws."



Prototype: HOMOIOS {#372 as [#40, #1, #30, #1, #20, #70, #10, #200] =
malakós (G3120): {UMBRA: #0 as #362 % #41 = #34} 1) soft, soft to the
touch; 2) metaph. in a bad sense; 2a) effeminate; 2a1) of a catamite;
2a2) of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man; 2a3) of a male
who submits his body to unnatural lewdness; 2a4) of a male prostitute;
/ #343 as [#300, #5, #30, #8] = télos (G5056): {UMBRA: #54 as #605 %
#41 = #31} 1) end; 1a) termination, the limit at which a thing ceases
to be (always of the end of some act or state, but not of the end of a
period of time); 1b) the end; 1b1) the last in any succession or
series; 1b2) eternal; 1c) that by which a thing is finished, its
close, issue; 1d) the end to which all things relate, the aim,
purpose; 2) toll, custom (i.e. indirect tax on goods)} / *HETEROS*
{#351 as [#10, #1, #300, #600] = ʼâsham (H816): {UMBRA: #9 as #341 %
#41 = #13} 1) to offend, be guilty, trespass; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to do
wrong, offend, trespass, commit an offense, do injury; 1a2) to be or
become guilty; 1a3) to be held guilty; 1a4) to be incriminated; 1b)
(Niphal) to suffer punishment; 1c) (Hiphil) to declare guilty; 2)
(TWOT) to be desolate, acknowledge offense; / #373 as [#1, #80, #70,
#80, #30, #1, #50, #1, #10, #50] = apoplanáō (G635): {UMBRA: #24 as
#1113 % #41 = #6} 1) to cause to go astray; 2) to lead away from the
truth to error; 3) to go astray, stray away from} / TORAH {#349 as
[#300, #9, #40] = sâṭam (H7852): {UMBRA: #21 as #349 % #41 = #21} 1)
to hate, oppose oneself to, bear a grudge, retain animosity against,
cherish animosity against; 1a) (Qal) to cherish animosity against /
#372 as [#40, #1, #30, #1, #20, #70, #10, #200] = malakós (G3120):
{UMBRA: #0 as #362 % #41 = #34} 1) soft, soft to the touch; 2) metaph.
in a bad sense; 2a) effeminate; 2a1) of a catamite; 2a2) of a boy kept
for homosexual relations with a man; 2a3) of a male who submits his
body to unnatural lewdness; 2a4) of a male prostitute}

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grumble/?zen:8,row:8,col:2,nous:38&PROTOTYPE:HETEROS>


.jackNote@zen: 8, row: 8, col: 2, nous: 38 [Date: (none), Time:
(none), Super: #351 / #15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse, Revealers of
Virtue; I-Ching: H61 - Inner Trust, Inner Truth, Center Returning;
Tetra: 1 - Centre, Ego: #373 / #38 - Consequences for Virtuous
Discourse; I-Ching: H62 - Minor Superiority, Small Excess, Small
Exceeding, Preponderance of the small, Small surpassing; Tetra: 11 -
Divergence]

YOUTUBE: "Annie Lennox - Why (Official Music Video)"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG7I4oniOyA>

LET'S GO COMMANDO [[email protected] / [email protected]] @ 1548
HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: “TRUTH WHISPERS AS TEARS IN RAIN:

Well I won’t make mention of the level of respect I have seen you show
to others, but while we are on the topic, I have some genuine
questions for you...

“INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀT[I]S”

This phrase seems to be somewhat poor LATIN, and you seem to be the
only person on the entirety of the internet to use it, and as a
result, I’m interested to know what you are attempting to say when you
use said phrase.

If you have a genuine message to convey - then clarity is #265 - *KEY*
to getting it across.

I am actually interested to know about some of the things you make
reference to - so if all you can do is sling insult back at me like
you seem to do with the rest of the world - then this will be the last
message of mine you will read.”

YOUTUBE: “Latin Lessons (Life Of Brian)”

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAfKFKBlZbM>

INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS(zen: 1, row: 2, col: 4, nous: 79)@{
     @1: Sup: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#79); Ego: 79 - DIFFICULTIES:
NAN (#79),
     @2: Sup: 27 - DUTIES: SHIH (#106); Ego: 29 - DECISIVENESS: TUAN
(#108),
     @3: Sup: 39 - RESIDENCE: CHU (#145); Ego: 12 - YOUTHFULNESS:
T'UNG (#120),
     @4: Sup: 51 - CONSTANCY: CH'ANG (#196: I AM NOT ONE OF LOUD VOICE >> {%37}); Ego: 12 - YOUTHFULNESS: T'UNG (#132),
     @5: Sup: 54 - UNITY: K'UN (#250); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#135),
     @6: Sup: 49 - FLIGHT: T'AO (#299: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 19
ON #261 - BINOMIAL CLAIMING AS OBJECTIVE VALIDITY AND NECESSARY
UNIVERSAL VALIDITY (FOR EVERYONE) ARE THEREFORE INTERCHANGEABLE
CONCEPTS, AND ALTHOUGH WE DO NOT KNOW THE OBJECT IN ITSELF); Ego: 76 -
AGGRAVATION: CHU (#211),
     @7: Sup: 7 - ASCENT: SHANG (#306: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 23
AS TIME FOR PAYBACK (@172 - GALLOWS) NEWSPAPER OF 5 JANUARY 2017 BEING
CONDUCT COMMENCING WITH A MAILBOX #261 - BINOMIAL CLAMPING THREAT MADE
UPON 6 JANUARY 2017 AS AN EXACERBATING INTENTION FOR HABITUAL
PILLORY); Ego: 39 - RESIDENCE: CHU (#250),
} // Male: #306; Feme: #250

IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) ON SECTION #19 - ARGUMENT FOR
ETHICAL ANARCHISM, RETURNING TO SIMPLICITY; I-CHING: H57 - COMPLIANCE,
GENTLE PENETRATION / WIND, GROUND, CALCULATIONS; TETRA: 58 - GATHERING
IN (HSI) AS IDEA: @299: "Objective validity and necessary universal
validity (for everyone) are therefore interchangeable concepts, and
although we do not know the object in itself, nonetheless, if we
regard a judgment as universally valid and hence necessary, objective
validity is understood to be included.

#261 as [#1, #60, #200] = ʼĕçâr (H633): {UMBRA: #6 as #261 % #41 =
#15} 1) interdict, decree, *DECREE* *OF* *RESTRICTION* (*TIME* FOR
PAYBACK);

Through this judgment we cognize the object (even if it otherwise
remains unknown as it may be in itself) by means of the universally
valid and necessary connection of the given perceptions; and since
this is the case for all objects of the senses, judgments of
experience will not derive their objective validity from the immediate
cognition of the object (for this is impossible), but merely from the
condition for the universal validity of empirical judgments [IDEA
@299], which, as has been said, never rests on empirical, or indeed
sensory conditions at all, but on a pure concept of the understanding.
The object always remains unknown in itself; if, however, through the
concept of the understanding the connection of the representations
which it provides to our sensibility is determined as universally
valid, then the object is determined through this relation, and the
judgment is objective.


<http://www.grapple369.com/images/TIME%20FOR%20PAYBACK%2020170105.jpg>

Let us provide examples: that the room is warm, the sugar sweet, the
wormwood repugnant, are merely subjectively valid judgments. I do not
at all require that I should find it so at every *TIME*, or that
everyone else should find it just as I do; they express only a
relation of two sensations to the same subject, namely myself, and
this only in my present state of perception, and are therefore not
expected to be valid for the object: these I call judgments of
perception.

The case is completely different with judgments of experience. What
experience teaches me under certain circumstances, it must teach me at
every *TIME* and teach everyone else as well, and its validity is not
limited to the subject or its state at that *TIME*. Therefore I
express all such judgments as objectively valid; as, e.g., if I say:
the air is elastic, then this judgment is to begin with only a
judgment of perception; I relate two sensations in my senses only to
one another.

If I want it to be called a judgment of experience, I then require
that this connection be subject to a condition that makes it
universally valid. I want therefore that I, at every *TIME*, and also
everyone else, would necessarily have to conjoin the same perceptions
under the same circumstances."  [CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF
PHILOSOPHY, IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783), pages 51-52]

IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) ON SECTION #23 - CONSTANCY OF
GUIDING CONCEPTS, EMPTINESS & NON-EXISTENCE; I-CHING: H18 - ILLS TO BE
CURED, ARRESTING DECAY, CORRECTING, WORK ON WHAT HAS BEEN SPOILED
(DECAY), DECAYING, BRANCH; TETRA: 26 - ENDEAVOUR (WU) AS IDEA @306:
"Judgments, insofar as they are regarded merely as the condition for
the unification of given representations in a consciousness, are
rules. These rules, insofar as they represent the unification as
necessary, are a priori rules, and provided that there are none above
them from which they can be derived, are principles. Now since, with
respect to the possibility of all experience, if merely the form of
thinking is considered in the experience, no conditions on judgments
of experience are above those that bring the appearances (according to
the varying form of their intuition) under pure concepts of the
understanding (which make the empirical judgment [IDEA: @306]
objectively valid), these conditions are therefore the a priori
principles of possible experience.

Now the principles of possible experience are, at the same time,
universal laws of nature that can be cognized a priori. And so the
problem that lies in our second question, presently before us: How is
pure natural science possible? is solved.

For the systematization that is required for the form of a science is
here found to perfection, since beyond the aforementioned formal
conditions of all judgments in general, hence of all rules whatsoever
furnished by logic, no others are possible, and these form a logical
system; but the concepts based thereon, which contain the a priori
conditions for all synthetic and necessary judgments, for that very
reason form a transcendental system; finally, the principles by means
of which all appearances are subsumed under these concepts form a
physiological system, i.e., a system of nature, which precedes all
empirical cognition of nature and first makes it possible, and can
therefore be called the true universal and pure natural science.
[CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, IMMANUEL KANT'S
PROLEGOMENA (1783), pages 56-58]

HOMOIOS PROTOTYPE@{
     @8: Sup: 20 - ADVANCE: CHIN (#326: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA IDEA ON
THIS VERY SYSTEM, LIKE EVERY TRUE SYSTEM FOUNDED ON A UNIVERSAL
PRINCIPLE, ALSO EXHIBITS ITS INESTIMABLE USEFULNESS IN THAT IT
*EXPELS* *ALL* *THE* *EXTRANEOUS* *CONCEPTS* THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE
CREEP IN); Ego: 13 - INCREASE: TSENG (#263: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA IDEA ON
*MAKING* *PLANS* *IS* *MOST* *OFTEN* *A* *PRESUMPTUOUS*, *BOASTFUL*
*MENTAL* *PREOCCUPATION*),
     @9: Sup: 24 - JOY: LE (#350: *TO* *THINK*, *PLAN*, *ESTEEM*,
*CALCULATE*, *INVENT*, *MAKE* *A* *JUDGMENT*, *IMAGINE*, *COUNT*));
Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#267: KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECTION 2),
} // Male: #350; Feme: #267

HETEROS PROTOTYPE@{
     @8: Sup: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#311: *CHRISTCHURCH* *MASSACRE* >> on 15 MARCH 2019 *AGAINST* #71 - WORLDVIEW OF QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS
PATENT ); Ego: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#329: 1 JANUARY CONFORMING TO
IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) / #391 - HOMOGENEOUS PRINCIPLE and
FIDELITY OF OATHS TO #231 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL / #541 - *THICK*
*CLOUD*),
     @9: Sup: 9 - BRANCHING OUT: SHU (#320: *TO* *VIOLENTLY*
*DESTROY*, *DEVASTATE*, *DESPOIL*, *ASSAIL*); Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN
(#333),
} // Male: #320; Feme: #333

YOUTUBE: "Shakespear's Sister - Stay (Official Video)"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCYaALgW80c>

TORAH PROTOTYPE@{
     @8: Sup: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#311 - *CHRISTCHURCH*
*MASSACRE* on 15 MARCH 2019 *AGAINST* #71 - WORLDVIEW OF QUEEN
VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT ); Ego: 79 - DIFFICULTIES: NAN (#329: 1
JANUARY CONFORMING TO IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) / #391 -
HOMOGENEOUS PRINCIPLE and FIDELITY OF OATHS TO #231 - JUXTAPOSITION
CONTROL / #541 - *THICK* *CLOUD*),
     @9: Sup: 9 - BRANCHING OUT: SHU (#320: *TO* *VIOLENTLY*
*DESTROY*, *DEVASTATE*, *DESPOIL*, *ASSAIL*); Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN
(#333),
} // Male: #320; Feme: #333

RIGHTS PROTOTYPE@{
     @8: Sup: 49 - FLIGHT: T'AO (#355: BIGGEST BLOKES BBQ ON 25 AUGUST >> 2017 AS FORMULA OF PROGRESSION AGAINST QUEEN VICTORIA'S LETTERS PATENT
EIDOMAI: G1492 (@228 - FORCE &  DEFINITE MEANING / KANT'S PROLEGOMENA
SECTION 57); Ego: 42 - GOING TO MEET: YING (#292),
     @9: Sup: 53 - ETERNITY: YUNG (#408: *MEAT* *IN* *MAILBOX* on 15
NOVEMBER 2017); Ego: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#296),
} // Male: #408; Feme: #296

#408 as [#5, #2, #1, #400] / [#2, #1, #400, #5] = bôwʼ (H935): {UMBRA:
#0 as #9 % #41 = #9} 1) to go in, enter, come, go, come in; 1a) (Qal);
1a1) to enter, come in; 1a2) to come; i) to come with; ii) to come
upon, fall or light upon, *ATTACK* (*ENEMY*); iii) to come to pass;
1a3) to attain to; 1a4) to be enumerated; 1a5) to go; 1b) (Hiphil);
1b1) to lead in; 1b2) to carry in; 1b3) to bring in, cause to come in,
gather, cause to come, bring near, bring against, bring upon; 1b4) to
bring to pass; 1c) (Hophal); 1c1) to be brought, brought in; 1c2) to
be introduced, be put;

MALE: @196 = #196

ONTIC CHECKSUM: #196 as [#40, #70, #30, #50, #6] = mâʻal (H4603):
{UMBRA: #14 as #140 % #41 = #17} 1) to act unfaithfully, act
treacherously, transgress, commit a trespass; 1a) (Qal) to act
unfaithfully or treacherously; 1a1) against man; 1a2) against God;
1a3) against devoted thing; 1a4) against husband;

IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) ON SECTION #39 - ACHIEVING ONENESS,
ROOT OF ORDER; I-CHING: H28 - MAJOR SUPERIORITY, EXCESS, GREAT
EXCEEDING, PREPONDERANCE OF THE GREAT, GREAT SURPASSING, CRITICAL
MASS; TETRA: 76 - AGGRAVATION (CHU) AS IDEA @326 WITHIN PREFACE TO ANY
FUTURE METAPHYSICS: "This very system, like every true system founded
on a universal principle, also exhibits its inestimable usefulness in
that it expels all the extraneous concepts that might otherwise creep
in among these pure concepts of the understanding, and it assigns each
cognition its place.

Those concepts that, under the name of concepts of reflection, I had
also put into a table under the guidance of the categories mingle in
ontology with the pure concepts of the understanding without privilege
and legitimate claims, although the latter are concepts of connection
and thereby of the object itself, whereas the former are only concepts
of the mere comparison of already given concepts, and therefore have
an entirely different nature and use; through my law-governed division
(Critique, p. 260) {ie.

Kant provides a fourfold division of “concepts of reflection,” which
pertain to judgment itself:

@1 - identity / difference,
@2 - agreement / opposition,
@3 - inner/ outer, and
@4 - determinable / determination or
@5 - matter / form)

} they are extricated from this amalgam.

But the usefulness of this separated table of categories shines forth
yet more brightly if, as will soon be done, we separate from the
categories the table of transcendental concepts of reason, which have
a completely different nature and origin than the concepts of the
understanding (so that the table must also have a different form), a
separation that, necessary as it is, has never occurred in any system
of metaphysics, as a result of which these ideas of reason and
concepts of the understanding run confusedly together as if they
belonged to one family, like siblings, an intermingling that also
could never have been avoided in the absence of a separate system of
categories." [Pages 77-78]

IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) IDEA @263 AS PREFACE TO ANY FUTURE
METAPHYSICS: "To make plans is most often a presumptuous, boastful
mental preoccupation, through which one presents the appearance of
creative genius, in that one requires what one cannot himself provide,
censures what one cannot do better, and proposes what one does not
know how to attain oneself – though merely for a sound plan for a
general critique of reason, somewhat more than might be expected would
already have been required if it were not, as is usual, to be merely a
recitation of pious wishes.

But pure reason is such an isolated domain, within itself so
thoroughly connected, that no part of it can be encroached upon
without disturbing all the rest, nor adjusted without having
previously determined for each part its place and its influence on the
others; for, since there is nothing outside of it that could correct
our judgment within it, the validity and use of each part depends on
the relation in which it stands to the others within reason itself,
and, as with the structure of an organized body, the purpose of any
member can be derived only from the complete concept of the whole.
That is why it can be said of such a critique, that it is never
trustworthy unless it is entirely complete down to the least elements
of pure reason, and that in the domain of this faculty one must
determine and settle either all or nothing.

But although a mere plan that might precede the CRITIQUE OF PURE
REASON would be unintelligible, undependable, and useless, it is by
contrast all the more useful if it comes after. For one will thereby
be put in the position to survey the whole, to test one by one the
main points at issue in this science, and to arrange many things in
the exposition better than could be done in the first execution of the
work.

Here then is such a plan subsequent to the completed work, which now
can be laid out according to the analytic method, whereas the work
itself absolutely had to be composed according to the synthetic
method, so that the science might present all of its articulations, as
the structural organization of a quite peculiar faculty of cognition,
in their natural connection." [Pages 12-13]

LET'S GO COMMANDO [[email protected] / [email protected]] @ 1620
HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: "TRUTH WHISPERS AS TEARS IN RAIN:

So, I should lead by your example, and film anyone and everyone, and
post that information publicly on the internet in an attempt to defame
them?

If you really feel that you have shown no disrespect, I think it is
time I finalized my INTERVENTION ORDER against you and take further
legal action on you for the images you posted online, *AND* *THE*
*DEFAMING* *COMMENTS* *YOU* *HAVE* *MA[D]E* *TOWARDS* *ME* *AND*
*OTHERS* *I* *KNOW* *AND* *IN* *PUBLIC*.

Be sure you check your mailbox soon for the court summons."

DOLF @ 1632 HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: "TRUTH WHISPERS AS TEARS IN RAIN:

You are not equitable in such considerations and that is wh[y] I was
prudent to consider your malevolent intentions.

If there are INTERVENTION ORDERS in consideration then the matters are
already before the court and you ought be reliant upon your own
integrity as resources rather than ask questions about the evidence
upon which I am reliant.

It is not lawful for you to stalk me anonymously upon the internet."

LET'S GO COMMANDO [[email protected] / [email protected]] @ 1641
HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: "TRUTH WHISPERS AS TEARS IN RAIN:

Indeed the matters will be before the court soon enough.  And there
are several matters to tend to.

However unlike you - my threats of legal action are not hollow.

It would seem that there is little more to say to each other.

I have made my attempt to try to understand you - and to peacefully
ask for explanation. even in person this is not possible - all you
know how to do is abuse people.

If you had answered your door when I knocked, and calmly explained to
me your requests, I could have easily complied, and we would not be here.

But instead you have chosen to make an enemy of a stranger.

This is a universally bad practice - but from what others in town tell
me of you, it's the way you have always been, and as a result you
leave me no choice but to make this legal.

I am sure you could use some rest - and so I will leave you to it, and
I will say no more - as we both seem to agree that neither cares much
for the other.

Sadly all I can do is *PRAY* *THAT* *YOU* *GET* *THE* *ASSISTANCE*
*YOU* *NEED* *TO* *IMPROVE* *TO* *A* *POINT* *WHERE* *YOU* *CAN*
*REJOIN* *SOCIETY*."

DOLF @ 1656 HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: "My door has a 'NO COLD
CALLERS' notice a fixed to it.  There is no requirement to answer my
door.

Neither have I had a conversation with you which as being reciprocity
and good intentions from [you] or your fascist associates.

Evidence upon which I have published is court evidence and the matter
is before the courts

Please cease stalking me with dishonest, irrational and hostile
intentions as if you are hunting human prey.

This is my final response to you as I desire no association with you
and your obsessive compulsive behaviours towards me."

LET'S GO COMMANDO @ 1823 HOURS ON 10 DECEMBER 2017: "Well, what you
actually did, was rush out of *YOUR* *HOUSE* {ie, *PRO* *DOMO* *SUA*
("for his house")}, yell angrily at me, and film me with your phone,
without consent - when I asked you calmly to repeat yourself, you
yelled even more and then stormed inside.

[continued in next message]

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