How To Use Parse Syntax Grammar To Correct Laws

Parse Syntax Grammar to correct Laws empowers you to identify fraudulent grammar, prove the fraud, and protect your family. Using this technology for any Laws, Statutes, Acts, Rules and Regulations, and Codes is empowering.

As an example of how to use Parse Syntax Grammar, here’s “An Act 1953” when the [ab]Originee flag is recognised by Queen Elizabeth in Australia.

AN ACT 1953

TO DECLARE A CERTAIN FLAG TO BE THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL FLAG.

TO MAKE OTHER PROVISION WITH RESPECT TO FLAGS

Now as you know:

AN = an article …

For an Act…

AN always appears in front of a word that starts with a vowel.

But because they left out “With an act… or … For an act or by an act

They didn’t use the prepositional phrase.

So “AN” now becomes an adverb, not an article in front of the word “ACT”, that means no contract…Because it’s a vowel and two consonants.

Next she says: “TO DECLARE…”

Now DE = No, and CLAR = To speak, and “TO” is also a future tense adverb, making DECLARE a “future tense no-speak”.

So she says nothing…

A CERTAIN FLAG now becomes undefined as to what flag she’s referring to, making “CERTAIN FLAG” an adjective-pronoun, calling the FLAG a “No-No”

TO = an adverb in future time, modifying the BE condition of now time.

But now BE is used as a verb, which is an illusion.

Then THE is an adverb making AUSTRALIA to be “a coloring national flag”, so therefore it’s another adjective-adjective-pronoun.

TO^1.9 DECLARE² A¹ CERTAIN³ FLAG⁴ TO^1.9 BE²

THE¹ AUSTRALIAN³ NATIONAL³ FLAG⁴.

TO = an adverb in future time, which has no Now-Time jurisdiction, which means you shall never…
MAKE = a verb instead of a “condition of state”

OTHER is a vowel and two consonants, = no-contract word, an adverb, which makes
PROVISION = PRO = No; VIS = Sight; ION = Contract,

Which means you cannot see the flag, and it’s also used as coloring of (pronoun) flag

Dangling Participle Verbs

TO^1.9 MAKE² OTHER¹ PROVISION²

WITH = adverb
RESPECT = No-Spectre , comes from “phantom”

So if you have “no phantom condition” in future time,

TO = adverb
FLAGS = a dangling participle verb.

WITH¹ RESPECT² TO^1.9 FLAGS^{2 dpv}

You can’t end the sentence with a verb

Yet Queen Elizabeth ends this sentence with a dangling participle verb, and she signs it

Are there any nouns on the page? Or any facts on the page?

Well the answer is NO. There are no prepositional phrases, so there’s no condition of lodial ownership.

And she’s given no Now-Time jurisdiction to anything, so every word has been a condition of future or negative.

So there is absolutely no condition or certification for a Now-Time [ab]Originee flag.

Yet since 1953 for the past 50 years they have pretended to treat the flag as being a national Australian flag

But this is the type of information…does Queen Elizabeth have jurisdiction in Australia.

Well, she claims to be your postmaster. But has the Postal Treaty ever been written with the correct sentence structure communication syntax?

The answer is No

So therefore Queen Elizabeth, as Postmaster, has no treaty whatsoever… Or trust, or contract with the entire country of Australia. She also has no standing in Australia because she’s not an [ab]Originee.

Therefore she’s an illusion that has come here pretending to be something that isn’t because there’s no contract.

And furthermore, when you do the violation on language to fool the people, you’ve lied…As pretending to be a public figure, and then telling lies to the people.

This is perjury.

Which is a criminal act in every language.

Parse Syntax Grammar Declaration

When you use the word declaration you’re saying

“No-Spoken-Contract”

And the throughout the history of mankind, war has always been an issue of trespass and mind control

If I don’t control your mind, I put a bullet or an arrow in it

So that’s basically the fundamental anything that is acquired through war

It’s called “AILING”, which means corruption from the beginning.

Parse Syntax Grammar: Vowel + 2 Consonants

When somebody says; “Show me the law that says a Vowel Plus Two Consonants means ‘No Contract’…”

Well, look up every word in English language and it’ll prove itself. It isn’t where there’s a written law to that effect, it’s just that the word “NO” is a negative condition of state.

Words like “With-Out”, “Under”, UN-, DE-, or AB-; all your prefixes are all negative conditions of state.

If you have anything that is negative you can’t create it, because it’s a negative contract. So if you put the word “NO” in front of any word that’s a fact… then why would you put “NO” in front of a fact?

Parse Syntax Grammar to correct Laws empowers you to identify fraudulent grammar, prove the fraud, and protect your family.