You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Hey Steemit Libertarians, I debated the death penalty with a conservative...
I am sure you have concrete evidence of this happening in the US.
I am sure you have concrete evidence of this happening in the US.
Of what was done to me? Yes. Medical proof of 5 homicides, a marriage they are having to annul, I am Stateless, involve and witness by Canada and Germany on child harms and a marital fraud. You can be sure.
I was told I had to leave Clarkson College first semester of my freshman year, I have likely 300 witnesses to that event alone. This is extremely serious. State will self incriminate and bring all with. Now you can be MORE sure.
What was the incident and was Clarkson College a private or state-funded institution?
Also, the state cannot self-incriminate. Agents of the state, however, can.
I attended both Clarkson (Private) and SUNY Buffalo (Public) as well as K-12 (Public) schools. ALL knew I was Stateless.
State will self incriminate as agents of State also do.
You are wrong again. Impossible for State NOT to self incriminate.
If Clarkson is a private school then they are not the state. Thus, the state did not self-incriminate in that instance.
It is impossible for the state to self-incriminate. But please provide an example of a government incriminating itself or an arbitrary division of land incriminating itself.
Not really.
You look to be wrong on all points now.
Clarkson has State oversight and I also attented SUNY and prior to that K-12.
None of that is needed for them to self incriminate.
I am not wrong on any point and you can keep saying that I am wrong on all points till you are blue and it won't make it true.
So, you admitted that Clarkson is a private school but is still some part of a sinister conspiracy against you that you couch in only the vaguest of terms and don't elucidate upon even though you told me to ask for specifics.
Finally, provide one example of the State--not agents of the state--testifying let along self-incriminating.
The problem is the doctors knew and acted informally with County and likely State agents of law. They lied and acted to obscure forensics related to the crimes, they have mandated reporting laws related to child harms, and then later they as I was an adult did 2 homicides medically. Later one using my wife. The earlier one was done using a knife and ambulance in Wilson NY. They denied treatment to revive me and someone else had to come to do that. Hospital conspired as did local law and fire personnel. I have plenty of proof.
Point is this is murder by State/Law. It can't work.
I have scars all over my body, many from executions done to me as a child, my adult teeth are mostly all ruined I was pandered to a dentist who took sexual pleasure from harming me and other children I assume... so to your point, yes. We have proof.
"I have scars all over my body, many from executions done to me as a child,"
You were executed many times as a child?
This was done by the individual not the state.
The State is involved as are Police. And they are obligated to act. Wrong again you are. State acted on some and on some they allowed others to do it etc...
This does not mean that you were executed.
You market too hard and make too much misguided effort to find fault. Bad faith. Fraud. Try asking direct questions about the events first.
Or how about you tell a complete and coherent story. I shouldn't have to tease the events out of you.
If you had included the events you might have made a stronger case. That is, of course, if you know what the meaning of execute and euthanize are but I don't think you do.
And since you can't define murder or treason properly and offer false equivalency on someone's crime that seems, err, foolish really.
You need to actually read what I have written as I have explicitly defined treason per the US Constitution.
Murder is defined as "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought" by Merriam-Webster.
Finally, I have made no false equivalency's just pointed out issues in your comments. If you disagree then here is the definition of false equivalency, from SkepticalRaptor, " logical fallacy where there appears to be a logical equivalence (usually in quantity and quality of evidence) between two opposing arguments, but when in fact there is one side has substantially higher quality and quantity of evidence. However, there is no equivalence between the two sides of a “debate” when one is supported by evidence, and the other side has no evidence, or evidence of low quality." If you think that I made a false equivalence then support your position by quoting the false equivalence.
I'd say overall your views are of no use to anyone. Given how misguided you are. And how closed minded you are.
It sounds like someone doesn't like having the errors and inconsistencies of their comments pointed out to them. Just FYI, I am not closed minded and I have not offered any evidence to support that false assertion.
My avatar image is of me. It is being misrepresented and sold to others online. It is another form of proof about the child harms done to me as of that age, less than 5 years. It all means something.