--------

Do you get this logic?

Under the premise, understanding of logic that prominently insinuates Steves accusations are ENTIRELY false,

and its ever repeating partial confessions cannot be bought as an excuse to alleviate him from capital punishment.

 

It only amplifies it.

As admission of attempted destruction.

 

And as the intent to harm proceeds. This is not speculative.

It is deterministic from your observation and experience.

 

 

 

Unless it is full confession, and a statement of never to harm again follow,

It's current partial confession only determingly works as concrete evidence and reason to solidify his capital punishment.

 

This is logic.

Somehow you folks went to the other direction permitting further harm

despite the overwheming evidence and repeating diabolical offense of same actions.

It only exploits the premise of my statement, stating few is allowed as theft, mass theft is murder, mayhem, destruction.

When in fact, it just admitted to mass as murder, mayhem, destuction.

It just admitted to its deeds and you see that as a portal for lenience?

As it perpetuates harm despite the implications of evidence that states its complete utter falsehood?

 

It admitted. Then that is what it must be charged for. That zero-sum game of destruction.

Few ambiguity? Two deeds in contrast are different things. Theft vs destruction.

And it admitted to this destruction. As its intent to perpetuate harm proceeds even under impliations and evidence that states its entire falsehood.

it only solidifies its capital punishment.

"I don't want to set the world on fire."

The victim has a say, not entirely yourselves at this point.

I am making the decision.

I will not tolerate repeating offense.

And its finally, finality, admission to attempted destruction while capital punishment was insinuated last several years must come into effect as solidified evidence.

 

It constantly places me in the danger of incrimination as it frames.

Whether that is incarceration or death penalty, it doesn't matter.

it is on pursuit of harm in devastating ways as people questions my legacy.

If it confessed partially again, judging by the relays of "The devil admittted what was done to you" while "i am sailing" still proceeds, it must be majority of the ideas it is confessing to while framing me for several ideas that can fuck up the rest of the ideas i had following by the principles if it is aiming for cubes. i hope you see that intent.

and it just may go for more. whatever it sees profitable.

and that will grow again, as if this confession in majority was nothing.

it is not specific either is it? admitting what was stolen and what was not?

and it just keeps on throwing in the framing as it leaves it ambiguous?

that is deliberate.

Understand its INTENT. You folks are exploiting the repeating insinuations of capital punishments to suddenly alleviate it of capital punishment,

and insane to let it go of charges. Then YOU must be incriminated for exploitation of the law.

 

Bunch of evil fucks creating a conspiracy around a blind guy and retracting your statements at the moment of an opportunity that is determined by your own personal perspective. or so you think it is.

it is not.

fuck.

it just admitted.

and it continues harm.

and your excuse is you front politics instead justice?

then you are exploiting.

then this is your evil.

 

 

now if that demon confession relay is elon musk,

still it remains the same, pursuit of harm under impossibility of the mass theft,

therefore mass framing and consequences, destruction.

capital punishment, as insinuated before, and must hold true,

is only fair either way. if confession did happen, that is partial,

then it only solidifies further, as it proceeds with harm.

 

 

did these people even ask what exactly was stolen and what was not,

if there was this partial confession of the majority, did they confirm or

left it ambiguous partially knowing it will exploit that ambiguity?

how many times is this and that intent can't be seen?

then is that not secretly hoping for its fucking up my life?

 

 

i don't see with my eyes. as naive and cliche as it may sound i see with the heart.

if something seems exploitative, then rest of the exploitation is expected with your INTENT.

and the rest of you must see through that. i can't possibly guess at this unless that intent is true.

 

"flash vs the justice league" came up often. so now knowing the obvious, crawl back on

their forced reasoning to help my attackers. intent would be clear.

 

i should have to fight to the bone. when the logic is obvious.

i am figting corruption, exploitation. even with the authorities.