998: MS&R - 17

  Even without the support of my citations or even any external witness, how much saying that thing they said about me does by itself reveal if weighed in and taken properly? Because even without those, being confused about my story despite knowing this is like owning blocks of gold but living homeless. First, how many other things can suggest such an inclination to erase someone from existence? And its being a reaction to THIS POST can tell us even more. I referred to their being against my existence and they responded to that by going at my existence rather than what I am saying, case in point. Their reaction could have been seen as supportive to the accusation had they shared only the issue of targeting my existence. But here we also have the uncalled for direct going to such intensity. This makes the thought that there is an already deeply rooted thing in them toward that direction unavoidable. And although it could not disguise the connection to that post, the time between the posting of that post and them taking that reaction was more than enough to show premeditation rather than a sudden burst of emotion. It also seems that later they sought to support their position with material targeting the issue of me being good or bad person. That could have had a bigger support for them had they started with it. But ironically having favored to go the earlier path first flips that to my side in the bigger picture by as much as that material have weight toward that sought later direction in responding to me. What I have just referred to as "my side" is specifically about the issue of targeting my existence. And if we put that at the root as the big picture shows it then the other bad things said about me would be greatly countered or cancelled. In fact, even whatever positive thing done by them would itself also add to my argument because it makes it even harder to see and realize the war on my existence. And what a war on existence could people showing such desperation, shamelessness and readiness for betrayal do to that same target as he was left in their hands from point zero. Add to that the freedom from morality that allows someone to cite such a thing for his side even though he should be the first to be in trouble because of the potential causation through that targeting to the existence of that target and what that implies. Moreover, the biggest probability here is that the knowledge of what they said about me  originated from an internal source after I left them (Actually I can make much better support for that if I were to not excluding the dependence on my own citing here) That seems to strongly suggest that they knew about the occurring of a thing that is by that much indicative of the internal destruction of the target but still favored to continue on their original path against the existence of that target. This is another thing showing the intensity and dedication on fighting and refusing my existence.    

It is amazing how much information and answers are condensed into that they said that thing about me and how much that information can focus the bad on them and in turn undo even the insult it itself has toward me at its face value. That of course assuming saying that thing they said about me count on them the same way it could have counted on anybody else saying such a thing. But as much as they can show characters that make one struggle in taking them like that then this struggle itself adds to myside because of what it suggests about the power of deception that targeted me through the way they did.