My question is simple.
To be threatened or have your family threatened, someone must issue a threat.
Besides the "white hat" hacker, who issued a threat to Kafka? Screenshots?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
My question is simple.
To be threatened or have your family threatened, someone must issue a threat.
Besides the "white hat" hacker, who issued a threat to Kafka? Screenshots?
Sorry, I’ve been busy and wasn’t able to respond to your comment here.
In your comment, you acknowledge that KafkA was threatened. You state that he was threatened by a “white hat” hacker.
Your question then states, who else threatened you? Did the screenshots threaten you?
You seem to take issue with the word threaten. Indeed, in the screenshots that KafkA provides, and in the scenario that he shares with us, there do not appear to be any verbal and/or direct threats made to him.
Another meaning of the word threat, however, is to cause harm to someone or something. What KafkA has described is a plan to do him (and his family) harm.
I concur with you that nobody said to Kafka, I will cause you physical harm. I will ruin your life or anything else that could be considered what I will refer to as a direct threat. Kafka seems to agree with this as well.
It does appear to me, though, that a plan was being developed to do harm to Kafka and his family, which could also be stated as a plan to threaten Kafka and his family.
Do you agree with this, or disagree?
There is a difference in feeling threatened than actually being threatened.
I'll ask you more directly. Do you confirm that a plan was being developed to do harm to Kafka? Or do you find the evidence inconclusive?
I agree. There is a difference. Sometimes you can misinterpret things and feel threatened, when in actuality, you aren’t being threatened. Do you not see the story and evidence being displayed by Kafka as proof that someone wanted a cyber attack/sabotage conducted on him?
A plan was set in motion, as documented by extensive evidence, to destroy my life via a cyber attack. This plan was already put in motion. Thus, the plan set in motion was an active threat to my safety, and that of my family.
Would you agree that something can threaten you, without being a direct verbal threat (as was issued via Famer to Tatiana Moroz at the behest of Adam)?
For example, if I plan to hack your bank account or bug your car, and the plan is in motion, is not said plan a threat to your security and safety?
Do you understand?
So no one issued you a threat verbally or written? You're only going off of someone's personal and private communication without context?
As I stated prior, there is a mountain of context: metadata-analyzable photos, phone numbers, video, and a PayPal address. Please see previous documented threats and manipulation sent from Adam by Ben, verified directly by Farmer, as well. One to Tatiana Moroz, and one putting political pressure on the 9-year-old son of the treasurer, Angela Owens.
Plus the whole conversational context in the video.
Is this, to your thinking, a lack of context?
So no one issued you a threat verbally or written?
If you truly are unable to grok the reality that something can threaten, without a directly issued verbal threat, I cannot help you, and will not insult myself by continuing the debate. Lol.
But I will answer.
Is this what you mean?
Adam & Ben - “HEY GRAHAM! WE ARE GOING TO RUIN YOUR LIFE! JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW!”
⬆️ Did this happen? No.
Now, if your “argument” is that in absence of an explicit, direct threat, such as the silly example above, no evil, and/or threatening deeds are ever or ever can be carried out, which threaten people’s lives, then I honesty do not know what to tell you.
This is...basic reality. Your life can be threatened by a murder plot without you knowing it, no? A doxxing plot without you knowing it, no?
Yes, or no?
Well, I’ve spent a lot of time on this, and you’ve ceased replying, only to write(?)/resteem another post by another account saying the same things and full of misinformation.