Thanks for being both respectful and still candid on your views. That's a great start, and I hope I can be as respectful in reply ( I may find it hard!).

"evil is flourishing because we are too "good" to do what MUST be done."

Ahem. This is EXACTLY the justification that the C_A and other such operations used to perpetrate their worst actions and infiltrate into the worst areas of evil, eventually becoming indistinguishable from the 'evil' they asserted they were 'protecting' against.

I'd also like to point to the idea that your argument is repleat with emotive justifications:

"too good" ... as if there is actually something such as being 'too good'!? Either good is good, or it isn't. The idea that being good is contradictory to being responsible or effective doesn't wash with me, personally.

'We are busy having debates about "what's prim & proper and respecting pronouns" ... I'm not having those debates. Who are you debating with?

Reductive: "if I proposed a law making it legal to kill child molesters or serial rapists; does that make me evil?"

You're dragging child molesters and serial rapists into the discussion is about as classic a case of hyperbole as one could find.

It seems like the case you are attempting to make is that the prosecutors in this case as so evil and corrupt that regardless of their actions they should just be executed and removed. What they are actually doing (petitioning a judge in a legal action) doesn't come into it. Or if it does, they are basically the same as "child molesters or serial rapists" so execute them anyway.

Also, (paraphrasing here) "MY execution of them would be perfectly justified! Not murder! It's justified killing, the way the bible distinguishes between these two! For proposing that the judge disallow certain evidence!!!"

The temptation to see the playing field purely in terms of black and white, and to imagine oneself as being either the embodiment of, or representing, the 'white', thus justifying any and every viewpoint one has, well, I think most of us know where that temptation leads. Hollywood likes to highlight the notion of the righteous vigilante, but that's fantasy, and in reality, it doesn't go well.

In conclusion, I'm just that saying declaring that prosecutors should be executed *for petitioning something of a judge" is ludicrous, and is contradictory to the foundations of law and order that everyone that is evil in the deep State is opposed to:

DS: Action like X is justified because they are our enemy

Law and Order: action like X is justified by transcendent moral principles, which we strive to codify in our actual laws.

All of Western common law - one codification of which is the US constitution - is grounded in the premise that human beings cannot simply make laws because they want it, but that enacted law has to reflect transcendental laws established by the Creator.

If you've dug at all in to the law and order and the war currently being waged around the world between those who are using legal but not lawful means to destroy their enemy and opponents (aka the DS, the Cabal, the numerous NWO organizations and their captive governments), then you'll get the point that making something law doesn't necessarily make it right or lawful.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your reasoning. Maybe those who read the comments (although the thread is now dead) can make up their own mind whose reasoning here makes the most sense.