And that sounds like a rationalization to allow harm to come to others, eg, I don't know the facts - so it is not my concern.That is a straw man fallacy.
First they came for the Armenians...That's an "Appeal to Consequences" fallacy.
You're human - you can assign a factual context to the actions of the state. That's a non sequitur fallacy and a meaningless slogan ;-)
The state works for me - the state works for you - We don't work for it. America is not a coral. America, as New Zealand, is a "home".I assume you're referring to NZ's corruption ranking in the latest international corruption survey? OK, so NZ is apparently least corrupt in the world. That's how we like it... but how is it relevant here? If you're trying to say people in NZ have no idea about corruption, I'd suggest the opposite is true - that ranking didn't just appear by chance. And it *still* doesn't prove that the coroner lied in this case.
"... They ne'er cared for us
yet: suffer us to famish, and their store-houses
crammed with grain; make edicts for usury, to
support usurers; repeal daily any wholesome act
established against the rich, and provide more
piercing statutes daily, to chain up and restrain
the poor. If the wars eat us not up, they will; and
there's all the love they bear us."
-- Shakespeare: Coriolanus, Act 1, scene 1
