At least I can admit my mistake.
I admit mistakes all the time. I also have teh fortitude to actually apologize for making them,
especialy if they involve an accusation.
First you argued that it was dissperportionate force to use a firearm to stop rock throwers and we gave you the case where it was deemed lawful.
False. My initial post was:
The Mexicans were right to prevent armed foreigners, who had already shot and killed a Mexican national on Mexican soil, from crossing their border.
They would have been right to shoot them if they had pressed the issue. In fact, since the US border patrol actually shot someone who was on the Mexican side of the border that was not armed with any type of legitimate weapon, they need to be prosecuted. That is an act of war.
As you can see, the argument involved them being on the Mexican side of the border from the very start. I
don't consider rocks thrown at a distance of greater than 20 feet to be a legitimate weapon to warrant lethal force. But I do allow for the caveat that Lethal force
is warranted if the perosn is on the US side of the border, due to the fact that this is well-within the Border Guards jurisdiction.
The clarification about being able to shoot over the border came here (which is the third of fourth post by me in that thread):
The border guard shot a Mexican National on Mexican soil. It's out of his jurisdiction. He is not authorized to do that unless his life is truly in danger, which it wasn't. If they were shooting, then he would have been authorized to defend himself with lethal force.
Clearly I was never arguing anything but what I have said I was arguing the whole time. Nothing has changed in my stance.
Then you lied you ever said that and added the caviat that it also had to be throwing rocks from the other side of the border and Mr V proved that was just as laughably wrong.
As you can see, the only person lying is you. You are lying about understanding my argument, and you are lying in how you are portraying that argument. Nothing I have said has been proven wrong.
You were not only dead wrong, you were laughably dead wrong and you still can't admit it despite the evidnce being right in front of you. Goes in spades with your lack of character.
Me admitting errror just last week:
The more I've thought about it, the more I'm seeing your position. The fact that she's lumping every Israeli Jew into the "GTFO" category is the key to it being racist.
Jews have always been present in the region, well before the creation of the Israeli state.
When someone actually
proves me wrong, I am totally willing to admit error. I would even be willing to wager that I have done this far mroe often than you have.
My contention is that your admission of error was merely a prevetantaive measure to keep me form pointing out the error, which you could do nothing to dodge. You still haven't admitted the error that exists in the attacks on my credibility. That can only be admitted through an apology directly tro me for your unfounded accusations.
By teh way, on the "character" accusation, allow me to add into evidence an
apology that I have offered to others due to an error made by me:
Allow me to add my apologies to anyone who was offended by my previous statements, which essentially amounted to a defense of Helen Thomas' comments. In retrospect, I see that her comments were truly reprehensible.
I should have been more sensitive to how this is an attack on all Israeli Jews, and in retrospect I feel terrible for having defended her comments in any way.
My sincerest apologies to all who were affected.
As I thought about my error in that thread, it occured to me that it might have caused offense to otehrs. I added the apology as an additional aspect due to the fact that I felt guilty over the offense that my error may have caused. It may not have been absolutey necessary in that case, for I made no accusations, but I offered it anyway because I felt it was the right thing to do in that case.
What I did
not do was compound the error by repeating it. i.e. Your accusations against me earlier for having "deleted" posts was as unfounded as your accusations now about my character. I do not
expect you to have the character to apologize for either of these accusations, but I would be pelasently surprised if you
did display that degree of character.
