[robertpaulsen]

"This from the guy who thinks that students hawking a few pills in an upscale high school are going to get in a gun battle with undercover cops."

Missed this part?

" (Principal) McCrackin, who has two children at the school, said the problem mostly stems from students who transferred into the school this year from out of state.

Going to? I never said that. Might have? Sure. The Friday before the raid, one student threatened another with a weapon.

Oops. You probably missed that, also.

[Long Cut]

No, you've repeated it enough. Was the student expelled? Was the incident drug-related, or did you manufacture that along with the rest of your fantasy?

And how in the WORLD do you come to the conclusion that a handful of students breaking the law warrants the risk of the lives of, and the terrorization of, ALL of them?

Get a clue...those dogs could easily have decided to take a bite out of an innocent student, or some itchy-fingered cop might have ventilated one. As it was, they probably destroyed any trust the students might have had in their Constitutional liberties being protected.

You'd have probably still said it was "worth it".

[Long Cut]

RP's post # 18 has this: " After school ended Friday, one student threatened another and claimed to have a weapon." Note, no weapon was found, and the type unspecified.

Next we have RP's post #51, in which he states, "A student threatened another with a weapon".

He repeats this again in the post I'm pinging to now: "The Friday before the raid, one student threatened another with a weapon." Note again, no relationship to any "drug gangs" is specified, even in his own article.

So, RP, now that we've caught you in a lie, or at the very least a deliberate misstatement of the facts with a bit of spin on the backside, anything ELSE you should be retracting?