Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT; mjaneangels@aolcom
I hope this was helpful. Remember this next time some other Freeper insists that I don’t know the facts.

I will insist that you misrepresent the facts. You said that Aldrete "limped away." But, what you cite as facts to support your argument relate to a period of time, some minutes later, when Aldrete had first disappeared into the brush, then made his way across the Rio Grande, and was finally spotted a few hundred feet away in a field in Mexico.

Shameless.

111 posted on 11/25/2007 9:54:16 PM PST by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]


To: calcowgirl; mjaneangels@aolcom
You would be better to read the thread before commenting. Then maybe you wouldn't waste your condescending tone where it is inappropriate and makes you look foolish.

Let me refresh your memory in case you can't go back and read the whole conversation.

We were discussing whether Davila's injuries could require expensive medical treatment (something I'm pretty sure you wouldn't disagree with, at least not while I'm around). aneangels@aolcom said:

One injury to his backside and he still got away, apparently without limping or being slowed down at all. That is not the definition of serious.

If you are honest, you will admit that the above statement is false. I, knowing it to be false, responded in kind to the post, using the SAME WORDS:

Testimony is that he limped away, and was slowed down. He was seen being helped into a car on the other side of the border.

Nowhere did I say "immediately after being shot", and in fact it's clear my statement covered the remaining time of the event as I specifically mention his getting into a car in Mexico.

And the testimony said exactly what I claimed it said, that he was seen limping away, and that he was going slow (walking, not running).

BTW, I was not making an argument. I was simply stating the facts of the testimony, to correct an incorrect statement by another person.

It's a shame that quoting testimony is considered misleading, but claiming with no evidence that a border agent is a criminal involved in the drug trade is considered acceptable.

153 posted on 11/26/2007 5:25:48 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson