Funny how you never practice what you preach.
Just once I would like to see you get the things you reference correct. Or at least show you understand what they're actually saying.
C'mon just do it once, just to show me you're capable of doing it.
Seriously...if a thing you're proposing with a referenced link stops making sense as soon as anybody actually clicks it do you not see how that's not going to help your argument?
So wait a minute are you now telling us that when you were posting about what you were calling your "facts" you actually knew about all the contradictions within the articles you were linking to the point you were trying to make?
Pivot to a non-problem.
Oh hang on...speaking of mistakes I just made one.
It's one I should know better than to make. CBC articles should always be read from the bottom up. The bottom is where they hide the juicy stuff.
Mention second problem because who cares?
See why people get called liars? It's hard not to notice when they lie.
Virtue signalling by writing that I'm lying about things that I didn't write, thereby implying that you are the only one telling the truth.
Do you actually believe I don't think these things through before posting, despite all these years of your being proven wrong?
The point you attempted to make originally appeared to be the border jumping problem was too tiny to care about and the RCMP had it under control. All wrongdoers were being punished or expelled from the country and you had the facts to prove it. Nobody else in the history of facts ever had the facts or the love of facts that you did.
I showed you using your own links how that was all bullshit.
No, it actually wasn't. I was countering Martin, Brah, et. al., when they imply that the RCMP are not patrolling the border and not arresting people who cross illegally. Which is not possible, considering they are making arrests on both sides of the border WRT human smuggling. Which is exactly what those articles show, and which any person can click on the link and read for themselves. Which is exactly what my second sentence said, outright, and what my last sentence concluded. Albeit, sarcastically.
I told you years ago to stop listening to the voices in your head, they aren't your friends.
Now it's true you didn't say exactly that, but if anybody wants to go back to read what you said they'll see it's pretty clear that's what you meant and I make no apologies for proving it false.
So, you assume you have a clue what I'm writing without reading it through, when I'm perfectly capable of writing what I'm writing - and you make no apologies for attributing your own opinion to me and then disproving it? How is that not a repeat of #10 from your anti-leftie mantra?
Seriously, you have gotten so terrible at this debate thing recently, you might as well stop. You can't even form an opinion that lasts an entire thread let alone defend it.