|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: saforrest on Friday, October 29 2004 @ 10:04 PM CDT |
Note that he is not backtracking, and the above really has nothing to do with his earlier statement:
While I agree he's being somewhat slippery in this apology, particularly in his very careful naming of the parties to whom his apology is directed, I do get the impression that he's actually trying to apologize.
Your point about him "not backtracking" notes that his apology is about civilians, while his original point was that no adult Israeli is a civilian. So his point about not supporting killing civilians is irrelevant to the issue.
I see what you're trying to get at here, but I don't think he was trying to weasel out to that degree. He is admitting fault: he said that he "fail[ed] to articulate his beliefs clearly" (about killing civilians), so he claims there was some kind of qualifier or proviso which he didn't include in his original statements.
I do wish he had been less equivocal, but addressing the substance of the offensive words would probably require him to state his true position in some form, which carries with it the risk of causing further offence. From the angle of political pragmatism, I can see why he chose to leave it at that.[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
