The "hesitancy" you noticed was your own subjective perception of what she was saying.
Correct and it's the same for every poster here , shock horror , including yourself. Serenity and myself , recall , are the only posters here thus far that have openly admitted to being influenced by their life experiences , which is the admittance of their " subjective perceptions ". If you had any humility yourself you would be able to admit to your own " subjective perceptions " . That you have not done so thus far or maybe just cannot due to your own personal traits/ type might suggest the same egomaniacal personality trait you have accused me of possessing in a attempted case of projection .
That you falsely accused me of " saying that if someone disagrees with your position, or does not support it wholeheartedly, it must mean they are being censored or are scared to present their "real" position. " was a classic case of deliberate misrepresentation. That you still claim to be " correct " about it , despite the pathetic attempt at a meaningless qualification , again shows that it is you that has shown the very behaviour you have accused me of displaying
In the above you are not only completely wrong but also show the belief that your assumption is an undeniable fact. I take it introspection isn't your strong point?
You did not consider the possibility that perhaps her position had changed, or that her position was now less in line with the position that you hold.
Neither her view IIRC had changed nor was " less in line " with my own wrt cease fire support, so there was no positional change to " consider " All well documented here so you just appear to be trying to put some false meat on your false bones
This lack of consideration of this possibility, and your immediacy at going to the "censoring" option goes directly to what I claimed. You are making an assumption about someone's motivations BECAUSE they are not lock step in line with your position, or because they no longer seem to be as such.
There was no " lack of consideration " as detailed above. And I never claimed that my view was in any way definitive or unquestionable like you are trying so hard to convey as an undeniable truth ( get over yourself man ) I said " it seems ". As in it seems to me that it could or might be down to a self censoring or outside factor such as the risk of accusation/investigation for hate crimes. I also gave the option that they just might not want to be associated with agreeing with something I said.
So no , the charge that I had a fixed and definitive view of why someone else responded or decided not to respond to something is false. Just like the rest of you own subjective opinions have been formed on falsehoods you're just too up yourself to admit to it imo
Of course it had to do with disagreeing... or at the very least, not holding the same positions as you, or holding the positions that you believe she has. I don't need to check back. I already did and am quite aware that I am correct with my position on this. You made an assumption because someone you believed was "on your side" seemed to be wavering. Your explanation was censorship, rather than considering other possibilities. That, as I said, presents you as believing your positions are facts, and denying them means one is either wrong or being censored.
The pathetic qualifier of " . or at the very least, not holding the same positions as you " is junk. You claimed I think people that disagree with me are being censored or are scared " remember ? The truth was we didn't disagree on support for a cease fire so the charge on that is plainly false
We didn't even disagree on her point made on the terror tunnels question , so once again your claims are false
Your "explanations" did not thing of the sort. You have done nothing to disprove my claim. You made an assumption, not based on any evidence whatsoever, but based on your own perceptions of what might cause one to either alter their position or disagree with you.
Your claims are junk and have been proven to be junk. That you persist with them shows to me a complete lack of the ability to admit when you are wrong , Which is in keeping with the very personality trait to have tried , and failed , to hoist onto me
