wonderpup Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Whats that got to do with the post you quoted? Thats called changing the subject when flaws are pointed out in an argument. The politicians do it better. I will respond in kind, Is it ok to set fire to people on a tuesday afternoon? Is that what you're saying? Your argument is that this is an straight reporting of a factual news story with no hidden motives- so I was asking you, on that basis, how do you feel about the inclusion of the kids in the story- and I expected you to say it was fine on the basis that the report had no harmful intent. The fact that you chose to evade the question instead strongly indicates that you clearly recognize that the story does in fact have an agenda, one that is clearly harmful to the interests of the children involved. So you do understand that this story is more than a neutral reporting of events- you simply choose to pretend otherwise. It's cute, but not convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybernoid Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.