Politics

[LouBarlow]

Always right is a completely subjective statement though. Much like cherry-picking journalists who all conform to your own preconceived ideas. There are no impartial journalists, especially those who have been invited to Russia during a conflict. I wonder why that always seems to happen to these ‘impartial’ journalists. Almost as if they have an agenda too.

It is why threads like these are pointless, and little interest has been shown in this one. People have their own ideas that they will not shift on no matter what information the other ‘side’ offers up.

[Walter sobchak]

Always right is a completely subjective statement though. Much like cherry-picking journalists who all conform to your own preconceived ideas. There are no impartial journalists, especially those who have been invited to Russia during a conflict. I wonder why that always seems to happen to these ‘impartial’ journalists. Almost as if they have an agenda too.

Which conflicts that I’ve listed have they been wrong about??

It is why threads like these are pointless, and little interest has been shown in this one. People have their own ideas that they will not shift on no matter what information the other ‘side’ offers up.

I think you’ll find that there’s plenty of people interested in discussing this topic as well as others but they get sick and tired of being labelled either a putin puppet or a racisit or anti-Semitic etc.

[Tman]

Probably "little interest" because it's another Groundhog Day, and started by the same poster who dangled the little fish last time in an effort to get other posters to argue with him.
This thread has been kicked to death recently on here, and even the sub-text "my news source is better than your news source" is as before.
Move on Walt, clearly not that many are interested in your pro-Russian views any more.

[Walter sobchak]

Probably "little interest" because it's another Groundhog Day, and started by the same poster who dangled the little fish last time in an effort to get other posters to argue with him.
This thread has been kicked to death recently on here, and even the sub-text "my news source is better than your news source" is as before.
Move on Walt, clearly not that many are interested in your pro-Russian views any more.

You sound like you’d fit right in in Russia trying to close down and censor debating politics.

Nobody’s forcing you to comment on here mate.

[Walter sobchak]

Can’t wait to discuss the dinghy arrivals

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Oh dear, I’m guessing you get your news from the western corporate msm outlets.

You wanted to discuss politics, but then you demeaned someone because of their news source. That's not a political discussion; that's character assassination, which I warned you about in my previous reply.

In the canteen, discussions are welcome as long as they follow the rules of RoyalMailChat. This means no bullying, no name-calling, and a commitment to respectful dialogue. Remember the rule of thumb: focus on addressing the content of the arguments made by those you disagree with, rather than attacking the individuals themselves.

So if this thread is closed, it's because you can't follow the rules. Last chance, discuss respectfully, do not attack the character of the people who have a different position from you.

You sound like you’d fit right in in Russia trying to close down and censor debating politics.

He was not censoring debate or closing it down; he was questioning the benefit of you continuing down this line, and addressing your attempt to close down someone else's argument by belittling them for their source of news.

This thread did not go very well, did it.

[Walter sobchak]

Oh dear, I’m guessing you get your news from the western corporate msm outlets.

You wanted to discuss politics, but then you demeaned someone because of their news source. That's not a political discussion; that's character assassination, which I warned you about in my previous reply.

He admitted in a later post that he gets most of his news from the msm media. lol

In the canteen, discussions are welcome as long as they follow the rules of RoyalMailChat. This means no bullying, no name-calling, and a commitment to respectful dialogue. Remember the rule of thumb: focus on addressing the content of the arguments made by those you disagree with, rather than attacking the individuals themselves.

So if this thread is closed, it's because you can't follow the rules. Last chance, discuss respectfully, do not attack the character of the people who have a different position from you.

And calling people Russian stooges and pro-Russian is what exactly??

You sound like you’d fit right in in Russia trying to close down and censor debating politics.

He was not censoring debate or closing it down; he was questioning the benefit of you continuing down this line, and addressing your attempt to close down someone else's argument by belittling them for their source of news.

Again calling someone pro-Russian and telling them to move on is what exactly?

This thread did not go very well, did it.

It’s a typical robust political discussion that you’d experience everywhere in the UK. Don’t be so sensitive mate.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

This is a clear case of whataboutism.

You attacked his character based on his choice of news source, and he responded in the same manner. Yet, you insist that you weren't the one who started it. :

The thread was locked because, even in your response to me, you resorted to attacking my character.

While it’s true that robust political discussions take place everywhere, this forum has strict rules that must be followed. You violated those rules despite my initial post. If you cannot adhere to the guidelines, threads will be locked, and you may be warned. If you dislike our rules, you are free to leave. If you choose to stay, you must follow the rules.