Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
The Philippines went to the international court if law... UN... But China doesn't recognize the ruling...
Personally, I think building those islands was brilliant...
Unsinkable aircraft carrier
Birdmam wrote:
Unsinkable aircraft carrier
And because they are man-made they absolutely belong to China...
permafrost wrote:
MMMM, yes, I think it would be good to see the issue brought up to the UN... but would like to understand jurisdiction on the issue.. at least on paper.. How about the world court.. In netherland????
Would be a waste China holds a permanent position in UN security which has primarily maintained international peace and security under UN charter 8 THIS IS A JOKE since China is threatening war and is. I don't see any UN peace and security working here, do you????
bggamers wrote:
Would be a waste China holds a permanent position in UN security which has primarily maintained international peace and security under UN charter 8 THIS IS A JOKE since China is threatening war and is. I don't see any UN peace and security working here, do you????
The US, Russia, the UK, and France all hold seats on the permanent council...
The difference is that China hasn't started any wars...
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
The Philippines went to the international court if law... UN... But China doesn't recognize the ruling...
Personally, I think building those islands was brilliant...
Heck of an accomplishment, like it or not...
LostAggie66
Loc: Corpus Christi, TX (Shire of Seawinds)
RascalRiley wrote:
You are missing a take on reality. It is necessity to separate the factual reporting from the opinion.
Most, all actually, are from a left wing’s perspective. Half the country.
It is wise to know the enemy.
Some fact you would not know about if you do not at least read the RawStory burbs.
PS. Most will piss you off just as much as most of The Federalist blurbs rankle me.
That makes sense RR so I will give RAw Story a second look from now on.
RascalRiley wrote:
You are missing a take on reality. It is necessity to separate the factual reporting from the opinion.
Most, all actually, are from a left wing’s perspective. Half the country.
It is wise to know the enemy.
Some fact you would not know about if you do not at least read the RawStory burbs.
PS. Most will piss you off just as much as most of The Federalist blurbs rankle me.
Where's the factual reporting of Raw Story Rascal? If you have to separate the "wheat from the chaff" to find any t***h in their reporting, then why bother? There are other more CREDITABLE SOURCES to find factual articles that may or may not be slanted toward one side, but they are at least not tabloid-style opinion click-bait journalism.
Justice101 wrote:
Where's the factual reporting of Raw Story Rascal? If you have to separate the "wheat from the chaff" to find any t***h in their reporting, then why bother? There are other more CREDITABLE SOURCES to find factual articles that may or may not be slanted toward one side, but they are at least not tabloid-style opinion click-bait journalism.
There are other more CREDITABLE SOURCESWhat do you consider credible sources?
RascalRiley wrote:
There are other more CREDITABLE SOURCES
What do you consider credible sources?
Well, as you know unbiased news doesn't exist. The key is to read multiple publications from the other side of the fence that are reporting on the same subject that you are questioning and compare them to the sources that you have confidence in for reporting facts as well as opinions.
A few examples of news sources that I find credible are: BBC, C-SPAN, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, ProPublica, Wall Street Journal, [Reuters & AP (for comparisons)], Axios, Newsweek, Politico and USA Today has some good journalists, and the Economist. FAIR writes about media bias and shines a light on the left as well as those on the right. Some others I read are: Real Clear Politics, Newsweek, Forbes, The Hill, Market Watch, Reason, Epoch News, New York Post News, Washington Examiner to name a few.
Here is a good site from Allsides.com which shows you where different sites land on the bias chart and you can take it from there.
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chartThere are many others that I may peruse, depending on what the subject is, and which news sites are reporting on it. You wouldn't find many left-leaning sites that report on detrimental news regarding the Biden admin. would you?
Justice101 wrote:
Well, as you know unbiased news doesn't exist. The key is to read multiple publications from the other side of the fence that are reporting on the same subject that you are questioning and compare them to the sources that you have confidence in for reporting facts as well as opinions.
A few examples of news sources that I find credible are: BBC, C-SPAN, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, ProPublica, Wall Street Journal, [Reuters & AP (for comparisons)], Axios, Newsweek, Politico and USA Today has some good journalists, and the Economist. FAIR writes about media bias and shines a light on the left as well as those on the right. Some others I read are: Real Clear Politics, Newsweek, Forbes, The Hill, Market Watch, Reason, Epoch News, New York Post News, Washington Examiner to name a few.
Here is a good site from Allsides.com which shows you where different sites land on the bias chart and you can take it from there.
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chartThere are many others that I may peruse, depending on what the subject is, and which news sites are reporting on it. You wouldn't find many left-leaning sites that report on detrimental news regarding the Biden admin. would you?
Well, as you know unbiased news doesn't exist. The... (
show quote)
Good list. I read many of them myself.
RascalRiley wrote:
Good list. I read many of them myself.
Then why don't you use some of them other than the junk journalism (Raw Story) that you usually site?
I use right and left-leaning sources (sometimes in the same post) to get my point across or defend my statements.
Good article from RedState
It uses a reliable source (Jonathan Turley) to get their point across.
permafrost wrote:
There is no known deal where the Bidens are concerned. No deals at all. None of the Bidens got 3 million from China
Now we know China invested in a Trump project when they ran out of money, millions and millions . Trump admitted owing the Chinese government owned bank of China over 500 million dollars.
We know H****r B***n served a 5 year term on the board of a Cypr**t company that did oil and gas exploration in the Ukraine and got paid slightly under the going rate for a corporate board member. The service that was provided was sitting on a corporate board and making decisions for the company. H****r B***n was also tapped because he had a record of being a successful venture capitalist, raising money for companies.
Biden has no ties to Russia or China and the only ties to the Ukraine is encouraging Americans to support the Ukrainians in defending themselves. Biden unlike Trump has stood up to both Russia and China as well as North Korea. He isn’t going to grovel to North Korea, or Russia or China as Trump did.
There is no known deal where the Bidens are concer... (
show quote)
Ahahahaha, now I know why you guys loved the Russian Collusion Delusion so much, You all live in delusions!!!!
microphor wrote:
Ahahahaha, now I know why you guys loved the Russian Collusion Delusion so much, You all live in delusions!!!!
Gee, micro, you have to do better than that...
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.