Quote:
Originally Posted by f0ca1
You should look up the word "slander" and it's your argument that's trying to associate them with my critique of the content.
|
No it isn't, it's by default. You can't criticize the content of the Times without criticizing the authors. Since the articles do not write themselves.
Quote:
|
I'd prefer to focus, rather than engage this obsfucation.
|
In other words, you can not demonstrate that they are biased. Which is of course what is required for their works to be biased as you claimed. Unless you are making the obscure claim that they are unbiased writers who write biased articles.
Quote:
Which is why I went on to prove that....
That's why I provided you with a quote from the cult leader.
|
If a quote from a cult leader proved anything, alas it does not.
Quote:
|
Just because you ignore what's presented, doesn't mean it wasn't presented.
|
What you presented proved nothing.
Quote:
Look, if you're happy to read a rag that is operated as part of a cult's propoganda machine, that's fine.
To each their own...
But, you should at least understand that's what it is.
|
I don't read it actually, but if you read Newsweek or other left wing rags the difference is splitting hairs.