The fake baby pretty much ruined it for me.

Fake baby?

(03-09-2015 05:58 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Fake baby?

The baby in the movie was a doll

(03-09-2015 03:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:20 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:04 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 02:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Please tell me he didn't use RT News as his source? Please....

The truth is somewhere in the middle. So while this may be a "controversial source" that I linked to, I find that you can get a decent amount of truth about a situation when you consult multiple sources who each have different agendas who are analyzing the same situation.

RT makes FNC look like NPR.

Well, if there is truth in their stories then it shouldn't matter where the source is from. Now I do not visit that site for news. Once in awhile I've visited Pravda to see their take on a few stories here and there, and when you strip away the bias there are facts that can be taken out of the stories just as well as any other news agency.

So far my favorite sources for news is the WSJ, BBC and NPR. Also, I enjoy Reason and the Cato Institute for articles as well.

Doesn't matter if there is any truth. Every single article that they produce has an anti-American/anti West agenda to it. EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE. That "source" is the main propaganda channel for an authoritarian regime in a country ranked 152 (out of 180) for journalistic freedom.

You clearly haven't read "every single article" on RT, or even skimmed their home page. The "RT is Russian propaganda" bit always cracks me up. The U.S. media might as well be state-owned at this point, but their morals are so low that they whore themselves out to the gov't for free (well, usually for some "favors"). RT has had an anchor criticize Putin on air and keep her job. Cenk Uygur was fired from MSNBC for criticizing Obama too much. "The Land of the Free" barely cracks the top 50 in press freedom, coming in behind the likes of Niger, Botswana, and Burkina Faso, and just ahead of the bastion of liberty Comoros. And let's not forget that complete hacks like Brian Williams and Bill O'Reilly have been the faces of popular news networks here. The mainstream U.S. media has no credibility to anyone who is actually paying attention. So instead of lazily attacking the source, why not address the content? A lot of the OP can be verified. For example, "Contrary to the character of Chris Kyle, the real Chris Kyle did not have the same angst over killing people." Kyle himself wrote "I only wish I had killed more."

(03-10-2015 01:30 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:20 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:04 PM)miko33 Wrote:  The truth is somewhere in the middle. So while this may be a "controversial source" that I linked to, I find that you can get a decent amount of truth about a situation when you consult multiple sources who each have different agendas who are analyzing the same situation.

RT makes FNC look like NPR.

Well, if there is truth in their stories then it shouldn't matter where the source is from. Now I do not visit that site for news. Once in awhile I've visited Pravda to see their take on a few stories here and there, and when you strip away the bias there are facts that can be taken out of the stories just as well as any other news agency.

So far my favorite sources for news is the WSJ, BBC and NPR. Also, I enjoy Reason and the Cato Institute for articles as well.

Doesn't matter if there is any truth. Every single article that they produce has an anti-American/anti West agenda to it. EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE. That "source" is the main propaganda channel for an authoritarian regime in a country ranked 152 (out of 180) for journalistic freedom.

You clearly haven't read "every single article" on RT, or even skimmed their home page. The "RT is Russian propaganda" bit always cracks me up. The U.S. media might as well be state-owned at this point, but their morals are so low that they whore themselves out to the gov't for free (well, usually for some "favors"). RT has had an anchor criticize Putin on air and keep her job. Cenk Uygur was fired from MSNBC for criticizing Obama too much. "The Land of the Free" barely cracks the top 50 in press freedom, coming in behind the likes of Niger, Botswana, and Burkina Faso, and just ahead of the bastion of liberty Comoros. And let's not forget that complete hacks like Brian Williams and Bill O'Reilly have been the faces of popular news networks here. The mainstream U.S. media has no credibility to anyone who is actually paying attention. So instead of lazily attacking the source, why not address the content? A lot of the OP can be verified. For example, "Contrary to the character of Chris Kyle, the real Chris Kyle did not have the same angst over killing people." Kyle himself wrote "I only wish I had killed more."

How many RT journalists have quit because the network lacks journalistic integrity? In fact how many have done so while making an on-air statement blasting the credibility of the network? I lost track of how many times that has happened. (3 was my last count)

To legitimatize RT in anyway is a joke. Do we really need to bring up their MH17 reporting?