Canadian new PM

[Manonthestreet]

Didn't know they were such degenerates to elect a guy who parades his in this manner.

Creepy 'fetish' photo of Canada’s new PM just turned them into a global laughingstock… - Revolver News

This is stomach-turning.

revolver.news

 

[Manonthestreet]

Probably wouldn't take long to take their country from em and straighten it out

 

[Dragonlady]

Didn't know they were such degenerates to elect a guy who parades his in this manner.

Creepy 'fetish' photo of Canada’s new PM just turned them into a global laughingstock… - Revolver News

This is stomach-turning.

revolver.news

You need to find better sources, moron: Right wing conspiracy theory websites are a joke, just like your post.

• Overall, we rate Revolver.News right biased and Questionable based on poor sourcing techniques and a complete lack of transparency.

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

Revolver.News - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Cassandro]

You need to find better sources, moron: Right wing conspiracy theory websites are a joke, just like your post.

• Overall, we rate Revolver.News right biased and Questionable based on poor sourcing techniques and a complete lack of transparency.

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

Revolver.News - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

As usual, you attack the source rather than dispute the facts. Is this an argumentative tactic, or are you so emotionally blinded as to be unable to distinguish them?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Didn't know they were such degenerates to elect a guy who parades his in this manner.

Creepy 'fetish' photo of Canada’s new PM just turned them into a global laughingstock… - Revolver News

This is stomach-turning.

revolver.news

That just looks fake, The guy in the second photo has a neckbeard!

I didn't see the article where he admitted that was his photo, or did I miss it?

 

[Dragonlady]

As usual, you attack the source rather than dispute the facts. Is this an argumentative tactic, or are you so emotionally blinded as to be unable to distinguish them?

I disputed the facts as posted. The Canadian PM expressed NO SUPPORT whatsoever for Hamas and clearly stated they can have no part in any new Palestinian government.

I quoted the section of his PRESS RELEASE which state his positions on my Post and I linked to the Canadian Government Website where our position is posted in full.

But nice try, asshole.

 

[Cassandro]

I disputed the facts as posted. The Canadian PM expressed NO SUPPORT whatsoever for Hamas and clearly stated they can have no part in any new Palestinian government.

I quoted the section of his PRESS RELEASE which state his positions on my Post and I linked to the Canadian Government Website where our position is posted in full.

But nice try, asshole.

Please identify "the facts" that you claim to be disputing. A direct quotation would be helpful.

You didn't "quote" anything in your post.

You're welcome

 

[Dragonlady]

Please identify "the facts" that you claim to be disputing. A direct quotation would be helpful.

You didn't "quote" anything in your post.

You're welcome

I quote the poster I was refuting in the post I described. He claimed both the PM and I have endorsed and fully support Hamas. I proved he was lying. Go to my post, and quite making an ass of yourself.

 

[MayorQuimby]

You need to find better sources, moron: Right wing conspiracy theory websites are a joke, just like your post.

• Overall, we rate Revolver.News right biased and Questionable based on poor sourcing techniques and a complete lack of transparency.

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

Revolver.News - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

I am not defending "right wing conspiracy theory websites", but have you thought about the credibility, trustworthiness, and objectivity of these sites that attempt to rate other sites, and whether you should place your trust in them? I mean, it's one thing if you are using your own judgment to judge for yourself, and you have genuinely determined certain sites to be "conspiracy sites", but when you rely on these sites that purport to fact-check, that really is fundamentally no different from placing your trust in conspiracy sites. Both are sites that contain other people's thoughts, rather than your own.