The one on the right is answered in a PM. It is C. It is informal and quietly observant about what happened in Montreal some years ago. There is nothing formal, didactic (there is no teaching going on and there is no moral instruction -- not yet anyway). There is no formal introduction (thesis statement). He is just talking about a setting. This is an interlude before getting to the point; you could argue that the very first sentence is a thesis statement, but after that we are getting something pretty conversational. I'd pick C.
Bonus
A very quick answer to the first one. I believe the answer is "Their only interest is in a one way international law ... It is what the dictators are doing and what their ultimate aim is. Being able to come to that conclusion is a job for logos. The sentences preceding it show the method used by the dictators in war or the response of America should a dictator invade a democracy. It is not exactly logos. The United States is very emotional in the use of the word democracy. The sworn enemy of a democracy is a dictator. Answer The sentence beginning "Their only interest ...
You want your information to be as factual as possible, and to have less opinions inside. If the author previously had been in the field of expertise, or has studied it to a certain degree, then they have the qualification to talk about the field.
I believe it all would depend on what side of the issue they are on. You see, there are some news outlet that are willing to satisfy a section of the population while others do the same with another section of the population.
The correct answer is by categorizing. One way to narrow your topic by discovering the features that are the most interesting is by categorizing the topic into groups. It will be easier that way to narrow the topics in categories.
