It literally says at the top, it is a Russian, Brazilian, Indian, Chinese, and South African state affiliated media website. You are asking me to read websites for you.
Why don’t you check their source? They are quoting a UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER! Wake up! Smell the bacon! Do you blindly believe articles depending on outlet? I guess that is why the neoconservatives were able to freely brainwash NPR listeners in America by writing a few checks.
What is BRICS? Very useful page, that…
I guess we’re beating the Russians on the online web design and social media front so it doesn’t matter that Ukraine has been completely depopulated! You have your priorities in order, procrastinating on their website to avoid reading the article. Looking for excuses not to read and pat yourself on the back. 🤣
Do you realise I’m a different person to the other poster? You told them to read the website and you are telling me not to read the website.
I already clicked through to the source, an RT article, which is clearly labelled as posted by the Russian part of BRICS.
I also looked up the MP, who was expelled from her liberal party for corrupt activities and now represents the party of an oligarch which has less than 1% of the national vote share.
So yes in conclusion, it is Russian propaganda. Who knows if the 100,000 figure is true, she is the only source, but without context it doesn’t really mean anything anyway.
Was I supposed to read all that or not?
In my first reply I already told you it was Russian propaganda, in addition to 4 other countries’. Nobody told you not to read the website, I told you to respond to the content of the actual article if you want to pretend to actually reply, not dick around exploring every link you find.
She is the ONLY SOURCE? Do you think that a member of Ukrainian parliament is going to get away with lying about what the military is saying? The lack of context exists only because of your lack of investigation into the subject.
Thanks for the additional context.
The additional context: “yes, I posted a propaganda article, but your investigation of the source and the source of the source wasn’t enough. You need to investigate more but I won’t provide any links or other sources.”
I ONLY POST PROPAGANDA ARTICLES! News IS propaganda! 📢📢📢
You’re literally demanding spoon feeding 😭 go copy and paste the name of the member of parliament and key words from the statement into your desired search engine you intransigent fraudster
That would be the “Source of the source”
Are you seriously just bad at reading btw? I was extremely clear I am making fun of you for reading random widgets on the site instead of ONE PAGE. Every news article you complain about is like one page of information and you have to be dragged kicking and screaming 😭🤧
TIL its tOtALlY rANdOm to read the “About Us” page of a website that people are discussing the origin of.
You found another reason to avoid thinking about the article’s contents after finally managing to read it. You think the Ukrainian parliament member made it up - why? To become more unpopular? Just to fuck with you? Where are you going with it?
No, the content of the article has no merit because of the source. Nothing is verifiable and the source has strong Russian ties. Russia, who is known for spreading false information, called “propaganda”. I would suggest looking that word up, because you don’t seem to know what it is or how it works.
You seem to be completely ignoring my analysis of the content and the source and the MPs background which I posted above. It seems like I’ve thought about it more than you.
The guy who is afraid of news articles that aren’t personally approved by the Secretary of State is telling me to calm down. Refill your antidepressants, you’re going to be in for a long ride, things are getting worse.
I am not the one crying over the people who tied Russian families to trees and beat them in public! I am not the one crying over people who killed Ukrainian teachers in cold blood and threw them into pits and showed it off on Telegram! You’re a selfish asshole.
Imagine believing that people talk about politics without any agenda.
“If those kids could read they would be very upset”
After a very quick search, I found CNN saying this:
After slightly more searching, we find El Pais saying:
So 100,000 doesn’t seem unreasonable at all. This was a very easy internet search. There’s lots of similar information out there. I recommend doing the search yourself and posting the results next time. You’re welcome.
