Any source of info, that is not affected by the conflicting side, is trustworthy. This means, that any 3d party reporter that got there and recorded everything by himself, will be much more trustworthy than any governmental organization, since any such organization will work in interests of government. What this means, is that it can also spread misinformation if it benefitial for the country. This may happen in a ANY country. Thus, unless you can provide unredacted raw proofs of this fact, at least, from let’s say even from a RANDOM citizen of the country, where it happened, who accidentally recorded it on phone, I have no obligation to believe in this fact or believe you. Fair?
P. S. We have a normal discussion here. If you can’t or don’t want to find liable source, you may simply state this and stop this dialog. I don’t force you spend your time on doing what you don’t like.
i sincerely hope that you’re at least as old as i am because that’s the only thing that could excuse why you have this deeply antiquated media literacy strategy since it’s the same one that i learned when i was in school.
this strategy leaves you woefully unprepared for today’s media landscape where easily available 3rd party media sources are captured and proof of it can be found in the examples like the inventing reality community that i shared with you in my previous comment; reading examinations of this capture by internationally well respected intellectuals like micheal parenti or noam chomsky; or by reading epstien files like document dumps that the american federal gov’t is forced to do as a result of the freedom of information act where they flatly admit to laundering misinformation through 3rd party sources like the new york times as well as creating entirely new sources with an ostensible 3rd party appearances/bonafides. i’m also sure you can see for yourself of 3rd party sources self censoring to maintain access to power like they did with colbert.
the truth of today’s media situation is that actors like the cia, mi6, mossad, and our repsective oligarchies are humans just like you and i are, so they’re just as aware as either of us are at all strategies to break free from their misinformation and have taken steps to ensure that the truly independent 3rd party sources are as difficult as possible for either of us to access as well as to understand.
P. S. We have a normal discussion here. If you can’t or don’t want to find liable source, you may simply state this and stop this dialog. I don’t force you spend your time on doing what you don’t like.
the biggest indictment of westerner – american in particular – media literacy stems from the fact that our governments have either been caught red handed or they publicly admitted to this behavior (eg freedom of information act) decades ago; yet we continue to collectively hold this misinformation as gospel nonetheless.
reading these document dumps myself in the same manner in which many are reading the esptein files right now will show you how much propaganda you’ve been unwittingly ingesting your entire life, as i had done and that’s why i shared my comment earlier; it’s my attempt to bring you to water as others have done for me in the most provocatively concise manner possible, but you’re the only one that can make yourself drink and i regret that i refused to do so for decades.
Any type of media reporting (even 3rd party) comes with inherent bias. Assuming it doesn’t and is therefore more trustworthy, is a logical fallacy. You corroborate stories by reading from all sides. Just because a piece of info comes from a state actor doesn’t make it less trustworthy, only it’s bias is more apparent. Propaganda isn’t effective if it doesn’t contain truths.
Basically you’re arguing here that this didn’t happen and imply western media and western information agencies wouldn’t debunk the story outright if they could
Okay, let’s omit the questions about how you have interpreted my comments. My question is that, where are other sides you are talking about? Provide me other sources of info, so so that I can compare. For some reason, no one can do it here, except for replying with criticism and even gaslighting intents. I want to see other sources of raw unedited material, not some speculations of other news agencies about if it is truth or not. I personally wasn’t able to find any source that has info not from governmental agencies of Russia. I am simply asking about raw facts and proofs not from them.
Provide me other sources of info, so so that I can compare.
Comrade @woodenghost@hexbear.net has provided you western reporting on it. If it werent true or if there were doubts about it being true, do you think western media would report on it?
I personally wasn’t able to find any source that has info not from governmental agencies of Russia.
Sometimes events don’t have these, does that mean it didn’t happen? Are you unaware of the massive amount of Nazis in Ukraine? Do you think it is staged? Do you think western press and information agencies wouldn’t jump at the opportunity to show the FSB lied?
I am starting to think that people here don’t understand that I am asking them to do. Yes, I absolutely don’t trust FSB. I don’t trust Russia and anyone who supports it, unless they show valid proofs of their righteousness. And Western media simply informed about this event as they inform about any other. They haven’t claimed that it was real or staged, they simply addressed the source which shared this info with them. If there is no other source of raw info available, then OK. I will then believe that this is false info. You can believe that it is real info. We can’t forbid each other from doing so, since these are our rights.
P. S. Don’t change the theme of topic. I am currently interested only in this event, not others connected.
i’m willing to bet that the sources you consider “trustworthy” or “reliable” are backed by the cia, mi6 or mossad.
you could see screenshots of them doing this in the inventing reality community, but i doubt it’ll matter to you.
Any source of info, that is not affected by the conflicting side, is trustworthy. This means, that any 3d party reporter that got there and recorded everything by himself, will be much more trustworthy than any governmental organization, since any such organization will work in interests of government. What this means, is that it can also spread misinformation if it benefitial for the country. This may happen in a ANY country. Thus, unless you can provide unredacted raw proofs of this fact, at least, from let’s say even from a RANDOM citizen of the country, where it happened, who accidentally recorded it on phone, I have no obligation to believe in this fact or believe you. Fair?
P. S. We have a normal discussion here. If you can’t or don’t want to find liable source, you may simply state this and stop this dialog. I don’t force you spend your time on doing what you don’t like.
i sincerely hope that you’re at least as old as i am because that’s the only thing that could excuse why you have this deeply antiquated media literacy strategy since it’s the same one that i learned when i was in school.
this strategy leaves you woefully unprepared for today’s media landscape where easily available 3rd party media sources are captured and proof of it can be found in the examples like the inventing reality community that i shared with you in my previous comment; reading examinations of this capture by internationally well respected intellectuals like micheal parenti or noam chomsky; or by reading epstien files like document dumps that the american federal gov’t is forced to do as a result of the freedom of information act where they flatly admit to laundering misinformation through 3rd party sources like the new york times as well as creating entirely new sources with an ostensible 3rd party appearances/bonafides. i’m also sure you can see for yourself of 3rd party sources self censoring to maintain access to power like they did with colbert.
the truth of today’s media situation is that actors like the cia, mi6, mossad, and our repsective oligarchies are humans just like you and i are, so they’re just as aware as either of us are at all strategies to break free from their misinformation and have taken steps to ensure that the truly independent 3rd party sources are as difficult as possible for either of us to access as well as to understand.
the biggest indictment of westerner – american in particular – media literacy stems from the fact that our governments have either been caught red handed or they publicly admitted to this behavior (eg freedom of information act) decades ago; yet we continue to collectively hold this misinformation as gospel nonetheless.
reading these document dumps myself in the same manner in which many are reading the esptein files right now will show you how much propaganda you’ve been unwittingly ingesting your entire life, as i had done and that’s why i shared my comment earlier; it’s my attempt to bring you to water as others have done for me in the most provocatively concise manner possible, but you’re the only one that can make yourself drink and i regret that i refused to do so for decades.
Any type of media reporting (even 3rd party) comes with inherent bias. Assuming it doesn’t and is therefore more trustworthy, is a logical fallacy. You corroborate stories by reading from all sides. Just because a piece of info comes from a state actor doesn’t make it less trustworthy, only it’s bias is more apparent. Propaganda isn’t effective if it doesn’t contain truths.
Basically you’re arguing here that this didn’t happen and imply western media and western information agencies wouldn’t debunk the story outright if they could
Okay, let’s omit the questions about how you have interpreted my comments. My question is that, where are other sides you are talking about? Provide me other sources of info, so so that I can compare. For some reason, no one can do it here, except for replying with criticism and even gaslighting intents. I want to see other sources of raw unedited material, not some speculations of other news agencies about if it is truth or not. I personally wasn’t able to find any source that has info not from governmental agencies of Russia. I am simply asking about raw facts and proofs not from them.
Comrade @woodenghost@hexbear.net has provided you western reporting on it. If it werent true or if there were doubts about it being true, do you think western media would report on it?
Sometimes events don’t have these, does that mean it didn’t happen? Are you unaware of the massive amount of Nazis in Ukraine? Do you think it is staged? Do you think western press and information agencies wouldn’t jump at the opportunity to show the FSB lied?
I am starting to think that people here don’t understand that I am asking them to do. Yes, I absolutely don’t trust FSB. I don’t trust Russia and anyone who supports it, unless they show valid proofs of their righteousness. And Western media simply informed about this event as they inform about any other. They haven’t claimed that it was real or staged, they simply addressed the source which shared this info with them. If there is no other source of raw info available, then OK. I will then believe that this is false info. You can believe that it is real info. We can’t forbid each other from doing so, since these are our rights.
P. S. Don’t change the theme of topic. I am currently interested only in this event, not others connected.
Bye
🤝