cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

Sources? People have credible sources these days?

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

THANK YOU. Some people here talk like they just got done with a 24 hour media marathon.

blungld said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

Seriously? F you.

---

No, I won't, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Sebastabear said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

You are free to ask dumb questions, no one is stopping you.

---

So now you edited your post to say this? Is your algorithm fritzing out again? Is it a dumb question to ask if any person would really make 500 posts on the night of the election?

---

I would post a thousand times daily on rigged elections but BearGreg would get upset. What's wrong with being called a left wing extremist when the right is constantly being labeled right wing extremists, white supremacists, Russian trolls, etc?

---

One post a minute for six solid hours would be 360 posts. And that's without getting up to take a single drink of water, eat a bite of food or go to the bathroom. And this account posted 50% MORE than that. And we are all supposed to pretend like there's an actual person on the other side of this keyboard. Not possible.

---

if you want to convince me that I'm a Russian bot, you're doing a pretty good job.

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

---

If that's the case, why didn't the NYT report on them? Why didn't they include them in their initial report on 4/2? It seems like an extremely important detail to overlook.

More importantly, given their value to Zelensky & Ukraine as evidence of Russian barbarism, why not publish photos immediately after Russian troops left?

And why wasn't the Bucha mayor's jubilant "Day of Liberation" speech tempered with sadness for the fallen victims?

Do you really think that the BBC is impartial here?

I'll compare photos, because I can't imagine that the bodies of Ukrainians killed by Russian troops were left in the street for 2 weeks, only then to be "discovered" & photographed days after the Russians left, and days after Western reporters had free rein to walk all over the town.

Also, why would the Russian soldiers bind the hands of these Ukrainians, and shoot them execution-style? They clearly had no qualms about shooting Ukrainian residents.

Like it or not, the binding of their hands behind their back suggests that they were interrogated by someone who thought that they were traitors to their cause, which fits with the Azov Battallion's alleged 'purge'.

I'm open to being wrong, but I'm not seeing any solid evidence to the contrary yet.

oski003 said:

---

Zelensky wants NATO to support and defend him, so framing Russia for war atrocities makes sense. I don't necessarily think this is happening, but it's not improbable. I believe your stance on the matter leads you and others to believe the questions aren't genuine.

---

It would be genuine only if it wasn't asked in a coy, insensitive, dishonest way. Like a tweet that is supposed to be provocative or a post on BI that is just a glib response. We are talking about innocent people who were tortured and murdered. This isn't a light breezy topic to just a kick around some alternative facts or spitball about. If there is real evidence and one wants to have a real discussion about how to help peoples of the world, great. This was not that. This was "owning the libs" tribalism, questions with ZERO evidence that sides with authoritarian propaganda that is covering up for war crimes.

I can roll my eyes or just be annoyed by 99% of the stupidity that about 5 posters consistently belch up on these boards, but the lack of human decency on murder of men, women, and children? No. Some lines need to be drawn and I am sick of partisan politics meaning I can be as unethical, immoral, and unconscionable as I want to be because that is the new way of the Trumpist GOP.

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

---

If that's the case, why didn't the NYT report on them? Why didn't they include them in their initial report on 4/2? It seems like an extremely important detail to overlook.

More importantly, given their value to Zelensky & Ukraine as evidence of Russian barbarism, why not publish photos immediately after Russian troops left?

And why wasn't the Bucha mayor's jubilant "Day of Liberation" speech tempered with sadness for the fallen victims?

Do you really think that the BBC is impartial here?

I'll compare photos, because I can't imagine that the bodies of Ukrainians killed by Russian troops were left in the street for 2 weeks, only then to be "discovered" & photographed days after the Russians left, and days after Western reporters had free rein to walk all over the town.

Also, why would the Russian soldiers bind the hands of these Ukrainians, and shoot them execution-style? They clearly had no qualms about shooting Ukrainian residents.

Like it or not, the binding of their hands behind their back suggests that they were interrogated by someone who thought that they were traitors to their cause, which fits with the Azov Battallion's alleged 'purge'.

I'm open to being wrong, but I'm not seeing any solid evidence to the contrary yet.

---

Okay, so let's rewind a bit.

Your original argument was that the Russian Army couldn't have done it because the timeline was wrong: the news about the massacred corpses came out after the Ukrainians had retaken the city, so it couldn't have been the Russians.

Now that's been disproven by satellite photos: in fact, these corpses could be seen in the streets weeks earlier, when the Russians were occupying. Now your line is that the Azov Battalion must have been responsible, even though the Ukrainian military was not in the city at the time of those photos? You think the satellite images are forgeries, even though they've been reported in multiple international outlets other than the BBC? You think these images were staged?

You think this even though there is also video footage of Russian soldiers executing civilians? You think this even though we have eyewitness accounts from citizens of the city confirming that this was happening?

As your refutation of this evidence, you have thus far only provided an article from the same site you once cited before, just days before their predictions about Putin not wanting to invade Ukraine were proven laughably wrong? And you also posted that article AFTER its own timeline about when the bodies were found was ALSO proven wrong by satellite footage and all of the above? And you want to tell me there's no evidence to the contrary? Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

It's pretty obvious you've already made up your mind about this and are willing to contort yourself to the greatest degree possible to maintain your narrative. Either you have been taken in by propagandists or you are one yourself. Not a good look, either way.

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

---

If that's the case, why didn't the NYT report on them? Why didn't they include them in their initial report on 4/2? It seems like an extremely important detail to overlook.

More importantly, given their value to Zelensky & Ukraine as evidence of Russian barbarism, why not publish photos immediately after Russian troops left?

And why wasn't the Bucha mayor's jubilant "Day of Liberation" speech tempered with sadness for the fallen victims?

Do you really think that the BBC is impartial here?

I'll compare photos, because I can't imagine that the bodies of Ukrainians killed by Russian troops were left in the street for 2 weeks, only then to be "discovered" & photographed days after the Russians left, and days after Western reporters had free rein to walk all over the town.

Also, why would the Russian soldiers bind the hands of these Ukrainians, and shoot them execution-style? They clearly had no qualms about shooting Ukrainian residents.

Like it or not, the binding of their hands behind their back suggests that they were interrogated by someone who thought that they were traitors to their cause, which fits with the Azov Battallion's alleged 'purge'.

I'm open to being wrong, but I'm not seeing any solid evidence to the contrary yet.

---

Okay, so let's rewind a bit.

Your original argument was that the Russian Army couldn't have done it because the timeline was wrong: the news about the massacred corpses came out after the Ukrainians had retaken the city, so it couldn't have been the Russians.

Now that's been disproven by satellite photos: in fact, these corpses could be seen in the streets weeks earlier, when the Russians were occupying. Now your line is that the Azov Battalion must have been responsible, even though the Ukrainian military was not in the city at the time of those photos? You think the satellite images are forgeries, even though they've been reported in multiple international outlets other than the BBC? You think these images were staged?

You think this even though there is also video footage of Russian soldiers executing civilians? You think this even though we have eyewitness accounts from citizens of the city confirming that this was happening?

As your refutation of this evidence, you have thus far only provided an article from the same site you once cited before, just days before their predictions about Putin not wanting to invade Ukraine were proven laughably wrong? And you also posted that article AFTER its own timeline about when the bodies were found was ALSO proven wrong by satellite footage and all of the above? And you want to tell me there's no evidence to the contrary? Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

It's pretty obvious you've already made up your mind about this and are willing to contort yourself to the greatest degree possible to maintain your narrative. Either you have been taken in by propagandists or you are one yourself. Not a good look, either way.

---

Yeah, I don't know what to say about people who go to such great lengths. Some of them are Putin sympathizers, some are anti-American and others are just contrarian. When their best argument gets shredded, they come back with even more tenuous stuff rather than just acknowledging that, yes, the prevailing opinion which has been verified by numerous sources and reputable journalist organizations is probably more reliable than some random conspiracy theorist.

Or they come back and say they were just asking questions.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

If Bucha was a false flag, Fox News would be all over it. They have a news division reporting on Bucha and you would think they would be more than happy to support Republican propaganda, since their viewers obviously would love to believe Putin is a force for good, as Tucker Carlson does and as many BI conservatives (and, to be fair, batsh)t crazy nut jobs) do.

Except they aren't doing that here. If Bucha was a false flag, why is Fox News reporting otherwise? I'm just asking questions here. Maybe the very obvious thing that the whole world is reporting on and which no credible alternative theory exists for is, gasp, actually true.

Quote:

---

Satellite imagery shows bodies laid in Bucha streets for weeks, contradicting Russian claims

Russia claimed the bodies appeared on the street after its forces withdrew from Bucha

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.

The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.
The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

Other images show a probable mass grave on the grounds of the Church of St. Andrew and Pyervozvannoho All Saints.

"What has been done to this modern town is a characteristic of the Russian military, which treated humans worse than animals," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters during a visit to the town Monday.

The Russian Defense Ministry dismissed the photos as "just another provocation," in a statement Sunday. They also said the images were "another hoax" and demanded an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council regarding "provocations of Ukrainian radicals" in Bucha.

---

Sure sounds like Fox News believes Bucha was perpetrated by Russia. But maybe, as 003 believes, nothing is black and white. He might argue that genocides are good for *reasons* and that Bucha is partially defensible, even if Putin ordered the Russian military to carry it out. I mean, there are no absolutes right?

---

Fyi

No, Tucker Carlson Didn't Ask if Dead Bodies of Ukrainian Civilians Were 'Staged'

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tucker-carlson-ukraine-bodies-staged/

blungld said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Zelensky wants NATO to support and defend him, so framing Russia for war atrocities makes sense. I don't necessarily think this is happening, but it's not improbable. I believe your stance on the matter leads you and others to believe the questions aren't genuine.

---

It would be genuine only if it wasn't asked in a coy, insensitive, dishonest way. Like a tweet that is supposed to be provocative or a post on BI that is just a glib response. We are talking about innocent people who were tortured and murdered. This isn't a light breezy topic to just a kick around some alternative facts or spitball about. If there is real evidence and one wants to have a real discussion about how to help peoples of the world, great. This was not that. This was "owning the libs" tribalism, questions with ZERO evidence that sides with authoritarian propaganda that is covering up for war crimes.

I can roll my eyes or just be annoyed by 99% of the stupidity that about 5 posters consistently belch up on these boards, but the lack of human decency on murder of men, women, and children? No. Some lines need to be drawn and I am sick of partisan politics meaning I can be as unethical, immoral, and unconscionable as I want to be because that is the new way of the Trumpist GOP.

---

It wasn't even said though. It was a tweet from someone else stirring the pot. I too am sick of partisan politics. I enjoy reading opinions of both sides without people feeling the need to snarkily flame others. With that being said, we can all agree that Russia is the bad guy in this conflict and their invasion of Ukraine is terrible and they are responsible for these atrocities.

oski003 said:

---

With that being said, we can all agree that Russia is the bad guy in this conflict and their invasion of Ukraine is terrible and they are responsible for these atrocities.

---

I can think of at least one person on this board who does not agree with that.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

If Bucha was a false flag, Fox News would be all over it. They have a news division reporting on Bucha and you would think they would be more than happy to support Republican propaganda, since their viewers obviously would love to believe Putin is a force for good, as Tucker Carlson does and as many BI conservatives (and, to be fair, batsh)t crazy nut jobs) do.

Except they aren't doing that here. If Bucha was a false flag, why is Fox News reporting otherwise? I'm just asking questions here. Maybe the very obvious thing that the whole world is reporting on and which no credible alternative theory exists for is, gasp, actually true.

Quote:

---

Satellite imagery shows bodies laid in Bucha streets for weeks, contradicting Russian claims

Russia claimed the bodies appeared on the street after its forces withdrew from Bucha

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.

The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.
The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

Other images show a probable mass grave on the grounds of the Church of St. Andrew and Pyervozvannoho All Saints.

"What has been done to this modern town is a characteristic of the Russian military, which treated humans worse than animals," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters during a visit to the town Monday.

The Russian Defense Ministry dismissed the photos as "just another provocation," in a statement Sunday. They also said the images were "another hoax" and demanded an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council regarding "provocations of Ukrainian radicals" in Bucha.

---

Sure sounds like Fox News believes Bucha was perpetrated by Russia. But maybe, as 003 believes, nothing is black and white. He might argue that genocides are good for *reasons* and that Bucha is partially defensible, even if Putin ordered the Russian military to carry it out. I mean, there are no absolutes right?

---

Fyi

No, Tucker Carlson Didn't Ask if Dead Bodies of Ukrainian Civilians Were 'Staged'

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tucker-carlson-ukraine-bodies-staged/

---

He didn't say it, but what if he did?

You said earlier that you think it's unlikely but not improbable that this was a false flag and that the questions were genuine. Minot thinks they are fair questions to ask and completely legitimate.

I knew the Carlson quote was a supposition but the goal was to get the discussion going. I wondered how long before someone came to say that Tucker didn't in fact ask these specific questions on this specific day and found it hilarious to hear people like you defend the questions. Do you no longer feel the need to defend Tucker now that you know that this quote wasn't technically from him?

Unfortunately we'll never know what Tucker thinks about this because there were far bigger and more important stories for him to cover last night. But what if there weren't? Then what would he have done? Completely fair to speculate right?

Tucker hasn’t mentioned Bucha tonight once. But good to see he’s finding time for the really important stories. pic.twitter.com/dfFsZKWvyh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 5, 2022

---

I don't really care. Congrats U2. You make this board awesome. So much integrity with how you honestly go back and forth and express ideas and welcome others' viewpoints. Sarcasm, obviously. Honestly, I can't believe how much you attacked me here for having the audacity to have an opinion contrary to your beliefs. You certainly have a penchant for pitchforks. I was actually wondering whether this would be your reaction to my posting that the comments weren't even real. Very predictable.

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

---

If that's the case, why didn't the NYT report on them? Why didn't they include them in their initial report on 4/2? It seems like an extremely important detail to overlook.

More importantly, given their value to Zelensky & Ukraine as evidence of Russian barbarism, why not publish photos immediately after Russian troops left?

And why wasn't the Bucha mayor's jubilant "Day of Liberation" speech tempered with sadness for the fallen victims?

Do you really think that the BBC is impartial here?

I'll compare photos, because I can't imagine that the bodies of Ukrainians killed by Russian troops were left in the street for 2 weeks, only then to be "discovered" & photographed days after the Russians left, and days after Western reporters had free rein to walk all over the town.

Also, why would the Russian soldiers bind the hands of these Ukrainians, and shoot them execution-style? They clearly had no qualms about shooting Ukrainian residents.

Like it or not, the binding of their hands behind their back suggests that they were interrogated by someone who thought that they were traitors to their cause, which fits with the Azov Battallion's alleged 'purge'.

I'm open to being wrong, but I'm not seeing any solid evidence to the contrary yet.

---

Okay, so let's rewind a bit.

Your original argument was that the Russian Army couldn't have done it because the timeline was wrong: the news about the massacred corpses came out after the Ukrainians had retaken the city, so it couldn't have been the Russians.

Now that's been disproven by satellite photos: in fact, these corpses could be seen in the streets weeks earlier, when the Russians were occupying. Now your line is that the Azov Battalion must have been responsible, even though the Ukrainian military was not in the city at the time of those photos? You think the satellite images are forgeries, even though they've been reported in multiple international outlets other than the BBC? You think these images were staged?

You think this even though there is also video footage of Russian soldiers executing civilians? You think this even though we have eyewitness accounts from citizens of the city confirming that this was happening?

As your refutation of this evidence, you have thus far only provided an article from the same site you once cited before, just days before their predictions about Putin not wanting to invade Ukraine were proven laughably wrong? And you also posted that article AFTER its own timeline about when the bodies were found was ALSO proven wrong by satellite footage and all of the above? And you want to tell me there's no evidence to the contrary? Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

It's pretty obvious you've already made up your mind about this and are willing to contort yourself to the greatest degree possible to maintain your narrative. Either you have been taken in by propagandists or you are one yourself. Not a good look, either way.

---

The only bodies I'm talking about are the ones initially reported on 4/2 that were shot execution-style, with hands bound.

Looks like the number of dead Ukrainians in Bucha may be in the hundreds. From citizen accounts, Russian soldiers clearly killed many of those people throughout the month of March.

I have no doubt that Russian troops are responsible for many more Ukrainian deaths in the area. It's a war, with both sides armed & going at it. If Putin is saying that Russian soldiers didn't hurt or kill anyone, he's obviously full of crap.

For how many Bucha deaths are Russian troops responsible? Could be many, most, or all. They weren't passing out flowers & candy for a month. They were fighting armed combatants who were defending their homes. The timeline still doesn't add up, though. It's possible that some of those people were killed after the Russians left. But clearly, the Russians killed people in Bucha. Exactly how many remains to be seen.

Still, Putin & Lavrov's denials are not credible. He sent his soldiers there for a reason, and if they didn't hurt or kill anyone, they're in deep stuff.

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

If Bucha was a false flag, Fox News would be all over it. They have a news division reporting on Bucha and you would think they would be more than happy to support Republican propaganda, since their viewers obviously would love to believe Putin is a force for good, as Tucker Carlson does and as many BI conservatives (and, to be fair, batsh)t crazy nut jobs) do.

Except they aren't doing that here. If Bucha was a false flag, why is Fox News reporting otherwise? I'm just asking questions here. Maybe the very obvious thing that the whole world is reporting on and which no credible alternative theory exists for is, gasp, actually true.

Quote:

---

Satellite imagery shows bodies laid in Bucha streets for weeks, contradicting Russian claims

Russia claimed the bodies appeared on the street after its forces withdrew from Bucha

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.

The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

High-resolution satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies collected over Bucha, Ukraine, corroborates recent social media videos and photos that show bodies lying out in the streets for weeks.
The images contradict Russia's claim that the bodies appeared on the city streets after "all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha" around March 30.

Other images show a probable mass grave on the grounds of the Church of St. Andrew and Pyervozvannoho All Saints.

"What has been done to this modern town is a characteristic of the Russian military, which treated humans worse than animals," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters during a visit to the town Monday.

The Russian Defense Ministry dismissed the photos as "just another provocation," in a statement Sunday. They also said the images were "another hoax" and demanded an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council regarding "provocations of Ukrainian radicals" in Bucha.

---

Sure sounds like Fox News believes Bucha was perpetrated by Russia. But maybe, as 003 believes, nothing is black and white. He might argue that genocides are good for *reasons* and that Bucha is partially defensible, even if Putin ordered the Russian military to carry it out. I mean, there are no absolutes right?

---

Fyi

No, Tucker Carlson Didn't Ask if Dead Bodies of Ukrainian Civilians Were 'Staged'

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tucker-carlson-ukraine-bodies-staged/

---

He didn't say it, but what if he did?

You said earlier that you think it's unlikely but not improbable that this was a false flag and that the questions were genuine. Minot thinks they are fair questions to ask and completely legitimate.

I knew the Carlson quote was a supposition but the goal was to get the discussion going. I wondered how long before someone came to say that Tucker didn't in fact ask these specific questions on this specific day and found it hilarious to hear people like you defend the questions. Do you no longer feel the need to defend Tucker now that you know that this quote wasn't technically from him?

Unfortunately we'll never know what Tucker thinks about this because there were far bigger and more important stories for him to cover last night. But what if there weren't? Then what would he have done? Completely fair to speculate right?

Tucker hasn’t mentioned Bucha tonight once. But good to see he’s finding time for the really important stories. pic.twitter.com/dfFsZKWvyh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 5, 2022

---

I don't really care. Congrats U2. You make this board awesome. So much integrity with how you honestly go back and forth and express ideas and welcome others' viewpoints. Sarcasm, obviously. Honestly, I can't believe how much you attacked me here for having the audacity to have an opinion contrary to your beliefs. You certainly have a penchant for pitchforks. I was actually wondering whether this would be your reaction to my posting that the comments weren't even real. Very predictable.

---

Says the guy on a crusade against life-saving vaccines or is it just a crusade to be a contrarian regardless of the object? You said what you said - nothing is black and white so you certainly believe there are no absolutes, even the narrative that Putin's war crimes are bad. Even if Tucker hasn't yet said this exact thing.

---

I never hinted that Putin's war crimes weren't bad. I just said it is okay to investigate the war crimes to determine what is real and what may not be. Again, that is you bringing a black and white perspective into everything. I am finally blocking you. No need to hear from someone constantly misrepresenting what is being said, holding grudges, and making personal attacks. Bye.

---

You said nothing is black and white, which would seem to include war crimes. I have no problem with you ignoring me but it won't stop me from commenting on your reflexively contrarian comments and/or misinformation.

For example, you baselessly implied that it would "make sense" for Zelensky to frame Russia for war atrocities and that it's "not improbable." That is no different from saying that it's "not improbable" that Zelensky perpetrated mass murder against his own civilians which is a pretty crazy thing to say with absolutely no basis other than you thinking that nothing is "black and white."

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Tucker asking the disingenuous questions. He's really gunning for Russian media personality of the year.

.@TuckerCarlson tonight: “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?”

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) April 4, 2022

---

Those are actually legitimate questions.

---

What if Tucker Carlson is a Russian asset embedded to destroy American democracy? What if he maintains a dacha in Vladivostok where he plays pinochle with Putin on his days off? I mean those seem like legitimate questions too and honestly far more likely to be true than the "fake corpses planted in a Russian occupied city to make Putin look bad" theory.

---

Also completely fair to ask those questions, I don't agree, but I'm not going to shout you down for asking them.

---

Well, except for them being monumentally stupid and idiotic questions and a total waste of air time that could have been devoted to meaningful questions. I suppose you still think questioning whether the dead school kids ar Sandy Hook were actually crisis actors was a legitimate question too. It's got about as much logic.

---

Everything that doesn't follow your ideology becomes stupid and idiotic. It's a problem with democrats currently. They can't picture themselves on the other side of the divide.

---

Why does the other side of the divide have to be "maybe Putin was justified for invading?"

---

Tucker Carlson may very well be a Russian asset, but calling for more information about the alleged massacre in Bucha is the only reasonable course of action.

The reasoning is simple: the timeline doesn't add up.

Wed, 3/30: Russian troops left Bucha (according to the Russian Defense Ministry);

Thu, 3/31: Anatolii Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces a "Day of Liberation of Bucha"; "This day will go down in the glorious history of Bucha and the entire Bucha community as a day of liberation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Russian occupiers."

Fri, 4/1: "Ekaterina Ukraintsiva, representing the [Bucha] town council authority, appeared on an information video on the Bucha Live Telegram page wearing military fatigues and seated in front of a Ukrainian flag to announce 'the cleansing of the city.' She informed residents that the arrival of the Azov battalion did not mean that liberation was complete [but it was, the Russians had fully withdrawn], and that a 'complete sweep' had to be performed."

Sat, 4/2:
++ NYT reports completion of Russian withdrawal from Bucha, "leaving behind dead soldiers and burned vehicles", with no mention of a massacre;

++ Left Bank, a U.S./EU-funded Ukrainian language site, announces: "Special forces [Azov Battalion] have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces."

++ Photos posted of Bucha massacre, blaming Russian troops [who had already been run outta town] for the killings;

Whenever there are reports of the killings of innocent civilians, it's important to remember that all Ukrainian men aged 18-60 were required by law to stay and fight against Russian forces. Were there really any "innocent civilians"? Or were they compelled, by the declared martial law, to be combatants?

Could the Bucha massacre victims have been pacifists who refused to fight?

It's also important to remember that throughout the entire Ukraine support for U.S./EU/NATO policies vs alignment with Russia was pretty evenly mixed, with the West more U.S.-aligned, and the East more Russia-aligned. Were there Russian sympathizers in Bucha who signaled their surrender to Russian troops?

There are many open questions that need answering. Unfortunately, no investigation is forthcoming.

When Putin started his troop buildup on Ukraine's Eastern border, I urged you guys to believe very little of what you hear from the media on this conflict. I stand by my statement even more so today.

Everything from Western MSM is urging escalation of the conflict on Ukraine's behalf, tighter economic sanctions, and the ouster of Putin. The fact that Russia's defense policy authorizes the first use of nuclear weapons for their own defense doesn't seem to give anyone in Washington a 2nd thought.

Nor does our track record with economic sanctions and their lack of success -- except the unintended consequence of consolidating support for the despot du jour.

As I said before, both Zelensky and Putin have had enough, and are ready to negotiate an end to this ordeal. Then Biden, who's kept the zealots from unbridled escalation thus far, calls Putin a "war criminal", somehow forgetting that the U.S. still refuses to recognize the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and still refuses to ratify the Rome Statute.

The U.S. Neocons believe that they're close to the regime change in Russia that they've wanted all along, and they aren't about to let their agenda get derailed by a peace agreement.

Bottom line: Believe very little of what you hear on Ukraine. Assume that everything that reaches you is propaganda, until proven otherwise. Everyone has an agenda, and they're more committed to their agenda than the truth.

Primary source: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre, Consortium News

---

Buddy, you need to take your own advice. You are repeating Russian propaganda. I think Consortium News is likely just a propaganda site itself.

The timeline does add up, because satellite images confirm the bodies have been lying in the street since March 19. This article is nonsense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

You need to start rethinking the sources you consume.

---

If that's the case, why didn't the NYT report on them? Why didn't they include them in their initial report on 4/2? It seems like an extremely important detail to overlook.

More importantly, given their value to Zelensky & Ukraine as evidence of Russian barbarism, why not publish photos immediately after Russian troops left?

And why wasn't the Bucha mayor's jubilant "Day of Liberation" speech tempered with sadness for the fallen victims?

Do you really think that the BBC is impartial here?

I'll compare photos, because I can't imagine that the bodies of Ukrainians killed by Russian troops were left in the street for 2 weeks, only then to be "discovered" & photographed days after the Russians left, and days after Western reporters had free rein to walk all over the town.

Also, why would the Russian soldiers bind the hands of these Ukrainians, and shoot them execution-style? They clearly had no qualms about shooting Ukrainian residents.

Like it or not, the binding of their hands behind their back suggests that they were interrogated by someone who thought that they were traitors to their cause, which fits with the Azov Battallion's alleged 'purge'.

I'm open to being wrong, but I'm not seeing any solid evidence to the contrary yet.

---

Okay, so let's rewind a bit.

Your original argument was that the Russian Army couldn't have done it because the timeline was wrong: the news about the massacred corpses came out after the Ukrainians had retaken the city, so it couldn't have been the Russians.

Now that's been disproven by satellite photos: in fact, these corpses could be seen in the streets weeks earlier, when the Russians were occupying. Now your line is that the Azov Battalion must have been responsible, even though the Ukrainian military was not in the city at the time of those photos? You think the satellite images are forgeries, even though they've been reported in multiple international outlets other than the BBC? You think these images were staged?

You think this even though there is also video footage of Russian soldiers executing civilians? You think this even though we have eyewitness accounts from citizens of the city confirming that this was happening?

As your refutation of this evidence, you have thus far only provided an article from the same site you once cited before, just days before their predictions about Putin not wanting to invade Ukraine were proven laughably wrong? And you also posted that article AFTER its own timeline about when the bodies were found was ALSO proven wrong by satellite footage and all of the above? And you want to tell me there's no evidence to the contrary? Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

It's pretty obvious you've already made up your mind about this and are willing to contort yourself to the greatest degree possible to maintain your narrative. Either you have been taken in by propagandists or you are one yourself. Not a good look, either way.

---

The only bodies I'm talking about are the ones initially reported on 4/2 that were shot execution-style, with hands bound.

Looks like the number of dead Ukrainians in Bucha may be in the hundreds. From citizen accounts, Russian soldiers clearly killed many of those people throughout the month of March.

I have no doubt that Russian troops are responsible for many more Ukrainian deaths in the area. It's a war, with both sides armed & going at it. If Putin is saying that Russian soldiers didn't hurt or kill anyone, he's obviously full of crap.

For how many Bucha deaths are Russian troops responsible? Could be many, most, or all. They weren't passing out flowers & candy for a month. They were fighting armed combatants who were defending their homes. The timeline still doesn't add up, though. It's possible that some of those people were killed after the Russians left. But clearly, the Russians killed people in Bucha. Exactly how many remains to be seen.

Still, Putin & Lavrov's denials are not credible. He sent his soldiers there for a reason, and if they didn't hurt or kill anyone, they're in deep stuff.

---

Okay, so now we're in agreement that Russian troops probably were killing civilians and that those bodies could be seen in the streets during their occupation of Bucha.

The supposition now is that maybe the Ukrainian government saw fit to stage a fake execution scene after the fact, in order to further pressure the West to enter the conflict against Russia. And they did this despite having ample corpses already strewn around the streets of the city that could easily help them make this argument without having to stage anything.

I find this scenario extremely unlikely to be true. I don't know why anyone would even entertain the idea unless there was some kind of concrete evidence pointing to it.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Get ready to hear more of this from conservatives now that the Koch machine has spoken.

BREAKING: The main non-profit group run by billionaire Charles Koch says the US should drop virtually all sanctions and push for a resolution that includes a partial "victory" for Russia, according to an internal email obtained by https://t.co/Gl6evXRDcZhttps://t.co/dJCMzFTihF pic.twitter.com/K7FvxfYTEN

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) April 6, 2022

---

Particularly brilliant coming one day after pictures of handcuffed civilians executed and left to rot on the street were splashed all over every screen and newspaper in the world. I mean is there anything more important to the Kochs than near term profits? Anything? Because even if all they cared about was money and the most grotesque human rights violations imaginable didn't register with them at all, I guarantee you letting Putin get away with this is not going to be great for intermediate much less long term global stability (and business).

What's sad is how many people don't realize they are supporting Russian propaganda.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, denies it’s a duck, demands you prove it's a duck, accuses you of being a duck, says your dog is a duck, that your friend's cat is a duck & that all 3 'ducks' are Russophobic ducks paid to be crisis actors, it’s a Kremlin duck 🦆

— Darth Putin (@DarthPutinKGB) April 6, 2022

BearForce2 said:

---

Anyone want to verify this report?

Horrifying video shows Ukrainian soldiers shooting captured Russian troops with their hands tied behind their backs amid accusations of similar Russian atrocities in Bucha.

• The video, which the New York Times verified Wednesday, shows Ukrainian troops committing the killings after what appeared to be an ambush
• 'Film these marauders. Look, he's still alive. He's gasping,' one of the troops is heard saying
• One of the soldiers then shoots the man three times. After the second shot, the man keeps moving but stops after the third bullet
• There appear to be at least three other Russian soldiers dead lying near the latest victim
• The video was taken from a road just north of Dmytrivka, about seven miles southwest of Bucha

---

If you are a soldier who is part of an invasion of a peaceful country and you get ambushed, captured, and killed then so be it. The lesson is if you risk your life in the service of a butcher, you will suffer the consequences. No one will shed a single tear for you. You reap the harvest you have sown.

If you are questioning whether war crimes occurred in Bucha after listening to eyewitness accounts, seeing the bodies on the streets, seeing the satellite photos, and seeing the mass graves you are an ****ING MORON! This is how Hitler was able to get away with the extermination of Jews and others.