|
|
On March 13 2014 17:29 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 17:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:21 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:11 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:09 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:02 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 16:44 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:32 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote:
[quote]
Of course it's gonna get heavily criticized, it's heavily stupid bullshit. From what was quoted from their own little manifesto or whatever it is, did nobody know about the Rockefeller family before the internet or something? Serious Badasses (TM) now know what is up and there's no way these bloodsuckers aren't gonna be held to account!
Jesus Christ these people are deluded and stupid. you're not criticizing the video though. i think it sums up some of the under-reported parts of the conflict at least. 'fuck the eu' being the least interesting part of the nuland leak and putting focus on backlash of western backing of 'politically expedient groups' (too funny) to shape policies. haven't heard estonian leak before, only read about it. sounded convincing.also i can't argue with not being told about us backing of syrian rebels wrt the conflict in ukraine. i gotta give them that. The Estonian leak actually appeared in this thread way before it appeared even on RT. And there was extensive discussion on it in this very thread. Yes, it's authentic, but it doesn't say anything negative. It was a cut-out of a conversation reporting on a rumour. It established no facts. like i said, i only read about it, but didn't hear it until now. i must have skimmed some of the extensive discussion in this thread. #filtered same with nuland leak, it made a much bigger impression on me when i heard it. leaks are a good source of info. #unfiltered what's "negative" in this context? remind me again, which twitter accounts have fact establishing retweet power? need someone to get on this. Don't be glib. If you listened to the actual tape, you'd know that Paet was reporting on a rumour he was told, it's not like it's actually fact. Also, there was some miscommunication between Paet and the person who started the rumour. This is what Olga Bogomolets responded: + Show Spoiler +
Myself I saw only protesters. I do not know the type of wounds suffered by military people," she told The Telegraph. "I have no access to those people."
But she said she had asked for a full forensic criminal investigation into the deaths that occurred in the Maidan. "No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the type of weapons. I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was done. I have no data to prove anything.
"I was a doctor helping to save people on the square. There were 15 people killed on the first day by snipers. They were shot directly to the heart, brain and arteries. There were more than 40 the next day, 12 of them died in my arms.
"Our nation has to ask the question who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine. We need good answers on the basis of expertise."
Mr Paet's assertion that an opposition figure was behind the Maidan massacre was not one she could share.
"I think you can only say something like this on the basis of fact," she said. "Its not correct and its not good to do this. It should be based on fact."
She said the new government in Kiev had assured her a criminal investigation had begun but that she had not direct contact with it so far.
"They told me they have begun a criminal process and if they say that I believe them. The police have not given me any information on it."
glib my posting style alone. ofc they scramble to save face afterwards, but not as interesting, and ofc you have to employ some semblance of critical thinking, but leaks are a more interesting source of info than your regular @what-have-yous #MyFavoriteColor, and probably as close as we plebs will get to the juicy stuff atm. So what did you learn from that leak? are we doing the interview right now? Don't avoid the question. Instead of making superficial statements, actually make a claim we can verify, what did that leak teach you. i'll repeat my 'claim' since it didn't stick the first time: i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings. good luck with the verification process and you're not getting into my apartement btw.
The problem with that leak is that it was kind of hearsay in the video.
Who was the woman(a doctor?) the Estonian PM was talking about that gave him his information? What is her credibility?
We don't know because of the way the author edited that portion. edit: He really should have provided the full recording to give the full context.
|
yes... critical thinking good... we are agree.
ghan venturing into a 1-man fact finding mission, thinking he has the mandate to interrogate / liquiboard is beyond me though... 'anything negative', gotta protect the cause.
|
Welp, the Crimean situation was predictably gonna be used for this:
“The Szeklers from the Szekler Land are, just like the Tartars from the Crimean Peninsula, about to become a minority on their own territory,” Tokes said, asking the European Parliament and the other European institutions to help the Szeklers obtain territorial autonomy.
“I noticed yesterday the high-level presence in Romania of the Hungarian extremist party Jobbik. I believe the time has come for us to put an end to the actions of this party on Romania’s soil. I am publicly asking the Government and Parliament to issue a legislative document to ban the presence in Romania of the members and leaders of the Jobbik party. This is an extremist party that has no shared responsibility. A rise in the weight of extremist parties is being noticed. If Hungary is unable to place them under control, at least they should not be allowed on Romania’s soil,” Basescu said.
Although it's probably gonna settle down over after the Hungarian parliamentary elections next month.
http://www.nineoclock.ro/laszlo-tokes-rekindles-the-hungarian-issue/
http://www.politics.hu/20140312/jobbik-leader-unwelcome-in-romania-says-pm-ponta/
|
On March 13 2014 17:49 nunez wrote:
yes... critical thinking good... we are agree.
ghan venturing into a 1-man fact finding mission, thinking he has the mandate to interrogate / liquiboard is beyond me though... 'anything negative', gotta protect the cause.
I not sure why you are hostile over people questioning the validity of a source on a forum. I'm not part of any conspiracy trust me. (wink wink)
|
On March 13 2014 17:29 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 17:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:21 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:11 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:09 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:02 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 16:44 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:32 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote:
[quote]
Of course it's gonna get heavily criticized, it's heavily stupid bullshit. From what was quoted from their own little manifesto or whatever it is, did nobody know about the Rockefeller family before the internet or something? Serious Badasses (TM) now know what is up and there's no way these bloodsuckers aren't gonna be held to account!
Jesus Christ these people are deluded and stupid. you're not criticizing the video though. i think it sums up some of the under-reported parts of the conflict at least. 'fuck the eu' being the least interesting part of the nuland leak and putting focus on backlash of western backing of 'politically expedient groups' (too funny) to shape policies. haven't heard estonian leak before, only read about it. sounded convincing.also i can't argue with not being told about us backing of syrian rebels wrt the conflict in ukraine. i gotta give them that. The Estonian leak actually appeared in this thread way before it appeared even on RT. And there was extensive discussion on it in this very thread. Yes, it's authentic, but it doesn't say anything negative. It was a cut-out of a conversation reporting on a rumour. It established no facts. like i said, i only read about it, but didn't hear it until now. i must have skimmed some of the extensive discussion in this thread. #filtered same with nuland leak, it made a much bigger impression on me when i heard it. leaks are a good source of info. #unfiltered what's "negative" in this context? remind me again, which twitter accounts have fact establishing retweet power? need someone to get on this. Don't be glib. If you listened to the actual tape, you'd know that Paet was reporting on a rumour he was told, it's not like it's actually fact. Also, there was some miscommunication between Paet and the person who started the rumour. This is what Olga Bogomolets responded: + Show Spoiler +
Myself I saw only protesters. I do not know the type of wounds suffered by military people," she told The Telegraph. "I have no access to those people."
But she said she had asked for a full forensic criminal investigation into the deaths that occurred in the Maidan. "No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the type of weapons. I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was done. I have no data to prove anything.
"I was a doctor helping to save people on the square. There were 15 people killed on the first day by snipers. They were shot directly to the heart, brain and arteries. There were more than 40 the next day, 12 of them died in my arms.
"Our nation has to ask the question who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine. We need good answers on the basis of expertise."
Mr Paet's assertion that an opposition figure was behind the Maidan massacre was not one she could share.
"I think you can only say something like this on the basis of fact," she said. "Its not correct and its not good to do this. It should be based on fact."
She said the new government in Kiev had assured her a criminal investigation had begun but that she had not direct contact with it so far.
"They told me they have begun a criminal process and if they say that I believe them. The police have not given me any information on it."
glib my posting style alone. ofc they scramble to save face afterwards, but not as interesting, and ofc you have to employ some semblance of critical thinking, but leaks are a more interesting source of info than your regular @what-have-yous #MyFavoriteColor, and probably as close as we plebs will get to the juicy stuff atm. So what did you learn from that leak? are we doing the interview right now? Don't avoid the question. Instead of making superficial statements, actually make a claim we can verify, what did that leak teach you. i'll repeat my 'claim' since it didn't stick the first time: i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings. good luck with the verification process and you're not getting into my apartement btw.
First of all, I'm really tired of your insults and insinuations. Talk like a human being.
Secondly, here's a transcript of the video (which I posted minutes after the video appeared on youtube:
8.22: Paet: "What Olga [of the civil society/Maidan people] said all evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides among policemen and on the streets that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides. She also showed [Paet] some photos, she said that as medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition don't want to investigate what has happened. So there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovich but it was somebody from the new coalition."
Ashton: "I do think they do want to investigate."
Paet: "What is disturbing is that if it starts to live its own life powerfully it already discredits from the very beginning also this new coalition."
Ashton: "Well, this is what they're supposed to be careful of as well, they need to demand great change, but they have also got to let the Rada function. If the Rada does not function then there will be chaos. Being an activist and a doctor is very important, but [something something] politician, and they have got to get to a kind of accommodation for the next few weeks as to how the country is going to run and then after elections they can think of change."
This definitely does not support your claim `i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings.' as he is very clear that he is reporting on the rumour Olga Bogomolets told him. And he is worried that such stories will begin to live their own life. Never in that video did he say that he believes this is in fact true.
|
This is pretty messed up. How much damage can they do in the space of a few weeks?!
|
If I remember reading correctly awhile back, Ukraine has shut down the banking system connecting Crimea's local banks to the outside. So people in Crimea had no access to their money. Russia is helping those people out, until the situation is resolved. So its not as messed up as you think, banks weren't working.
|
On March 13 2014 18:09 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 17:49 nunez wrote:
yes... critical thinking good... we are agree.
ghan venturing into a 1-man fact finding mission, thinking he has the mandate to interrogate / liquiboard is beyond me though... 'anything negative', gotta protect the cause. I not sure why you are hostile over people questioning the validity of a source on a forum. I'm not part of any conspiracy trust me. (wink wink)
if your point is still "critical thinking must be applied", we are still in agree. i think a leak is a good source.
On March 13 2014 18:46 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 17:29 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:21 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:11 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 17:09 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 17:02 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:57 nunez wrote:On March 13 2014 16:44 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 13 2014 16:32 nunez wrote:
[quote]
you're not criticizing the video though. i think it sums up some of the under-reported parts of the conflict at least.
'fuck the eu' being the least interesting part of the nuland leak and putting focus on backlash of western backing of 'politically expedient groups' (too funny) to shape policies.
haven't heard estonian leak before, only read about it. sounded convincing.
also i can't argue with not being told about us backing of syrian rebels wrt the conflict in ukraine. i gotta give them that. The Estonian leak actually appeared in this thread way before it appeared even on RT. And there was extensive discussion on it in this very thread. Yes, it's authentic, but it doesn't say anything negative. It was a cut-out of a conversation reporting on a rumour. It established no facts. like i said, i only read about it, but didn't hear it until now. i must have skimmed some of the extensive discussion in this thread. #filtered same with nuland leak, it made a much bigger impression on me when i heard it. leaks are a good source of info. #unfiltered what's "negative" in this context? remind me again, which twitter accounts have fact establishing retweet power? need someone to get on this. Don't be glib. If you listened to the actual tape, you'd know that Paet was reporting on a rumour he was told, it's not like it's actually fact. Also, there was some miscommunication between Paet and the person who started the rumour. This is what Olga Bogomolets responded: + Show Spoiler +
Myself I saw only protesters. I do not know the type of wounds suffered by military people," she told The Telegraph. "I have no access to those people."
But she said she had asked for a full forensic criminal investigation into the deaths that occurred in the Maidan. "No one who just sees the wounds when treating the victims can make a determination about the type of weapons. I hope international experts and Ukrainian investigators will make a determination of what type of weapons, who was involved in the killings and how it was done. I have no data to prove anything.
"I was a doctor helping to save people on the square. There were 15 people killed on the first day by snipers. They were shot directly to the heart, brain and arteries. There were more than 40 the next day, 12 of them died in my arms.
"Our nation has to ask the question who were the killers, who asked them to come to Ukraine. We need good answers on the basis of expertise."
Mr Paet's assertion that an opposition figure was behind the Maidan massacre was not one she could share.
"I think you can only say something like this on the basis of fact," she said. "Its not correct and its not good to do this. It should be based on fact."
She said the new government in Kiev had assured her a criminal investigation had begun but that she had not direct contact with it so far.
"They told me they have begun a criminal process and if they say that I believe them. The police have not given me any information on it."
glib my posting style alone. ofc they scramble to save face afterwards, but not as interesting, and ofc you have to employ some semblance of critical thinking, but leaks are a more interesting source of info than your regular @what-have-yous #MyFavoriteColor, and probably as close as we plebs will get to the juicy stuff atm. So what did you learn from that leak? are we doing the interview right now? Don't avoid the question. Instead of making superficial statements, actually make a claim we can verify, what did that leak teach you. i'll repeat my 'claim' since it didn't stick the first time: i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings. good luck with the verification process and you're not getting into my apartement btw. First of all, I'm really tired of your insults and insinuations. Talk like a human being. Secondly, here's a transcript of the video (which I posted minutes after the video appeared on youtube: Show nested quote +
8.22: Paet: "What Olga [of the civil society/Maidan people] said all evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides among policemen and on the streets that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides. She also showed [Paet] some photos, she said that as medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition don't want to investigate what has happened. So there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovich but it was somebody from the new coalition."
Ashton: "I think they do want to investigate. I mean i didn't pick that up, that's interesting i guess"
Paet: "What is disturbing is that if it starts to live its own life powerfully it already discredits from the very beginning also this new coalition."
Ashton: "Well, this is what they're supposed to be careful of as well, they need to demand great change, but they have also got to let the Rada function. If the Rada does not function then there will be chaos. Being an activist and a doctor is very important, but [something something] politician, and they have got to get to a kind of accommodation for the next few weeks as to how the country is going to run and then after elections they can think of change."
This definitely does not support your claim `i thought paet sounded convinced that the opposition was behind the shootings.' as he is very clear that he is reporting on the rumour Olga Bogomolets told him. And he is worried that such stories will begin to live their own life. Never in that video did he say that he believes this is in fact true.
well, stop presenting yourself as an arbiter of truth, or i shall taunt you a second time.
you're right, that's your edited transcript, in text. it doesn't sound convincing at all. since it's text, it's mostly a visual experience. even though you can hear a low, intelligible whisper by looking at a part you left out.
Ashton: "I think they do want to investigate. I mean i didn't pick that up, that's interesting i guess(?)"
so tell me in your head, have you now falsified my claim that i thought he sounded convinced? and ghan, what's 'negative'? what is this 1-dimensional scale you are (no doubt scientifically) measuring this conflict in?
|
On March 13 2014 19:16 kukarachaa wrote:If I remember reading correctly awhile back, Ukraine has shut down the banking system connecting Crimea's local banks to the outside. So people in Crimea had no access to their money. Russia is helping those people out, until the situation is resolved. So its not as messed up as you think, banks weren't working.
Source? I've heard nothing like that.
***
Summary: Russia's accession is suspended.
|
Regarding the sniper issue, Russia channel had an interview with a former Israeli intelligence officer and I thought he brought up an interesting point. During the mayhem in Ukraine plenty of countries were listening in, and the fact that no one has come forward with any intercepted communications suggesting that riot police were using snipers to deter the crowd is puzzling, something should have given it away. While it doesn't prove that the shooters were from Maidan side, it doesn't help their cause.
|
Germany will not help US (via sanctions) get its hands on its gas faucet; it has been trying to get rid of US influence for years.
|
^I don't understand the point. Can you, once again, post the source?
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
when i first stated that snipers were not from police side but from EU side i got blamed really hard
look now, i find your lack of faith in evil Berkut snipers disturbing my little TL.netters 
|
You are still getting blamed really hard. There is no evidence for it.
|
On March 13 2014 19:54 PaleMan wrote:when i first stated that snipers were not from police side but from EU side i got blamed really hard look now, i find your lack of faith in evil Berkut snipers disturbing my little TL.netters
Well you should get blamed, I don't see how anyone can say with certainty, whose snipers were shooting the demonstrators.
Although I and many others, did go from having no doubts it was Berkut, to thinking something here isn't right.
Hard to ignore the following:
1) Videos breaking down bullet trajectories.
2) Doctor's who treated the shooting victims and their opinions.
3) Leaked phone call.
4) Nothing has been found or presented ( as far as I know ), for example radio communications, paper orders, people's testimonies ( such as police officers or government officials ). Lack of existence of such evidence doesn't help.
While none of things above amount to a conclusive proof. Any normal person should have some doubts as to what actually happened.
|
|
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
On March 13 2014 20:21 kukarachaa wrote:
Although I and many others, did go from having no doubts it was Berkut, to thinking something here isn't right.
i like this trend
see, my point still stands, yours is slowly drifting to mine
lets wait and see
|
It seems quite obvious that Putin will never back down without getting something for it. I mean he will never just give up and look like a loser in front of the whole world. But what can he get, if we assume the goal is to keep crimea a part of ukraine?
|
On March 13 2014 20:30 PaleMan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 20:21 kukarachaa wrote:
Although I and many others, did go from having no doubts it was Berkut, to thinking something here isn't right.
i like this trend see, my point still stands, yours is slowly drifting to mine lets wait and see
You dont think Putin with all his resources would have brought forward more evidence to use this if it was true? It would be very powerful if it was and I doubt such a thing would be left alone by Russia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
