On February 21 2014 04:06 DeepElemBlues wrote: Cynicism replacing critical thinking is very prevalent these days. What "all the people in Germany think" means squat beside the unedited video being transmitted from Kiev. Don't trust your media all you want, it's pretty funny that you say something like that while swallowing down nearly anything and everything you hear or read that is negative about the West. The cynicism doesn't operate so consistently then.
It's not replacing critical thinking because actual critical thinking is exceptionally rare.
From a purely technical point of view most media are unreliable on almost any issue. That's not cynicism, that's a fact. It's something you can check for yourself if you listen carefully to reports on issues you have deep expertise in.
We can debate whether 'western media' (whatever that means) is intentionally biased, or whether their incompetence leads them to support their governments' agenda. You could even argue that their incompetence actually evens out and they are as likely to err on one side as the other.
But all that doesn't change the fact that there's no public debate on foreign policy or international events that approaches the most rudimentary criteria of critical thinking. What we have are debates loosely centred around trust or distrust in the establishment.
And no, watching a few hours of unedited footage won't make you an expert either. The first step is admitting ignorance, then depending on one's level of interest do research or get out of the way.
No, Der Spiegel is one of the most prolific weekly newspapers! From the daily newspapers the best are Süddeutsche Zeitung and Frankfurter Allgemeine, maybe, to get another, more leftist view, the TAZ. The best weekly ones are Die Zeit and Der Spiegel.
Maybe Spiegel Online (SPON) is getting more to that tabloid you mention, but I doubt it heavily. I am not the greatest fan of Spiegel, as, for instance, the recent news were very one-sided in favor for the protesters.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
Indeed. Yet, when British defense contractors advised security forces in Bahrein that were doing just that, they got of free. Their accounts weren't frozen. They didn't even lose their military pension. I imagine they were actually praised in private for defending HM's interests.
Thank you both r.Evo and hypercube! Your arguments are logical, sound and, best of it all, they are with the hint of humanity this thread deeply needs.
On February 21 2014 02:26 Greem wrote: One thing is clear to me, one valuing their life should not go near places where rioters and polices are present, sooner or later things get ugly and inocent will die, and there is no clear side to blame, there is no black and white here. Red or Blue.
You sound like you don't have the full information. Innocent people have already died, lots of them. Many unarmed civilians were killed before 18 of february, including those who were kidnapped and tortured to death. Things "got ugly" more than a month ago when government and/or its supporters started to use violence against, at that point, completely peaceful demonstrations.
Well it became Riot pretty quickly, no people died prior to that i think, and if they being kidnaped and tortured, those were people in some relations and with some power, some political afinity related to groups in maidan, maybe innocent but related.I was talking of innocent people who just wanted to help or for whatever reason just stood there.. I guess i can a link a video , and at the start a guy from London describes the situation as it started.
This video would be so much better if they picked someone who can articulate himself properly instead of the guy from Washington in the bottom right. ;;
i Agree , that guy sounded too incompetent compared to the others , but a guy from London is clearly on neither side, and he tells things that oposition shoud've done .
You're right. However some people on the thread here intentionaly or not , blame one side or another, the situation became so chaotic and uncontrolable that looking for blame-side is just gonna make mad another side, because as we know people like to take sides. So as guy from London pointed out, they create , whats the word he used, Polarization ? which isn't helping at all. One side is blaming the side who "started" whatever side that is, and others blame the one who couldn't resolve the shit, whatever side that is . Wrong aproach to the situation it is. And at this point, who knows what needs to be done. At least in my eyes first step for normal , innocent person who desires stability to abandon the protesting , because there are rioters present there. And i doubt there are that much, police will deal with them, and hopefully new ones wont appear, and people can wait 1 more year for elections, and hopefully Ukraine got some leader to step up, because as it seems now, and from what i observed there is no one competent enough. I just hear them talk and they sound too genetic all, nothing promising. While I liked the way he explains things some of his comparisons are highly awkward.
If you riot (aka pose a risk to public order) that's illegal in pretty much any other European country. However if your police force seems incapable of dispersing the "riot" (for whatever reason) you have two choices. Either you try to deescalate, make sure your forces are set up defensively, try to keep business as usual otherwise and try to... talk about it or you keep storming and push up the violence.
What I've seen since the very beginning of this isn't "Our police force is protecting the rest of the city and population from violent rioters (aka trying to re-establish public order)" - it is "Our police force is protecting a belief system and on the other side are a large proportion of women and elders". That's simply not acceptable and where the comparison to violent rioters in the middle of London ends very quickly.
You don't bring a SWAT team army to disperse a riot, fail at it because it's already bigger than anything you prepared to handle and then start using lethal force because for some weird inexplicable reason all you did was make the mob more angry. You don't issue a general "use lethal force whenever you feel threatened"-command because some of the people in the mob are using firearms. If anything, you announce that people with firearms will be shot on sight (keep in mind that this would be more civil than what is happening right now) and make very, very damn fucking sure that your ranks keep order and don't start fucking up people with red crosses over their chests who are trying to help the wounded.
That's not trying to restore order, it's not protecting the city or your citizens. It's declaring war on your own population.
Strange, i wrote a response and it didnt get posted after the quote. What i answered was basically this.
You're right. But at this point situation is too chaotic and uncontrolable. And what some people do , even on this thread is blame some side , police or rioters, when in reality its too late for that, what this does is create polarization as a guy from London sad, i agree with him, it aint helping to speak about wrongs of any side, its horrific at this point what is happening, to decide who is more wrong is just poitless.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
But why would the police shoot at medical personal? This feels like 'Assad used chemical weapons' all over again. There are militant Right Sector groups all around the place wearing yellow armbands and posing as law enforcers. There is absolutely no way anyone can know who is shooting at medics. Jumping to conclusions solves nothing
It's not replacing critical thinking because actual critical thinking is exceptionally rare.
Unsupported, self-serving assertion most likely based on "well come on, everybody knows that."
From a purely technical point of view most media are unreliable on almost any issue.
Unsupported assertion. And even ceding that media getting technical things wrong thanks to a lack of familiarity with a technical subject may be common, it has little if anything to do with media reportage on human behavior, like engaging in politics or protesting or shooting at protesters. So why should this technical shortcoming be sufficient to discredit non-technical reporting?
That's not cynicism, that's a fact. It's something you can check for yourself if you listen carefully to reports on issues you have deep expertise in.
It also has nothing to do with media reporting that isn't on technical subjects, but we're far off into evidence that doesn't actually support my argument land now.
We can debate whether 'western media' (whatever that means) is intentionally biased, or whether their incompetence leads them to support their governments' agenda. You could even argue that their incompetence actually evens out and they are as likely to err on one side as the other.
Now why would we want to debate with such restrictions that clearly favor the already arrived at conclusion of one side?
But all that doesn't change the fact that there's no public debate on foreign policy or international events that approaches the most rudimentary criteria of critical thinking. What we have are debates loosely centred around trust or distrust in the establishment.
This is simply horseshit borne from ignorance and arrogance and more likely than not from bitterness that one's self-evidently true opinions are not as influential as they would wish. There are thousands of intelligent public discussions on foreign policy and international events every day that are not loosely centered or centered at all around trust or distrust in the establishment, you are simply unlikely to find them on the internet, even though the erudition of the typical person who engages in such discussions on the internet is higher than that of the general population. Anonymity and "talking" to a screen not a face usually easily counterbalances that erudition. But no doubt you get daily comprehensive reports from the NSA on the frequency and quality level of public discussions regarding foreign policy and international events and so are talking from a position based 100% on fact.
And no, watching a few hours of unedited footage won't make you an expert either. The first step is admitting ignorance, then depending on one's level of interest do research or get out of the way.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. The first step is discovering that your (coincidentally, I'm sure) self-serving condescending opinion about the unwashed masses is not an accurate view of reality, it's mental masturbation. Also, getting out of the way because 'you're ignorant!' is elitist authoritarianism. Shut up you dumb prole, let the smart people do the thinking and the talking and the making of the decisions. And sorry but I don't base what I say about the Ukraine on watching a few hours of some Youtube, it's based on extensive reading of Ukrainian (and European in general) history going back to the days of the Roman Republic.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
But why would the police shoot at medical personal? This feels like 'Assad used chemical weapons' all over again. There are militant Right Sector groups all around the place wearing yellow armbands and posing as law enforcers. There is absolutely no way anyone can know who is shooting at medics. Jumping to conclusions solves nothing
Yes it solves shit. But then again, I seriously doubt that "wild animals" as you called them few posts before, are capable of taking precision shots without proper training and weapons.
There is a video of a group of advancing protesters behind shields. They come under very precise fire. After a few are hit, some fatal, people try to rescue them. Of course the rescuers are then shot too.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
Indeed. Yet, when British defense contractors advised security forces in Bahrein that were doing just that, they got of free. Their accounts weren't frozen. They didn't even lose their military pension. I imagine they were actually praised in private for defending HM's interests.
Supposedly Ukrainian parliament voted to end the "anti-terror" campaing, all units should fall back to their barracks. it also says that the government didnt participate in the voting. Also no more live ammunition shooting allowed
From a purely technical point of view most media are unreliable on almost any issue.
Unsupported assertion. And even ceding that media getting technical things wrong thanks to a lack of familiarity with a technical subject may be common, it has little if anything to do with media reportage on human behavior, like engaging in politics or protesting or shooting at protesters. So why should this technical shortcoming be sufficient to discredit non-technical reporting?
The problem is that they chose to report on things where they lack expertise in the first place. It's a proof that they are willing to make stuff up and that they aren't very good at evaluating evidence in general.
That's not cynicism, that's a fact. It's something you can check for yourself if you listen carefully to reports on issues you have deep expertise in.
It also has nothing to do with media reporting that isn't on technical subjects, but we're far off into evidence that doesn't actually support my argument land now.
Point is that you shouldn't base your conclusions on sources that are not very reliable. This isn't cynicism: it's actually an application of critical thinking skills.
But all that doesn't change the fact that there's no public debate on foreign policy or international events that approaches the most rudimentary criteria of critical thinking. What we have are debates loosely centred around trust or distrust in the establishment.
There are thousands of intelligent public discussions on foreign policy and international events every day that are not loosely centered or centered at all around trust or distrust in the establishment, you are simply unlikely to find them on the internet, even though the erudition of the typical person who engages in such discussions on the internet is higher than that of the general population. Anonymity and "talking" to a screen not a face usually easily counterbalances that erudition.
Ok, none is an exaggeration. But the main problem isn't anonymity: it's the lack of detailed specific information.
And no, watching a few hours of unedited footage won't make you an expert either. The first step is admitting ignorance, then depending on one's level of interest do research or get out of the way.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. The first step is discovering that your (coincidentally, I'm sure) self-serving condescending opinion about the unwashed masses is not an accurate view of reality, it's mental masturbation. Also, getting out of the way because 'you're ignorant!' is elitist authoritarianism. Shut up you dumb prole, let the smart people do the thinking and the talking and the making of the decisions.
I take exception to that. My opinion is more like:
"Shut up you ignorant fuck* and let people who know what they're talking about speak."
*Not referring to anyone in particular here, although myself would probably be included.
And sorry but I don't base what I say about the Ukraine on watching a few hours of some Youtube, it's based on extensive reading of Ukrainian (and European in general) history going back to the days of the Roman Republic.
Guess what: I wasn't talking about you. All I'm saying that the people who figured out they shouldn't have strong opinions based on a few news reports are probably on the right track. You call them cynical for some unknown reason.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
But why would the police shoot at medical personal? This feels like 'Assad used chemical weapons' all over again. There are militant Right Sector groups all around the place wearing yellow armbands and posing as law enforcers. There is absolutely no way anyone can know who is shooting at medics. Jumping to conclusions solves nothing
Yes it solves shit. But then again, I seriously doubt that "wild animals" as you called them few posts before, are capable of taking precision shots without proper training and weapons.
I know I mentioned paramilitary groups when I made that post. There are many Afghanistan war veterans with the protesters in western Ukraine, with the large stockpiles of military hardware that went missing during the 90's its very hard to believe they don't have the means to pull something like this off. Also there is your 'run-of-the-mill' sociopath that would use the large scale disorder to kill people at random.
On February 21 2014 05:45 hypercube wrote: All I'm saying that the people who figured out they shouldn't have strong opinions based on a few news reports are probably on the right track.
But having strong opinions solely based on anti - western resentments and half ass conspiracy theories is better? We have hundreds of independent news agencies in Western Europe that are under practically no government influence. If 90% of them report the same thing chance that they are right is pretty high. Instead people are like "nooo, we can't trust the evil western mainstream media! I'll go watch Russian state television instead!"
That's neither critical nor cynical, it's just plain stupid.
On February 21 2014 05:45 hypercube wrote: All I'm saying that the people who figured out they shouldn't have strong opinions based on a few news reports are probably on the right track.
But having strong opinions solely based on anti - western resentments and half ass conspiracy theories is better? We have hundreds of independent news agencies in Western Europe that are under practically no government influence. If 90% of them report the same thing chance that they are right is pretty high. Instead people are like "nooo, we can't trust the evil western mainstream media! I'll go watch Russian state television instead!"
That's neither critical nor cynical, it's just plain stupid.
First there's no such thing as anti-western resentment. There is strong resentment against western elites as I'm sure there's similar resentment in Russia, China or in the rest of the world against their own.
But yeah, you obviously can't trust the western media. That's not to say RT is more likely to be correct or that the opposite of what they say is automatically true, just that it's an unreliable source for most information.
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
I cant remember saying it is not evil todo that. It is also evil to smash the skull of a unconscious police officer lying on the ground with a stone. Or burying police officers with molotov cocktails so they burn alive.
On February 21 2014 04:32 Nyxisto wrote:
On February 21 2014 04:25 Saryph wrote: Sokrates, I'd argue it's pretty evil to purposely shoot (in the neck/head) clearly marked unarmed medics that are trying to treat injured/shot civilians. Unfortunately not all of the people in even this thread seem to agree with that, which is why some people are getting irritated.
Since the whole NSA stuff was revealed some people on this continent have switched from latent anti - Americanism/Westernism into 'Putin is our savior' mode. From their point of view every European or American sanction towards the glorious civilized regime of Yanukovych is just evil imperialism and every person fighting for their freedom is just a scumbag nationalist vandal who is disturbing the peaceful order.
How about neither?
People are so stuck in their archaic "pick your side" that they are unable to see past that.
It can never be the police's response to a few committing crimes to open fire indiscriminately on crowds of innocents. To purposely have snipers attack medics, to use automatic gunfire on crowds watching protesters. People shooting at police are wrong, but the police are never right to shoot to kill at people they know have done no wrong. Police exist to uphold order, not get angry and commit mass murder.
But why would the police shoot at medical personal? This feels like 'Assad used chemical weapons' all over again. There are militant Right Sector groups all around the place wearing yellow armbands and posing as law enforcers. There is absolutely no way anyone can know who is shooting at medics. Jumping to conclusions solves nothing
Yes it solves shit. But then again, I seriously doubt that "wild animals" as you called them few posts before, are capable of taking precision shots without proper training and weapons.
I know I mentioned paramilitary groups when I made that post. There are many Afghanistan war veterans with the protesters in western Ukraine, with the large stockpiles of military hardware that went missing during the 90's its very hard to believe they don't have the means to pull something like this off. Also there is your 'run-of-the-mill' sociopath that would use the large scale disorder to kill people at random.
Please.
Paratrooper squads and special forces come to the city and people start falling right and left from sniper fire? Ah it must have been a coincidence. There are other possibilities like "run-of-the-mill" sociopath. Afghan veterans from 80's with equipment from 90's. What else, in your denial, will you invent?
On February 21 2014 05:45 hypercube wrote: All I'm saying that the people who figured out they shouldn't have strong opinions based on a few news reports are probably on the right track.
But having strong opinions solely based on anti - western resentments and half ass conspiracy theories is better? We have hundreds of independent news agencies in Western Europe that are under practically no government influence. If 90% of them report the same thing chance that they are right is pretty high. Instead people are like "nooo, we can't trust the evil western mainstream media! I'll go watch Russian state television instead!"
That's neither critical nor cynical, it's just plain stupid.
First there's no such thing as anti-western resentment. There is strong resentment against western elites.
On February 21 2014 02:26 Greem wrote: One thing is clear to me, one valuing their life should not go near places where rioters and polices are present, sooner or later things get ugly and inocent will die, and there is no clear side to blame, there is no black and white here. Red or Blue.
You sound like you don't have the full information. Innocent people have already died, lots of them. Many unarmed civilians were killed before 18 of february, including those who were kidnapped and tortured to death. Things "got ugly" more than a month ago when government and/or its supporters started to use violence against, at that point, completely peaceful demonstrations.
Well it became Riot pretty quickly, no people died prior to that i think, and if they being kidnaped and tortured, those were people in some relations and with some power, some political afinity related to groups in maidan, maybe innocent but related.I was talking of innocent people who just wanted to help or for whatever reason just stood there.. I guess i can a link a video , and at the start a guy from London describes the situation as it started.
The protest was considerate and peaceful up until government tried to disperse it with force at 30 november. Only after that it started to look like riot. You are right that no people were killed at that point, but are you trying to say that some people who were helping protesters at Maidan and latter got killed because of it were not innocent just because they supported certain political view? Like Yuriy Verbytsky, who got kidnapped right from a hospital and then tortured and left to die in a rural area. Or many others who were seized by police right in hospitals and other medical institutions and instead of proper medial treatment they got beaten even more. I'm talking about things that happened around 20-23 january. The very reason this riot got so large and some people got so angry/radical is because regular Ukrainians, who didn't hurt anyone, were treated like trash and even worse by the police.
Btw, I don't need that video to learn how things started or progressed. I live in Kiev and can see what is happening by my own eyes.
On February 19 2014 10:14 disciple wrote: The news and images from Ukraine hurt me deeply. What infuriates me even more is the completely pointless and utterly perverse celebration of vanity going on in neighbouring Russia. By that I mean the Olympics. Both are the extremes of the same social abomination. My thoughts and prayers are with the people of Ukraine.
EPT
