I’m reading through it through firefox’s reader to bypass the paywall and most of their stories are conjecture (I read most of them and skipped the rest). Even worse, they’re just that: stories. They have no dates attached, just a name, age, and “was never seen again”. I don’t doubt these people were in Bucha in March, but beyond that the NYT is not tying them to the massacre itself. Just that they were in the fighting. Like there’s telegrams screencaps saying “this person was killed march 5 can you help me move their body” but the message itself isn’t dated, very amateur.
NYT is the journal that has been cheering for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan for decades, they have a very high bar to clear if they want to be taken at face value.
The part about how they reported this is word salad, it’s the exact same method Buzzfeed used to find the “Uyghur concentration camps” that were actually factories and schools: google maps and their “sources”
There are literally videos of Russian bmps shooting people in the article I linked, maybe the ad block is blocking it. The video done with the article maybe presents it in a more digestible format.
Yeah I saw some of those videos, but Ukraine has been known (and indeed as far back as the early days of the war) to impersonate Russian soldiers and film propaganda videos.
We’re talking about the country that had a guy proudly cook human skulls in soup on video. There was also the video where a driver got scared in town and drove his armored vehicle over cars in the city trying to get away and the propaganda machine instantly claimed he was Russian, but it turned out to be UA forces.
I don’t personally know enough about Russian/Ukrainian armoured vehicles to say if they’re similar or Ukraine had somehow seized one back in March of last year but again, NYT has a very high bar to clear if they want to be taken seriously. And then we went from “Russia didn’t commit the Bucha massacre” to “oh but they did kill civilians even if it wasn’t a massacre” which I don’t know what the goal of this reframing is :/
I’m reading through it through firefox’s reader to bypass the paywall and most of their stories are conjecture (I read most of them and skipped the rest). Even worse, they’re just that: stories. They have no dates attached, just a name, age, and “was never seen again”. I don’t doubt these people were in Bucha in March, but beyond that the NYT is not tying them to the massacre itself. Just that they were in the fighting. Like there’s telegrams screencaps saying “this person was killed march 5 can you help me move their body” but the message itself isn’t dated, very amateur.
NYT is the journal that has been cheering for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan for decades, they have a very high bar to clear if they want to be taken at face value.
The part about how they reported this is word salad, it’s the exact same method Buzzfeed used to find the “Uyghur concentration camps” that were actually factories and schools: google maps and their “sources”
There are literally videos of Russian bmps shooting people in the article I linked, maybe the ad block is blocking it. The video done with the article maybe presents it in a more digestible format.
Again nsfl bc dead bodies ect https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/europe/100000008299178/ukraine-bucha-russia-massacre-video.html
Yeah I saw some of those videos, but Ukraine has been known (and indeed as far back as the early days of the war) to impersonate Russian soldiers and film propaganda videos.
We’re talking about the country that had a guy proudly cook human skulls in soup on video. There was also the video where a driver got scared in town and drove his armored vehicle over cars in the city trying to get away and the propaganda machine instantly claimed he was Russian, but it turned out to be UA forces.
I don’t personally know enough about Russian/Ukrainian armoured vehicles to say if they’re similar or Ukraine had somehow seized one back in March of last year but again, NYT has a very high bar to clear if they want to be taken seriously. And then we went from “Russia didn’t commit the Bucha massacre” to “oh but they did kill civilians even if it wasn’t a massacre” which I don’t know what the goal of this reframing is :/