4 ms·
>I simply choose to read proper sources and be informed of geopolitical events rather than parrot US propaganda And yet in your other comment you linked to "Mo
by r721 5y ago
>I simply choose to read proper sources and be informed of geopolitical events rather than parrot US propaganda
And yet in your other comment you linked to "Moon of Alabama", anonymous blogger which always takes a pro-Kremlin position. How is that a "proper source"?
- radmuzom 5y agoNo. Yes, he is generally what I would consider "anti-US" but Media Bias Fact Check reports no failed fact check in last 5 years. Also, before people label him as "left-wing", he was a very strong supporter of Kyle Rittenhouse from the beginning (even supposedly good sources like The Intercept lamented the acquittal). I have linked to his article on the day of the verdict below. https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/11/kyle-rittenhouse-is-not-guilty.html https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/11/kyle-rittenhouse-is-no...
- r721 5y ago>No. What kind of a reply is that? You can search what he wrote on every topic which is sensitive for Kremlin (Crimea, Donbass, MH17, Navalny, Skripals, Syrian chemical attacks) and in every post he would take a "Russia did nothing wrong" position.
- radmuzom 5y agoI would say that if all facts point to the fact that Russia did nothing wrong, perhaps Russia did nothing wrong. And junk articles in NYT, WSJ, Guardian or BBC are not "evidence" that they did something wrong. Another relatively neutral source on reporting on Central Asia is https://www.indianpunchline.com/about-me/ https://www.indianpunchline.com/about-me/ if you are interested.