4 ms·

As I've said repeatedly, the first casualty of war is the truth - applies to both sides. "You are unfortunately quoting a fake numbered that originated from a

by lowkey 3y ago

As I've said repeatedly, the first casualty of war is the truth - applies to both sides. "You are unfortunately quoting a fake numbered that originated from a poorly photoshopped version of the legitimate documents." I have no doubt that spokespeople from the US may have made this unsubstantiated claim, but unless they share the legitimate documents publicly how can we confirm they are telling the truth? If the truth were as they claim, it would add significantly to their credibility to share this with the media. However, the fact that none of the media who did see the leaks ever shared the details of those leaks, and actively dissuaded anyone from looking for themselves, lends me to believe there were inconvenient facts in those leaks that the US did not want to be shared with the public. "Scott Ritter is also a twice convicted pedophile and a pro Russian propagandist." I don't know if the claim that he is a twice convicted pedophile is true or not - but I'll tell you about another convicted pedophile who definitely didn't kill himself. His name was Jeffrey Epstein and he was also convicted of trafficking underage girls to a bunch of anonymous rich dudes who have never been charged, but I'm sure they will be any day now because our legal system is honest and true and they would never lie to you "A yes it makes sense now your source is literally just Russian Propaganda." In war it's all propaganda, on both sides. Just for the record, the US is better at propaganda than the Russians. We have Hollywood which convinced us all that the CIA never does wrong, never spies on Americans (except that Snowden thing) and never overthrows democratically elected leaders (only dictators like Saddam Hussein - who we funded and armed to fight Iran, whose democratically elected government we also overthrew. See also, most of Latin America)

_kbh_ 3y ago
> As I've said repeatedly, the first casualty of war is the truth - applies to both sides. You keep repeating this buts its meaningless, you won't even accept you got duped by Russian propaganda. I literally posted a link to the obviously photoshopped number and the original side by side. The only person trying to make the truth a causality is you. > I have no doubt that spokespeople from the US may have made this unsubstantiated claim, but unless they share the legitimate documents publicly how can we confirm they are telling the truth? If the truth were as they claim, it would add significantly to their credibility to share this with the media. You seemed to be very certain about the authenticity of your claim, which in reality only exists in a poorly photoshopped low resolution copy of the original document. if you look at both those images side by side and seriously believe the Russian propaganda document is the original then I you don't exist in reality. Its so obvious a toddler could spot it. > However, the fact that none of the media who did see the leaks ever shared the details of those leaks, and actively dissuaded anyone from looking for themselves, lends me to believe there were inconvenient facts in those leaks that the US did not want to be shared with the public. What are you on about?, Ive seen many articles and references to the documents all over the place. You're now trying to deflect after your complete rubbish 7:1 claim was proven to just be straight up Russian propaganda (funny how lots of your views mirror the Kremlins). The inconvenient truth is that Ukraine has lost a lot of people and vehicles but the Russians have lost a lot more. It never was taken down from the internet, now you either intentionally lied or were not capable of finding a copy of course which took me less then five minutes. > I don't know if the claim that he is a twice convicted pedophile is true or not. It is.

by lowkey 3y ago

_kbh_ 3y ago

> As I've said repeatedly, the first casualty of war is the truth - applies to both sides. You keep repeating this buts its meaningless, you won't even accept you got duped by Russian propaganda. I literally posted a link to the obviously photoshopped number and the original side by side. The only person trying to make the truth a causality is you. > I have no doubt that spokespeople from the US may have made this unsubstantiated claim, but unless they share the legitimate documents publicly how can we confirm they are telling the truth? If the truth were as they claim, it would add significantly to their credibility to share this with the media. You seemed to be very certain about the authenticity of your claim, which in reality only exists in a poorly photoshopped low resolution copy of the original document. if you look at both those images side by side and seriously believe the Russian propaganda document is the original then I you don't exist in reality. Its so obvious a toddler could spot it. > However, the fact that none of the media who did see the leaks ever shared the details of those leaks, and actively dissuaded anyone from looking for themselves, lends me to believe there were inconvenient facts in those leaks that the US did not want to be shared with the public. What are you on about?, Ive seen many articles and references to the documents all over the place. You're now trying to deflect after your complete rubbish 7:1 claim was proven to just be straight up Russian propaganda (funny how lots of your views mirror the Kremlins). The inconvenient truth is that Ukraine has lost a lot of people and vehicles but the Russians have lost a lot more. It never was taken down from the internet, now you either intentionally lied or were not capable of finding a copy of course which took me less then five minutes. > I don't know if the claim that he is a twice convicted pedophile is true or not. It is.