Reading mainstream articles in Western world.
The article I would like to use as an example, or to dissect it as a useful piece of something I see no use of other than dissect it, is amazing. It has all wonders of Western reality such as interchangeable use of opposite definitions and names, suddenly appeared things in the plot, and the main characteristic of mainstream western media - implied conclusions of absurd nature (which we can see in most comments below the article).
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/what-really-happened-in-odessa-a-step-by-step-reconstruction-of-a-tragedy-that-killed-46-people-video-346192.html
So, the article is found as one of the first search results for the googled phrase ‘what happened in Odessa’ and is called not less than “What really happened in Odessa: A step-by-step reconstruction of a tragedy that killed 46 people (VIDEO)”. And this masterpiece is written by Sergiy Dibrov; the effort of alternating reality in a such “honest” way should be much appreciated because one should really be familiar with logic rules to use them for creation of logically inaccurate but “real” argument.
Let`s analyze the heading. If you go to other articles, you might be missing the reality, and only in this article you can get the accurate information about “what REALLY happened”. This is the first attempt to claim that the events presented in the article are not a sci-fiction, but “reality”, virgin and untouched. The next step is to reinforce this forming feeling of “truth is here” by claiming that this is actually “step-by-step” (like nothing missing, nothing left behind, everything is here and for you, dear reader) “reconstruction” (I would erase “re” in this claim, which is my point in this post). And the last pearl in the heading is “a tragedy that killed 46 people”. See? If you think that people kill people you are kind of missing the point. A tragedy killed people.
Now, please follow me to the article itself. It is not less fascinating than its heading. The first, pre-historic, part - “Before May 2” gives the explanation of situation, giving hints by references to Communist party, by revealing that opponents of European Union integration are actually “Russian-backed separatists”, and, shh, they support Ukraine`s federalization, which is really “Kremlin`s code word for the dismemberment of Ukraine”. Sounds like secrets are given away! In school we learn about different types of state`s organization, like Unitarian, Federation, and Confederation. Only now I received a real meaning of Federation - dismembered state. I wonder how the author would define “confederation” (which is the type of stat`s organization in USA) - a body parts flying in space some how on the same orbit?
Anyway. Enough of teasing the author. He tried hard. It is obvious. Let`s go step-by-step with the issues in the article that made me ask questions:
“pro-Ukrainian citizens have long demanded that authorities remove the camp”. Why the camp with “Russian-backed separatists” (who are, by the way, are mostly also Ukrainian citizens) was still there. Isn`t it because the Ukraine is trying to claim that there is no human right crimes, so the opposite opinion is also honoured?
Please follow me to the second part of the article - “May 2”.
“After the EuroMaidan protests started in November, Ukrainian football fans started the game-day tradition of peacefully marching in support of Ukraine’s unity as a nation”. Here I wonder if there is no football fans among “separatists” or pro-Russian separatists are not allowed to do peaceful marching in Ukraine? Where are the human rights again?
Even though the author acknowledges that AntiMaidan activists had a peaceful march, he starts then saying that “AntiMaidan pages on the Russian-controlled Vkontakte social network shared calls to forcefully stop the pro-Ukrainian march and gather at Oleksanrivkiy Avenue, near the planned march”. - Why Vkontakte social network is controlled by Russians? Everybody can express there, like on Facebook. Is Fb controlled by Americans? Well, I think yes, but, shhh, let`s pretend it`s not. Good. Peace.
Do you notice those small embodied as a non questionable things like “bloody attackers by Kremlin-backed,…demonstrators on pro-Ukrainians on April 27”? like, is it proven they were Kremplin-backed? Why they are Kremlin-backed, and other side is “pro-Ukrainians”, not “USA-backed” or “Euro-backed”? just put some harmony in the wording.
“Russian-backed attackers came armed, ready to attack” (in bold). - The conclusion is made too early. I wonder if American citizens are allowed to keep arms in their houses to be ready to attack or to be able to defend themselves? It might be both, of course, Democracy might be unpredictable and bloody, if demos doesn`t have manners. So, let`s suppose that people in a country where people are so easily kill people for the sake of belonging to “pro-Ukraininans” or to “separatists” might think it is safe to have arms to defend themselves. Here, please remember that pro-Ukrainins were really football fans who traditionally geather for peaceful marches.
“One hour before the march, some 200 young men gathered in an agreed location. They had guns, bats, knives and wore helmets and bulletproof vests. They behaved aggressively and began to dismantle the pavement to prepare rocks to throw at their opponents” - I don`t know why they began to dismantle the pavement if they were “ready to fight” and had guns and knives. Probably, they brought those tools to dismantle the pavement. One couldn`t dismantle the pavement with named hands, knives would work. Though, I would be interested to see how they do it with guns. Which is possible, I know. But not practical (bullets cost money).
“At the same time, some 1,000 football fans and supporters of Ukraine’s unity gathered at Sobornaya Square” - just remember the number - 1000 football fans.
“Only several dozen members of the Maidan Self-Defense Units, a paramilitary patriotic organization formed during EuroMaidan to support the revolution, were equipped to defend the crowd.” - one of my favorite parts. “Several dozen” might be easily weighted against 200 separatists, if not outnumbering them. “Maidan Self-Defense Units” - is it official name of Ukraininan police? Military forces? “Paramilitary patriotic organization” - I`ve been taught in school, when we studied history with two textbooks (pro-socialists and pro-new-age) that Patriot and Terrorist are the names of the same people, looked at from different points of view. So, if this patriotic organization is not an official military forces, not a police, why they were not treated as “separatists”, well, I`m talking about human rights. Both sides of the conflict consist of humans. Is it right? But Patriotic organization came to defend the crowd on the peaceful march. Go next, this is good:
“The atmosphere was positive in the square. Fans of the two teams from Odessa and Kharkiv sang the Ukrainian national anthem together, chanted patriotic slogans such as “Odessa, Kharkiv, Ukraine” and sang songs against Russian President Vladimir Putin. - Positivity! Ukraininan-style.
“When the fans gathered in a column and began marching to the stadium, the Self-Defence Unit members were informed about several hundred aggressive AntiMaidan supporters coming to the square from Hrecheska Street, to attack the column of peaceful demonstrators.” - 200 (two hundred) should not be considered as “several hundred”.
“Police didn’t separate the two rallies from each another.” - why? HUGE WHY??? I remember lines from Russian poet Mayakovskiy “Listen, if stars are lightened, then somebody needs it?”
“The armed Self-Defense fighters formed a chain and put up their shields at the crossing with Hrecheska Street to protect the fans” - where was the police? Why Self-Defence Units are so well informed and Police is not? Why Self-Defence Units didn`t inform police about “aggressive separatists ready to fight”?... “Listen, if stars are lightened, then somebody needs it?”
“They threw rocks and stun grenades into the column. In response to the explosions, football fans and Ukrainian patriots immediately responded and threw fireworks and smoke grenades into the attackers”. - Just for the sake of clarity “A stun grenade, also known as a flash grenade or flashbang, is a non-lethal explosive device used to temporarily disorient an enemy's senses. It is designed to produce a blinding flash of light and loud noise without causing permanent injury”. And Smoke granates are used for signalling the aircrafts, and “Smoke grenades should not be confused with smoke bombs, which are a type of fireworks typically started with an external fuse rather than a pin. Smoke grenades often cost around $40 USD compared to smoke bombs, which can often cost just a few cents. Smoke grenades generally emit a far larger amount of smoke than fireworks-grade smoke bombs and are more complex” (I wonder how rich are pro-Ukraininans). Also, “the smoke grenade class is restricted to signalling and concealment under the laws of war, and thus they are not considered weapons” (OOPS, somebody broke the laws of war. Let`s not point on them.)
The question is Why Self-Defence used fireworks and smoke granades, when they were hit with rocks and they were shielded (reminds me Berkut people with shields standing long hours against “EuroMaidan” activists). Why police didn`t stop, or at least come? Why the author doesn`t say anything about victims among outnumbered pro-Russian activists who turned defencing before Patriotic organization forces?
“Gunshots fired by pro-Russian aggressors; first person killed” - who was that person? No, really, I wonder. Was it a sniper in the window? Was it a Patriotic organization member who injured an eye of young activist with fireworks?-
“Soon, other supporters brought gasoline and foam plastic, and young women began mixing Molotov cocktails right on Derybasivskaya Street”. - Young women are famous to be football fans or Self-Defence members. They always complement peaceful marches in Ukrain with their skills of mixing Molotov cocktails. Amazing!
“Police officers attempted to protect the AntiMaidan fighters, but were thrown back by Molotov cocktails and rocks. The pro-Ukrainian side began using firearms, too”. - Why even governmental body - police - started to protect AntiMaidan fighters? Were pro-Ukrainians so aggressive and strong so even police forces couldn`t stop them? Let`s see:
“The football fans chased the opponents, and beat those who they caught, while pro-Ukrainian Self-Defense members tried to restrain them from lynching their victims” - Pro-Ukraininan football fans who went to peaceful march were really having fun! Please think about it!
“After the AntiMaidan supporters were chased away, pro-Ukrainian activists headed to Kulikove Pole Square to destroy the Russian-backed camp. Some 2,000 pro-Ukrainian activists attacked the camp, where some 200 AntiMaidan supporters were present”. - Why peaceful demonstrants wanted to destroy a democratic protesters? It might be the only public, open proof of opposition and another opinion in Odessa, it they wanted to destroy it. Not clever. Then note, “2000 pro-Ukrainian activists” - where have those 1000 football fans disappeared? The magic is that as soon as you use rocks and firearms, you can turn into activist. Those activist got very active and set tents of the opposition on fire. Do you think such people can geather for peaceful march?
“When the activists set the tents and stage on fire, Odessa Oblast council member Oleksiy Alba called on the pro-Russians in the camp to flee to the nearby Trades Union building”. - Here is the intrigue. Why government representatives tried to protect opposition (I guess they understand that showing off with democratic “intentions” might work for restoring stability in the region, ensuring human rights for everybody. But how strange it is that government cannot control situation with pro-Ukrainians. Doesn`t it show that they are not in control of their own people?
To make long story short:
“Several bottles of petrol bombs, thrown by activists outside, broke into the front entrance and the windows of the second and fourth floor, where the fire spread quickly”. - So now, football fans, magically turned to activists, set the building with people inside on fire. And guess what?
“Firefighters arrived an hour after the fire began” - that is just outrageous! Police, firefighters, government officials - everything seem to be uncontrollable in the hands of Ukrainian government. Do Ukrainian people really want to live under such roof, being led by those people who do not care about well-being of their citizens? No, really. This question should be asked.
And to conclude the article: “Police officers, who arrived after the fire was extinguished, took them outside and arrested them (Pro-Russian separatists). Some football fans attempted to attack them, but were once again restrained by the pro-Ukrainian Self-Defence members.” - Please note here the magic came to play again, when angry activists turned back to football fans, which explains why police didn`t arrest them, but only arrested those criminals, pro-Russian separatists, who arrange the camp at the square to acknowledge their different opinion. They were brought into a building, burned alive, and then those who survived were arrested. Does it make ANY sense?
I spend my time to go through one of the numerous articles on the tragedy happening in Ukraine. It is just one article of the same misleading nature, aimed for propaganda, for information war.
I am neither pro-Russian, nor pro-Ukrainian. It would make no sense. We are very close nations, with similar traditions, same mentality. What I am against is Constructed Reality, when facts are arranged in a way to distort a real picture of the events in order to justify people`s deaths, governmental ignorance, blind following to propaganda. People in Ukraine are so exhausted with ocean of confusing information, tsunami of news with contradicting accounts for the same events that they have only energy left to be led to ANY conclusion, just A conclusion, to stop this chaos in their home, made by outsiders. Just check the comments below the discussed article. People from other countries are confident that they can say that “the few hundred Putin backed terrorists can be subdued and defeated”. Is it a right, a humanitarian, way of looking on the tragedy? Can ANY idea justify lives lost in this bloody events?
The only thing we can do, in my humble opinion, is to THINK about EACH piece of information given. And if you don`t know or/and understand, don`t store this piece of information as a given fact. The Constructed Reality if built with such bricks - unverified pieces of information.
Thanks.
MDK