patrick.net

AmericanKulak says

Ukraine has shot down planes before by accident prior to MH17.

Oooohhh, this is sooo juicy and I almost missed this.

This is TEXTBOOK, TEXTBOOK Russian propaganda 101. Sure they did. In 2001.

- It was a joint military exercise between Russia and Ukraine
- Russian dispatcher (from Rostov) routed the plane through the zone of the exercise
- Russian operator marked the plane as a valid target
- Ukrainian anti-aircraft crew shot it down.

Then Ukrainians admitted the mistake, paid out compensations (probably not much), and begged for forgiveness.

Russians did none of the above. But now they are blaming MH17 on Ukrainians, despite overwhelming factual evidence to the opposite, because, see, they've done it in 2001.

Is that all? No, that's not all. Someone somewhere actually tries to use the "they've done it in the past" line as an argument.

HeadSet says

mostly reader says

Odds are overwhelming that Russia's future is to be China's bitch.

You mean like how Biden is China's bitch now?

Like "we will use your territory and your resources for whatever we want, including nuclear waste if so we wish, while you run our errands".

mostly reader says

Here's a video from Al Jazeera: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/8/its-barbaric-kharkiv-residents-devastated-by-russian-bombing?source=patrick.net

Sure is. One thing I didn't see was any interviews. No GPS coordinates either, what was this city block? Was it just residential or was it government? They said it was residential. We'll fine out in a few months.

One thing I've learned is you rarely get accurate information right away. Remember Dawit Kelete? I bet you don't. That was just 2 years ago (well, not even quite that), what is going on with him?

Similarly in a year, maybe two, you might at that time find out what actually happened in Kharkiv. You will have forgotten it by then I bet though. I will try to remember it.

mostly reader says

Did it convince you? Unlikely. Do you have any criticism for it, except that it's posted on Al Jazeera? I expect "crickets".

Convince me of what?

All war is pretty awful. I've pointed out several times this war could have been avoided. Zelenskyy should have simply signed some BS agreement that Ukraine wouldn't join NATO for X amount of years and then after X-N years renegotiated with both the EU, NATO, the US, and Russia. That would have pushed it off. Zlenskyy doesn't give a shit about the public any more than Biden gives a fuck about Americans. His job isn't to represent them.

mostly reader says

Then, say again, what does my personal material add to the conversation? Legitimacy? Nope. From what you said in the past, it's safe to say that you trust me less then you trust Al Jazeera. What then?

I used to once trust Al Jazeera but then Gore got involved with it, now I have the same respect for it as I do Fox News, CNN, the BBC, or the NY Times. I quit reading it over a decade ago.

I don't trust you, you shouldn't trust me. Trust is earned. It creeps in slowly, but when that trust is violated, it gallops out of town like a whipped horse. There's nobody in "mainstream media" that deserves any trust at this point. People who look to "established respectable sources" in this day and age of cameras that are the LITERAL size of buttons I think are foolish. I mean, we're the nation that had Yellow Journalism.

For example. there's 10's of thousands of hours of video footage of the January 6th insurrection. If that was made available for public review, it would only take a few weeks, maybe months at the worst, for people to figure out what happened then. It's not released though because our government is lying about what happened. That's only possible explanation. Is Kharkiv lacking cameras? Maybe. That's the game changer. We can record EVERYTHING today. Once it's edited though, it's been edited for a reason, and that's to hide the truth.


mostly reader says

richwicks says

Do you have something to add to the conversation or people's understanding of the situation?

Oh yes. Exposing trolls is valuable for people's understanding of the situation.

Maybe we have a different understanding of what a troll is.

To ME, a troll is a person that purposely says something that they believe is false to get a reaction out of people and stir up an argument. For example, if I were to say "weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq in Kirkuk" and then produce a bunch of photos that purported to show proof of this - just to create an argument. People then would be arguing about the authenticity of the picture, if it was really in Kirkuk, if any sources I listed were legitimate (I could pull some names out of a hat to get some names), etc. They just stir up trouble.

I would argue our "news" media engages in trolling. This increases readership, and as a side benefit creates division among the populace.

mostly reader says

You throw around statements and accusations, but then run away from a hint of responsibility for being wrong. I quite successfully demonstrated just that.

What have I been wrong about?

Look, I don't want to create an argument. I'm not an expert in this area, but I have been watching my nation aggravate Russia for 20 years. I've seen them poke and prod, and anally violate the Bear for years. I'm not surprised at this outcome. Russia has had quite a bit of restraint. The US adult babies wouldn't have put up with this shit for this long.

And I'm not blind to the gross hypocrisy of my government. I mean, they've fucking bombed 7 nations over the last 20 years. I have NO IDEA what POSSIBLE motivation they had to bomb Somalia, but they did. Our propaganda doesn't even give a reason. From the point of view of just the chaos Russia and the United States causes - who is worse, it's quite obvious (to me, perhaps erroneously) that it's the United States and EVEN IF RUSSIA were worse, if they did it the way the US does it, there would be a silver lining. All the wars the US has been in within the last 20 years has been VERY DAMAGING to this nation, if Russia is really a danger and a threat to me, I want them to do things that is damaging to them. What our STUPID FUCKING TRAITORS in out government does, hurts this nation - it hurts me, my friends, my neighbors, my family. The assholes in charge don't even care about this nation, they just care about how much they can steal from it before their criminality, destroys it. They are a 5th column.

I remember when the USSR was in Afghanistan. I was happy to see themselves get destroyed there, despite the lives it cost. I didn't celebrate the death and destruction it caused, I celebrated the destruction it was doing to the USSR, a criminal group of thugs that I celebrated collapsing on December 26, 1991. I was overjoyed to see them collapse DESPITE the chaos that it caused as a result. When my nation collapses, I will also celebrate it. I want to be be free of the parasites for a few weeks, maybe months, or even years.

The US has been shooting themselves in the head - or really US in the head. The assholes that run this nation don't care about the health or welfare of this nation. They are mobsters. They are thugs. But since Americans are so fucking stupid to allow it to happen with little to no resistance, I'm just going to stick around to see the lazy, apathetic, fucks, see what kind of bed that was allowed to be made for them. Not a SINGLE war that has been waged in at LEAST 20 years has benefited the dumb NPC's that have fanatically supported it - the useful idiots, which are many.

RWSGFY says

Nice strawman: nobody ever stated that Ukraine is an "altruistic utopia". Do these even exist IRL?

When you guys won't say a single negative thing about Ukraine, what am I supposed to think? Granted, it's an exaggeration, but Ukraine must have done something special to "earn" this kind of support. We've seen worse atrocities in the Middle East, Africa, China, yet it's Ukraine that gets all the attention, praise, and donations.

I mean if the rational part of your brain isn't screaming there's something wrong here, you've probably per-emptively nuked it.

socal2 says

Was Putin so paranoid thinking that NATO was going to invade Moscow through Ukraine or something?

Said it before. I think he see's Ukraine becoming the start of destabilization along the Russian border al-la Iran in the Middle East.

mostly reader says

It look - ahem - interesting, but here's one detail. There's no clear difference between a lab which genuinely works on fighting highly dangerous virus/bacteria vs. one which specializes in bio-warfare. IIRC Obama banned such labs in US, so indeed he also funded those US-controlled abroad.

Yep, that's how Wuhan got to leak the rona. But why does the US have so many of these in Ukraine to start with? Why are so many US citizens on energy boards in Ukraine? Why is the Biden family doing deals in Ukraine? Why was McCain over there before this all started with other US state officials telling Ukraine Nazi's to go to war?

Why is the US so heavily involved in Ukraine? Again, alarm bells should be sounding in your head.

gabbar says

Engh, maybe it's true. Who would be shocked if it was true?

Fauci created sars-cov2-19 after all. Don't we all pretty much accept that at this point? And they did it in an "enemy nation" - china. The nation that our traitorous leaders want to turn this nation into.

mostly reader says

I'll go on record saying that this lab

Labs, plural. They were not coincidentally the early targets of Russian missile strikes. Also, there are articles about Russia complaining of the labs well before now. Speculation is they were working on genetic specific diseases, specific to the region of the lab. Israel did some of this, until they had to scrap it because Israeli and Palestinian DNA are too similar. Now there's a discovery that should have gone a long way towards healing hatred.

NuttBoxer says

Israel did some of this, until they had to scrap it because Israeli and Palestinian DNA are too similar. Now there's a discovery that should have gone a long way towards healing hatred.

You know what is ironic? Chinese hate Koreans hate Japanese, hate Indonesians, hate Chinese - BECAUSE they are so similar.

My hypothesis is that the Palestinians are the actual ancient Israelites, that converted to Islam, under intense pressure from the Muslims. They were historically a shunned group by the Ottoman Empire and they weren't treated very well then. A significant number 2000 years ago fled instead of converting. The ones who fled have NO RIGHT to return, because they fled and left their friends and sometimes family behind to fight on their behalf.

But it's so politically contentious, such a statement can't even be investigated. Some Spanish geneticist did this a decade ago, and was absolutely destroyed. His paper compared the genetics of the Palestinians to the modern Israelis through mitochondrial DNA - his conclusion was they were the same people (largely). His paper was retracted, his tenure was retracted, I think he's dead now.

I've also heard of papers that showed there is NO genetic line connecting moderns Jews. I'm at the point of who knows, and who gives a shit? They apparently consider themselves a race through the matriarchal line when it's convenient or claim it's "just a religion" which that's convenient. I don't particularly care, if they are superior in intelligence and so on, they OUGHT to take over the world. It's just evolution in progress.

richwicks says

One thing I didn't see was any interviews. No GPS coordinates either, what was this city block? Was it just residential or was it government? They said it was residential. We'll fine out in a few months.

Correction: YOU will find out in a few months. I know it today. Not this particular block perhaps, the fact that this shit is going on in civilian quarters.

richwicks says

Convince me of what?

Let's not get all cute here. You challenged me on the fact that Russians shell civilian quarters, haven't you? Convince you of "that". Should be pretty obvious.

If you are willing to take Al Jazeera as a source, you can do your own search and find more videos, likely with interviews. Not convinced? Don't trust Al Jazeera because Al Gore? Then why do you ask for materials from a source which is even less reputable in your book? (i.e. myself)

My theory: because you want to create friction in the way of a message which demolishes your narrative. Simple as that.

richwicks says

All war is pretty awful. I've pointed out several times this war could have been avoided.Zelenskyy should have simply signed some BS agreement that Ukraine wouldn't join NATO for X amount of years and then after X-N years renegotiated with both the EU, NATO, the US, and Russia.

If you really believe that then you are extremely naive. Nobody was worried about Ukraine becoming NATO because obviously, obviously, OBVIOUSLY NATO doesn't want Ukraine. Not to mention that Russia already, ALREADY has NATO at it's boarders. This whole NATO thing was just a pretext.

But thanks for the laugh. That image of "anally violated bear" will be with me for a while.

NuttBoxer says

When you guys won't say a single negative thing about Ukraine, what am I supposed to think?

When you have a victim and a criminal with a smoking gun, you typically don't focus on how victim wasn't a top performer at work.

mostly reader says

When you have a victim and a criminal with a smoking gun, you typically don't focus on how victim wasn't a top performer at work.

The only victims here are the citizens in the area. For your analogy to be correct you'd have NATO, US, Ukraine, and Russian government criminals all pointing guns at the citizens of both countries, while the Ukrainian Nazi's are taking them off to the side to rape/kill.

See how I included Russia in there, something you can't do because your propaganda house of cards would fall apart. But I'll go even further. Pre-emptive wars are always wrong. Russia should never have invaded, and Ukraine/US/NATO should never have provoked. And no country should tolerate Nazi's, not in their political parties, and DEFINITELY NOT in their armed forces.

NuttBoxer says

while the Ukrainian Nazi's are taking them off to the side to rape/kill.

RT pushed this image for 8 years. They used and overused it to hide real (as in self-identified rather than propaganda-labeled) Nazi's who crossed over to Donbass to stir shit, real atrocities, improvised jails which belonged to pro-Russian field commanders, and other whatnots. But you are not exactly Mr. Current Affairs: in the light of current invasion, it's clear beyond reasonable doubt who the real Nazi is.

NuttBoxer says

something you can't do

I can't do what? Include Russia? I'm not parsing your sentence. I have to guess what you meant.

My analogy is absolutely correct. Your diversion intended to project image of impartiality is very transparent. The likes of you blamed German annexation of Sudetenland on governments of other countries. Or Germany/USSR tearing up Poland, for that matter. They'd blame governments of England and France, and - as a lip service - Germany too, to support the above-mentioned pretense of impartiality. You appear to do this with regards to Russia. They'd also blame US "because imperialism". In all of the mental gymnastics, they'd omit a simple fact: there's a clear aggressor, who's getting hungrier.

Now, history repeats itself.

Go get'em @richwicks and @nuttboxer! Expose trolls and propagandists for what they are.

personal

Eric Holder says

Except nobody has provoked anybody

Bullshit. The US has supported TWO coups in Ukraine that overthrew democratically elected Presidents and replaced them with Globalist Friendly Oligarchs. In the last one, we have the infamous Nuland recording and wikileaks emails on top of those, the Oligarch Ukrainians removed the "Neutrality" clause from their Constitution.

Then we have Saladcomb, McCainiac, and Miss Lindsay going over there and spreading anti-Russian hostility in 2016 and I'm sure since then.

Not to mention the "biolabs" that got all "Factchecked" in the past month that turned out to be very real and doing weaponization gain of function research on viruses to get around US laws, right neighboring Russia.

Ukraine has violated the Minsk agreement by endlessly shelling into rebel territory for years.

Obama Hold Overs, RINOs, and Neolib-cons created this mess and were deliberately provoking Russia.

When have these three EVER acted truthfully and in US Interests?

@mostly%20reader You won't look at any alternative media, which we all know is the only source of news left. You won't blame anything on the side you picked, and your refusal is fanatical to the point where you can't even comprehend why my concessions about Russia matter. If a Ukrainian government or Nazi military person stepped on an ant, you'd justify it by saying the ant was a Russian Nazi ant.

I'd love you hear real information from you, but you only parrot narratives that don't require you to think. I mean you bring up that airliner, but you don't even consider the role that eliminating a bunch of AIDS experts played in controlling the covid narrative. You never take the extra step, you just digest and regurgitate.

I'm not sure why you've invested so much of your self worth into believing these lies, but you're setting yourself up for an unpleasant future if you can't better distinguish truth from fiction. Ukraine is just the next propaganda campaign, not the last. And if you can't let go of a little ego and allow yourself to learn the truth, this won't be the last time you get suckered. And the lies will become more and more dangerous to those you know who don't fall for them, because one day you'll turn them in. I don't say this last part lightly. It's something I worry about with my own extended family.

Or maybe you're just a troll who's larping?

> NuttBoxer

"Alternative media", lol. I was literally forced to listen to it for some years (don't ask, it's a side affect of sharing family room with visiting older generation) I know what they are worth, and I'm telling you what they are worth. You wouldn't listen. Whatever your sources are, your narrative is fully consistent with that of RT.

Get off RT nuts. You don't box them, you hug them.

mostly reader says

Get off RT nuts. You don't box them, you hug them.

Faux News and Newsmax ain't much better.

Came out they got paid by HHS to push COVID vaccines, and of course both were crap on 1/6 and Election Fraud.

AmericanKulak says

mostly reader says

Get off RT nuts. You don't box them, you hug them.

Faux News and Newsmax ain't much better.

Came out they got paid by HHS to push COVID vaccines, and of course both were crap on 1/6 and Election Fraud.

Sure. Which is why I rarely refer to either. When I do, it's typically because their story has been cross-referenced.

Fox specifically looks suspicious because they didn't call out multiple fake news on Trump until after the damage was done.

stereotomy says

Go get'em @richwicks and @nuttboxer! Expose trolls and propagandists for what they are.

I'm not positive they are either, but I do have my suspicions. Propagandists mimic people, it's not trivial to distinguish them online. People who are tricked by propagandists spread the ideas of them without realizing it. Everybody is a victim of this to some extent and I know I'm not immune.

Propagandists are, however, easy to identify in video. On television, they all are. You know you've been fooled when you cannot explain why you believe what you've been programmed to believe. Many people get angry when they are confronted with this realization, for me, it's a revelation - at least now. 30 years ago, I was enraged, because "it's obvious! How can you be this stupid????".

It's interesting to be old and to be able to review past experiences.

mostly reader says

Sure. Which is why I rarely refer to either. When I do, it's typically because their story has been cross-referenced.

Fox specifically looks suspicious because they didn't call out multiple fake news on Trump until after the damage was done.

Okay, MSNBC and CNN did the same, and are proven liars over and over again, from putting Avenatti (remember him? they touted him as a 2020 Candidate) up twice a day, to Masks Working, to CRT just being for law students (until it was not being taught at all, or alternatively only in college, and when that failed, lying that it was simply Civil Rights history like Rosa Parks and vital for America), etc. Trump would go after da Gays, Peeing on Hotel Beds, Perfect Phone Call, etc. etc.

Which News Sources DO you trust?

AmericanKulak says

After 2014, the new government

Which is a CIA/Ukrainian Oligarch joint venture.
!!FREEDOM!! and !!DEMOCRACY!!

AmericanKulak says

Which News Sources DO you trust?

None of them, individually.

There's difference though. Fox and CNN work for clicks first and foremost, and only then they are propaganda outlets. Fox is better because they clearly separate facts from opinions. MSNBC are just insane. It seems that they believe their own BS.

The likes of RT operate on a different (much cruder) level. They are propaganda outlets first and foremost, all else is secondary.

NuttBoxer says

Israeli and Palestinian DNA are too similar

"It's like yams hating sweet potatoes"
Sarah Silverman

NuttBoxer says

Labs, plural. They were not coincidentally the early targets of Russian missile strikes. Also, there are articles about Russia complaining of the labs well before now. Speculation is they were working on genetic specific diseases, specific to the region of the lab

Dr Robert Malone, who spent his career 'deeply involved in the US Biodefense enterprise', says basically they are ALL biological weapon labs.
".....over many decades, the total expenditures of the US Government in developing biowarfare agents exceeded the money spent on thermonuclear weapons. A case can be made that modern understanding and technology relating molecular biology, microbiology, and virology is fundamentally a “civilian” byproduct of a massive investment in biowarfare tech by US, USSR, and other governments. "

mostly reader says

There's difference though. Fox and CNN work for clicks first and foremost, and only then they are propaganda outlets. Fox is better because they clearly separate facts from opinions. MSNBC are just insane. It seems that they believe their own BS.

Only then? Do you think Fox taking HHS money to push the Vax may have colored their coverage?

Was there a US intervention in the past 20 years Fox was against?

None of them. NONE OF THEM. Hold the candle to the military grade propaganda that RT and such has to offer. They are amateurs, in comparison.

AmericanKulak says

mostly reader says

There's difference though. Fox and CNN work for clicks first and foremost, and only then they are propaganda outlets. Fox is better because they clearly separate facts from opinions. MSNBC are just insane. It seems that they believe their own BS.

Only then? Do you think Fox taking HHS money to push the Vax may have colored their coverage?

Was there a US intervention in the past 20 years Fox was against?

Agreed, also hannity is and has always been a major warmonger, and as a propagandist not different from RT, lapping up every hoax as long as it's putin baaad.. 80% on there is also warmongering at this point. The truth is that there is very little difference between Russian, Chinese, Canadian, Western European or American media these days.

mostly reader says

None of them. NONE OF THEM. Hold the candle to the military grade propaganda that RT and such has to offer. They are amateurs, in comparison.

So RT is propaganda (agreed), Fox and CNN are the other side of propaganda, as has been amply demonstrated behind a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable objections, to a degree of certainty, especially in the past few years.

I stopped watching Fox the day after the Election when they were pushing the "Wait and See" BS. It was wait and see until Dems got outside the mandatory recount margins of the various states, then wait and see became "That's it, it's over, no questions, no waiting, no seeing" Friday Morning.

So, to go back to the question, which news sources do you rely upon?

AmericanKulak says

So RT is propaganda (agreed), Fox and CNN are the other side of propaganda, as has been amply demonstrated behind a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable objections, to a degree of certainty, especially in the past few years.

You missed my first point. Calling Fox and CNN "the other side of propaganda" when you compare them to the likes of RT/RIA is like comparing stuffy nose to cancer. Or playground misunderstanding to UFC heavyweight title fight. Pick your preferred analogy. Our media couldn't hold candle to the hammer-like brainwashing of the other side. Same goes for our government: they are so useless, they look like they are lying even when they combat Russian disinformation. Here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/10/us-denies-russian-claims-of-biowarfare-labs-in-ukraine?source=patrick.net They couldn't even explain why this is disinformation.

AmericanKulak says

So, to go back to the question, which news sources do you rely upon?

You also missed my second point. I already answered that: "None of them, individually."

I do have a process. Which allows me to label something "true" or "false" with reasonable accuracy.

Let's talk a bit more about that. We all have our processes (for some, a "process" is just watching CNN). How would you know that your process is good? Because you detected propaganda and stopped following a source? Nah, that's not good enough. You may have switched to something that's even worse because it doesn't trigger your BS detector due to a different delivery style. Because it builds somewhat of a consistent picture? Nah, that's not good enough either. Because you may be missing things that make it inconsistent, or because there may be other consistent pictures.

There's only one answer: you use your process to predict future and see how well that goes, and if it doesn't then you make adjustments. We have a wonderful setup here: a thread kindly presented by @Bd6r https://patrick.net/post/1343705/2022-02-18-will-russia-invade-ukraine in which he asked to do exactly that, to make a prediction.

Now, go through that thread. Note all the people who said "No". And understand: the higher the enthusiasm with which a person said "no", the more clueless they are about what's going on in real life. Pay special attention to those who said "No" along with some cute remark pointing elsewhere.

That would be a start to understanding processes and to classifying people based on their understanding of reality.

Patrick says

Our media couldn't hold candle to the hammer-like brainwashing of the other side.

I disagree. The US corporate media is the hammer-like brainwashing. It is pervasive and uniform in its support for the whims of GloboCap.

I don't know much about the Russian media but what I can see from here, but it's hardly conceivable that it could be more manipulative or dishonest than, say, CNN.

Patrick says

I disagree...

You are not seeing the other half of the comparison that I'm making. Yet you have an opinion. I see.

mostly reader says

You missed my first point. Calling Fox and CNN "the other side of propaganda" when you compare them to the likes of RT/RIA is like comparing stuffy nose to cancer. Or playground misunderstanding to UFC heavyweight title fight. Pick your preferred analogy. Our media couldn't hold candle to the hammer-like brainwashing of the other side. Same goes for our government: they are so useless, they look like they are lying even when they combat Russian disinformation. Here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/10/us-denies-russian-claims-of-biowarfare-labs-in-ukraine?source=patrick.net They couldn't even explain why this is disinformation.

How do YOU know what is propaganda and what isn't?

So how do YOU know the Biolabs are propaganda?

mostly reader says

There's only one answer: you use your process to predict future and see how well that goes, and if it doesn't then you make adjustments. We have a wonderful setup here: a thread kindly presented by @Bd6r https://patrick.net/post/1343705/2022-02-18-will-russia-invade-ukraine in which he asked to do exactly that, to make a prediction.

Now, go through that thread. Note all the people who said "No". And understand: the higher the enthusiasm with which a person said "no", the more clueless they are about what's going on in real life. Pay special attention to those who said "No" along with some cute remark pointing elsewhere.

Yes, the past prediction metric.

However, I'll the "falsus en unum" isn't always a perfect metric. We've been told Russia was building up forces to invade Ukraine many times before, just like we've been told Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons (not that that isn't an end goal, but we've heard that for 20 years). We've also been told that COVID mandate lifting were going to create mass death waves not mere months ago, now even NYC is lifting it's restrictions. Same about refusal to get vaccinated, that the vaccine protected people from death with immunity, but simultaneously somehow the unvaccinated were endangering the vaccinated who had immunity. That the vaccine worked well on variants (Fauci, 2021 also Biden and CDC Director W????stein/berg) turned out to have little impact vs. Omnicron.

Does that make the US/Various State Governments unreliable on other issues? They were "Falsus en unum" so why not in "Omnibus"? In fact in many "unums", ha.

So based on past performance, it was actually reasonable to expect Russia not to Invade, esp. given the Admin's need to pivot from loser COVID and the shit Economy.

For example:
Or, the poorest country in the area that has previously downed Civilian Aircraft by mistake in the past, couldn't possibly have downed another one (MH17).

There's a term I made called "Faux Skeptic", it's about people who apply skepticism to counter-status quo narratives, but give the Establishment/Status Quo Narratives every consideration with lack of said skepticism. Like Factcheckers do.

I would like to know how you "know" the biolabs are propaganda, however.

Where it is going - a failed state with white Christian Slavic Isis-like resistors. Russia isolated from the EU. The Belt and road stalled in this region. Russian energy possibly verbotten very long-term. NATO reinvigorated. Germany gets the war buzz going. (See The Ramones for musical accompaniment.)

The usual helter-skelter CIA disruption/destruction. But the USA are the good guyz, you see.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

The usual helter-skelter CIA disruption/destruction.

Which leads to Klaus Schwab rubbing his hands together like the demented Pelosi doing her Human Fly impression when she contemplates G.I.'s breathing toxic smoke.

> AmericanKulak

You are confusing data with narrative with prediction.

"Russia is amassing it's forces at the boarder" - that's an example of data (right or wrong).
"This doesn't look good" - that's an example of narrative (right or wrong).
"Russia will invade Ukraine" - that's prediction.

Process picks your sources for data and narrative. Those sources may be conflicting. Process further takes them to prediction. Of the 3, prediction is the one that may be verified. If your predictions are wrong, it's time to change the process.

That's what a data-oriented person would do. But note how folks who were verifiably wrong didn't reconsider their process. I'd say that the opposite happened: cognitive dissonance ensued and most of them doubled down.

AmericanKulak says

I would like to know how you "know" the biolabs are propaganda, however.

Because at this point Russia has no way of knowing if it's a genuine research lab or bio-warfare lab.

Furthermore, I went on record saying that these labs will not affect diplomatic relationships between US and Russia. I don't see anyone go on record and say otherwise.