It's okay to remain neutral-skeptic. The Bucha massacre is weird the way it is being presented. The Mariupol theater airstrike narrative didn’t all add up, neither did the hospital shit. Nor does 90% of what you will read in MSM. I’m not going to carry water for RU but the way the media runs with these stories with limited information / no rock hard throbbing proof should be raising flags for anyone critical. The burden of proof is on the accuser, but that has never seemed to matter when it comes to western propaganda and consent manufacturing.

I mean Russia invaded a country and there are assuredly mass civilian casualties. What I am talking about is uncritically hopping on-board the consent manufacturing narrative because of muh optics. Don't fall prey to moralistic individualism, and use that position as a bludgeon, like the Xinjiang shit. Everyone remembers the conversation in left spaces "I mean China bad so maybe they are doing a genocide we don't really know yet, so lets just put it on the backburner." As though your opinion or condemnation means or changes anything if Russia massacred a bunch of people and you decided to condemn it first.

This idea that we are obligated to publicly address condemn every single accusation by the western media is wrecker shit 101. It's the same optics obsessed shit that podcasters concern themselves with, hyper-online-individualism, competing to form the perfect take on every piece of news. We should be collecting available information and applying a critical lens, not drawing conclusions prematurely.

I guess we did have that one person in here saying the most reputable sources are NYT and mediabiasfactcheck that got banned when I asked them to name their favourite propaganda. so thats cool.