Removed by mod
Russia Kidnapping Ukrainian Children, AP Report Claims.
Removed by modThousands of children have been found in the basements of war-torn cities like Mariupol and at orphanages in the Russian-backed separatist territories of Donbas. They include those whose parents were killed by Russian shelling as well as others in institutions or with foster families, known as “children of the state.”
Russia claims that these children don’t have parents or guardians to look after them, or that they can’t be reached. But the AP found that officials have deported Ukrainian children to Russia or Russian-held territories without consent, lied to them that they weren’t wanted by their parents, used them for propaganda, and given them Russian families and citizenship.
The investigation is the most extensive to date on the grab of Ukrainian children, and the first to follow the process all the way to those already growing up in Russia. The AP drew from dozens of interviews with parents, children and officials in both Ukraine and Russia; emails and letters; Russian documents and Russian state media.
Whether or not they have parents, raising the children of war in another country or culture can be a marker of genocide, an attempt to erase the very identity of an enemy nation.
Even where parents are dead, Rapp said, their children must be sheltered, fostered or adopted in Ukraine rather than deported to Russia.
Russian law prohibits the adoption of foreign children. But in May, Putin signed a decree making it easier for Russia to adopt and give citizenship to Ukrainian children without parental care — and harder for Ukraine and surviving relatives to win them back.
Russia also has prepared a register of suitable Russian families for Ukrainian children, and pays them for each child who gets citizenship — up to $1,000 for those with disabilities. It holds summer camps for Ukrainian orphans, offers “patriotic education” classes and even runs a hotline to pair Russian families with children from Donbas.
“It is absolutely a terrible story,” said Petro Andryushchenko, an adviser to the Mariupol mayor, who claims hundreds of children were taken from that city alone. “We don’t know if our children have an official parent or (stepparents) or something else because they are forcibly disappeared by Russian troops.”
Russia portrays its adoption of Ukrainian children as an act of generosity that gives new homes and medical resources to helpless minors. Russian state media shows local officials hugging and kissing them and handing them Russian passports.
It’s very hard to pin down the exact number of Ukrainian children deported to Russia — Ukrainian officials claim nearly 8,000. Russia hasn’t given an overall number, but officials regularly announce the arrival of Ukrainian orphans in Russian military planes.
In March, Russian children’s rights ombudswoman Maria Lvova-Belova said more than 1,000 children from Ukraine were in Russia. Over the summer, she said 120 Russian families had applied for guardianship, and more than 130 Ukrainian children had received Russian citizenship. Many more have come since, including a batch of 234 in early October.
She acknowledged that at first, a group of 30 children brought to Russia from the basements of Mariupol defiantly sang the Ukrainian national anthem and shouted, “Glory to Ukraine!” But now, she said, their criticism has been “transformed into a love for Russia,” and she herself has taken one in, a teenager.
The children of Mariupol aren’t the first Russia has been accused of stealing from Ukraine.
In 2014, after Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula, more than 80 children from Luhansk were stopped at checkpoints and abducted. Ukraine sued, and the European Court of Human Rights found the children were taken into Russia “without medical support or the necessary paperwork.” The children were returned to Ukraine before a final decision.
Kateryna Rashevska, a human rights defender, said she knows of about 30 Ukrainian children from Crimea adopted by Russians under a program known as Train of Hope. Now, she said, some of those children might well be Russian soldiers. Since 2015, the Young Army Cadets national movement has trained youth in Crimea and Russia for potential recruitment into the military.
This time around, at least 96 children have been returned to Ukraine since March after negotiations. But Ukrainian officials have tracked down the identities of thousands more in Russia, and the names of many others simply aren’t published.
Russia literally admitted to taking the kids and framed it as a good thing. If this is a lie, then it should be extremely easy to prove, no?
deleted by creator
Never said that. They have a lot of sus shit even in this article. But that doesn't take away from the fact that children are being taken from their homes (which were bombed) into Russia and given to Russian families. Russia literally admits it. They just say its a good thing.
https://swprs.org/the-propaganda-multiplier/
Oh wow, what a great source. Let me look into it a bit further.
Huh, they have an article on their home page called Facts about Covid. I wonder what they are:
If that wasn't enough, they literally believe that the MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX .
Like, sure, western media is bad and biased and used for propaganda. But the alternative is not to fucking read literal trash rags.
I could also go onto every single site you might send to me about literally anything, find two things that are dismissable (and not at all what someone actually sent you), and then use that to dismiss anything genuinely accurate.
You have literally dodged engaging with any of the content you have been sent, you're not participating in good faith.
ive tried responding to every fucking comment as best i can. im only one person. not to mention, this post got fucking removed and so did half my comments.
Because you're not participating in good faith and you're being a massive and annoying liberal. You dodge any content that you don't like by dismissing sources instead of actually critically engaging with content.
You have handed over your ability to judge to liberal media through this attitude you have of "reliable" sources. You decide that content is dismissable unless it comes from some recognisable media owned by billionaires. Your entire concept of reliability is built not by any notion of real reliability but instead by marketing, by recognisability, by how much you have seen a source previously used by liberals.
Get this notion of reliable out of your head. Judge content by the content. Western media makes you extremely manipulatable by filling your brain with this idea of reliable sources so that you become trained to just trust whatever they say instead of judging content based on content. They do it to make you listen to them without resistance while acting in a resisting and sceptical way to anything you've not seen before.
You should judge content on merit, on your own actual ability to critically judge what the content says, but instead it is painfully obvious that you do the liberal thing and have no ability to judge or engage with anything by yourself.
oh like so many people did here, in this very fucking thread?
Also, one of the key markers of judging if a source is reliable or not is by seeing how they report on issues you do know about. if their reporting on those issues is correct, you can afford some level of trust that they would be okay on issues you dont know about.
in the case of your article, i read through it. i didn't "attack" it because its obvious and makes sense. i then went to the site to see what other articles they have, thinking they might be a genuine source i could use/follow. That is when i saw the anti-covid and moon landing hoax bs. which i posted. dont act like you knew all that was there. you didnt do your fucking research.
No, you CAN'T afford some level of trust. Not at all. Watch from 0:00 to 6:10 but to be honest the whole thing is worth your time.
We do not afford trust to figures we on the left recognise. Zizek? Fuck him. Man's a giant fucking wanker recently and everyone on this site will tell you so because everyone here judges content on merit not on where it's from. His output lately has been pure unfiltered shit. Chomsky? We usually don't like him, a lot of his older stuff is absolute shit, but his content recently has been absolutely excellent.
Then fucking say that so that people don't think they're utterly wasting their time engaging with you! You've avoided any kind of sense of agreement or mutuality throughout the thread. If you engaged with people and agreed with any of the content they actually send to you then you'd find them feeling like their time is not being so massively wasted because it demonstrates that you are receptive in some way or another.
Ok that video is very scary. Jesus.
The idea that the very method I used to judge sources is what they’re using to spread propaganda. Plant true stories, especially in areas where people might know things, to get them to trust you, then plant fake stuff. That’s seriously fucked. If that’s the case then how do you even judge anything , how do you find out what is actually real.
Edit - combine that with the article you posted before and it paints a picture of literally thousands of CIA agents all over the world, choosing which stories to cover and which to suppress, how to spin things, and straight up fabricating stuff, then sending it to all the major publications. All the time. Constantly. Daily. As news.
And that's the CIA when they were less embedded, less powerful and less influential than they are today.
When we say things like Jessica Ashooh being a CIA plant at reddit we sound insane but, when you start learning about how the CIA has always operated, you realise it's really not a joke.
Trust absolutely nothing and ALWAYS judge content on its own merit.
One of the first things you should learn to do is seek primary sources, for example when it comes to USSR related content we seek out primary sources in the soviet archives instead of relying on secondary and tertiary sources. Media are usually a tertiary source reporting on a secondary source reporting on a primary source. You have to follow the chain, and if it doesn't go back to a primary source then MORE INVESTIGATION is needed to find primary sources that confirm or debunk a given issue.
Yes. We live in that world today. Always seek primary sources.
Its a painful reminder that they still hold most of the cards, and can pull a billion people around like puppets whenever they want.
It is, but I feel it changing. Left media grows stronger while consciousness of this bullshit is developing in more and more people.
Eventually this person will fully develop, like many others. And go on to help others develop this understanding.
:sankara-shining: Never stop explaining
:sankara-salute: great motto tbh
deleted by creator