Posted on 04/01/2022 7:27:07 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Igor Lopatonok directed the films "Ukraine on Fire," "Revealing Ukraine," and the most recent film, "Ukraine the Everlasting Present." The films have been heavily censored in favor of the propaganda film, "Winter on Fire." Hear his opinion of what is really going on, his background and what he's working on now.
(Excerpt) Read more at kristileightv.com ...
In before the gaslighters say, “Oliver Stone! Don’t see it!!!”
Ignore them. See for yourself.
Never trust or believe the Putin cult.
I’m more concerned about the dumpster fire that the US has become since the November Coup.
Maybe it's because Stone chose to interview only Putin, Russian President Vladimir Putin, former pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and former Ukrainian Interior Minister Vitaly Zakharchenko, who was cashiered by the Ukrainian parliament after ordering that live ammunition be used against protesters.
Not a single Ukrainian offering an opposing view was interviewed. It's the very definition of one-sided propaganda that doesn't even attempt to look at both sides.
How do I determine if someone is in the “Putin Cult”? Do I need to see evidence that they worship Putin as a deity? Or do they belong automatically if they disagree or doubt with an official doctrine about the war in Ukraine?
The person posting the daily 'flu bro's' thread was just copy/pasting the opening thread daily for a year and a half, and then went to posting Pro-Poo-tin propaganda.
You don't have a problem when it's the opposite, Soros toadie.
Watched them all. 3 total. Stone has a part 2.
Yep. Unless you are a neocon keyboard warrior willing to fight to the last Ukrainian you are a Putinista.
And from what bodily orifice did you pull that accusation?
I personally don't have an issue with someone who is only presenting one side. But in that case, they are an advocate of one specific viewpoint rather than someone presenting all the relevant facts objectively. As long as that is clearly understood up front, it's fine. Like in a trial -- we all know who the lawyers on both sides represent, so we know we're only getting one side of the facts from them. We count on the other lawyer to present the other side.
What is objectionable to me about this article and the initial post is that it deliberately avoids mentioning Oliver Stone by name -- which is ridiculous -- and doesn't mention that this is only one side's view of the situation. To me, that is being deliberately dishonest, and misleading.
Ok checked the post history of
E. Pluribus Unum
and it is extensive and very active. I scrolled back for about a years worth of posts and still he was very actively posting lots of stuff. So not a Putin-Cult member by the post history test.
Show me a pro-Soros/Ukraine article that mentions "this is only one side's view of the situation."
They are easy to spot and expose
The movie was made in 2016, during the Obama administration. The "color" revolutions were the product of his policies, as well as Bush's.
The notion that there are "both sides" ignores the fact that the two sides of a dualistic view sees 1) Putin and 2) Biden, currently, though certainly an extension of Obama's team still influencing the current administration.
I see more than two sides, with bad actors on the two sides mentioned above. It is sad for the average Ukrainian and the average Russian that this is going on. It is also becoming sad for the average European -- many friends from our decades living there -- as inflation as we are seeing is running wild in Europe.
I'd reject the "both sides" in favor of a many sides perspective. We've already seen Germany veto NATO in the Ukraine, and the sanctions are biting all sides now. And the US has been Obama-involved from long before 2016, from DARPA to NATO to the princelings of Biden, Pelosi, Romney and Kerry.
I won't see "both" sides when there are more than two and respond to "pick one of two." Trump was correct to observe that under his administration this wasn't happening. And energy prices were lower, and we were energy independet. So I don't choose one of two. At the minimum there are three and perhaps more.
Well maybe its easier to spot for you. I was trying to get an idea of the criteria for determining if I’ve spotted one or not from you and you don’t seem to have one for me. Should we maybe see if they weigh the same as a duck?
After Oliver Stone finished the movie “Snowden”, he was in Russia and managed to get some face to face interview time with Putin - 20 hours worth! You can see the final version of those interviews in a 4 part series on YouTube. The Putin Interviews, Parts 1-4
https://www.youtube.com/show/SCca2WL3EfAJes7MRYGuzcnA?season=1&sbp=CgEx
According to one of the local Hollyweird jockstrap-sniffers, Stones’ interviews are invalid because he didn’t acknowledge that there were two sides to the issue.
Because the gaslight presstitutes always make such acknowledgement.
“You don’t have a problem when it’s the opposite, Soros toadie.”
Ahh, yes, the dialectic. There it is. The proof of a dialectical materialist education/indoctrination and world view.
A tool of evil intention and design.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.