Facebook allows praise of Neo-Nazi Ukrainian battalion if it fights Russian army
theintercept.com
theintercept.com
The Wikipedia is full of contradiction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion which was expected. Fact is they all serve Ukraine a free land, lead by a Jewish https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolodymyr_Selenskyj
Something to take into consideration is that in the end of the day, a War like that will be just fight by patriotic and nationalist people, or who do we expect to fight for your country in a such scenario?
The intercept is Russian propaganda.
The fact that the US Congress at one point labeled Azov a white supremacist group is contradictory?
Oliver Stone's 2017 doc "Ukraine on Fire" [1], painstakingly documenting Azov's Nazi roots and it's glorification of Nazis who led massacres of Jews and Poles in WW2 is also propaganda?
The fact that Stephen Bandera, one of those Nazis and perpetrators of the Holocaust in Ukraine is considered a hero by Azov and is revered and honored by the UKRAINIAN state is also Russian propaganda.
The evidence and facts are overwhelming that Nazism is now embedded into the fabric of a modern state. I myself ignored this for a long time and that makes me sick.
The relationship from West Ukraine and the Nazis isn't hard to understand. They had to choose a side and they wanted everything but the soviets. The figure of Bandera is a controversial one, but I think this piece of text from the Wikipedia article (linked by you) makes it clear that the facts are more complex than you are saying:
"Bandera cultivated German military circles favorable to Ukrainian independence, and organized OUN expeditionary groups. When Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union, he prepared the 30 June 1941 Proclamation of Ukrainian statehood in Lviv, pledging to work with Nazi Germany. For his refusal to rescind the decree, Bandera was arrested by the Gestapo, which put him under house arrest on 5 July 1941, and later between 1942 and 1943[7] sent him to the Sachsenhausen concentration camp. In 1944, with Germany rapidly losing ground in the war in the face of the advancing Allied armies, Bandera was released in the hope that he would be instrumental in deterring the advancing Soviet forces. He set up the headquarters of the re-established Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council, which worked underground."
So his goal was clearly one: Ukrainian independence. From this point of view, I can understand why some circles think good about him.
Actually the whole Wikipedia article about him, makes clear his role and reasoning. From that, and his Biography what do you think was extremely bad?
What side I would pick? I'm glad that I didn't have to pick one. As Jewish, my family left Germany and Poland after the WWI towards South America.
Why I think that it is just Russian Propaganda? Because to bring those "factoids" now is just to justify the invasion of the Ukraine. There is no other intention other than be used in the Information Warfare.
Which part of the comment supported Russia?
> At least while that's the official position from India.
Here is India's official position as stated in the Explanation of Vote: https://twitter.com/ambtstirumurti/status/149907303815487488...
Which part of that supports Russia?
> So his goal was clearly one: Ukrainian independence.
That is actually a position Indians can fully understand and appreciate. And right now Indians care about getting their citizens stranded in Ukraine back home, ensuring that shipments of potash from Russia are not disrupted and not antagonizing their largest weapons supplier.
> Why I think that it is just Russian Propaganda? Because to bring those "factoids" now is just to justify the invasion of the Ukraine. There is no other intention other than be used in the Information Warfare.
Again, TFA is about changing the rules of censorship. FB previously considered any support of the Azov Battalion unacceptable because of the neo-Nazi connection. Was FB also a part of Russian propaganda?
In fact it was an instrument, yes: https://www.npr.org/2022/02/28/1083633239/facebook-and-tikto...
Rather than address that in anyway, your response has been to claim it's all Russian propaganda and now to link to a completely irrelevant article about Facebook blocking Russian state media.
You misunderstood the question. Let me restate it more clearly:
Was Facebook's original decision to censor praise of the Azov Batallion due it's neo-Nazi associations also Russian propaganda?
India abstained, which is support to Russia. Looks like the world agree with me:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/03/india-ukraine-russia-wa...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60552273
The list go on and on. Other brics leaders, avoided criticism, but voted against Russia, in the UN general assembly. Abstention meant, business first, Ukraine second.
Oh, and maybe don't have your official Twitter handles posting stuff like this: https://www.twitter.com/ng_ukraine/status/149792461486500249...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsangel
What I personally think about it? I really want to see the bombing in Ukraine stopping. Russia has no rights to invade Ukraine. There is 0 reason for that. There is 0 reason to discuss about other topics which somehow supports the idea that Russia is right. Russia as we all know isn't a land free of racism, right wing groups and hooligans.
There are also people who claim that the Confederate battle flag is a symbol of Southern heritage and has nothing to do with slavery or racism. Nobody takes that seriously either.
> There is 0 reason to discuss about other topics which somehow supports the idea that Russia is right.
The topic of TFA is Facebook tweaking its rules of censorship to allow content that would have been previously blocked. If you don't see a reason to discuss that, maybe just stay away from the the thread instead of claiming that everything is Russian propaganda.
That's not about what people think, but official position. What I posted you is the official position from the Group (Straight from Wikipedia). That's for what we can hold them accountable for.
> If you don't see a reason to discuss that, maybe just stay away from the the thread instead of claiming that everything is Russian propaganda.
As if you were the one who would decides what people discuss here or not.
And the official Russian position is that they have not invaded Ukraine. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?
Facebook's approach here is too allow the praising of Nazi's as heroes while also maintaining the ban on showing the clearly Nazi imagery on their uniforms.
So anyone that is not already familiar with the Azov movement and it's doctrine may be convinced that they are simply freedom fighters protecting their nation, real honest heroes.
This shows perfectly why censorship is bad. By purging the Azov movements abhorrent rhetoric and imagery while allowing specific praise, Facebook has removed enough shades of grey to turn black to white, lies to truth, and evil to greatness. This is what people mean when they reference 1984, the truth is whatever you are told it is today.
But the malleability of truth is not the real risk here. The real risk is that the Azov movement succeeds in their defence of Ukraine, that those that hold them up as heroes begin to believe they can't be all bad, that nobody that is a hero can be a real Nazi, begin to listen more intently to the Azov movements hate. The real risk is that by hiding evil you create more evil, not less.
We will sort it out later.
Our species interbreeding with the neanderthals, denisovans, and perhaps other primates makes us human.
The mix is important.