The truth about Bucha massacre is out there, but perhaps too inconvenient to be discovered. It should be easy to find out what really happened to the massacred civilians in the Ukrainian town. The Mayor of Bucha or any other Ukrainian official, never suggested that Russia was carrying out acts of genocide or massacre, which is the truth about the affair.
- MAJOR PEER REVIEWED STUDY: Moderna Vaccine Increases Myocarditis Risk By 44 Times In Young Adults
- MUST READ: High Level International Bankers Simulate The Collapse Of Global Financial System
- BIG STORY: Wuhan Lab Isolated Monkeypox Strain In 2020
- EXPLOSIVE: Ukraine Biolabs Used Fever Carrying Mosquitoes To Spark Dengue Pandemic In Cuba
“In war, truth is the first casualty.” This phrase is credited to Aeschylus, a Greek tragedian who was known for his “copious use of imagery, mythic allusion, grand language, wordplay, and riddles” in the 6th century BCE. It’s only natural, then, that the guy who created the concept of modern-day wartime propaganda should see his words come to life in modern-day Ukraine. The Kiev administration and their Western information warfare advisers may have coopted all of Aeschylus’ dramatist tactics to create a modern-day tragedy in the Ukrainian town of Bucha that embodies the concept of lying as a weapon of war rather than just a result.
The footage of one of the Ukrainian National Police convoys travelling through a street in Bucha is the major source of the Bucha massacre reports. A dozen or so bodies are strewn across the road, several of which look to be bound. This footage has gone viral, resulting in a pandemic of pain and indignation that has swept much of the world, attracting the attention of heads of state and the Pope, and resulting in a tidal wave of condemnation and outrage directed at Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin. The video and the global uproar have an obvious cause-and-effect relationship; the former could not exist without the latter.
Slowing down is one of the fundamental teachings of objectivity, as it ensures that facts are not distorted by emotion. The footage from Bucha is unsettling. It appears that the video was posted in its current form with the express goal of provoking a visceral “shock and awe” reaction from the spectator. If this is the fact, those who released it — the Ukrainian National Police – have achieved more than they could have imagined. Or, depending on the situation, those of their advisors.
Without any fact-based data to back it up, the link between the deceased and the Russian military was quickly formed, and it was later reiterated in all kinds of media — mainstream and social alike. Anyone who attempted to challenge the prevailing “Russia did it” narrative was screamed down and labelled a “Russian shill” or worse.
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
The fact that these conclusions are the result of mass hysteria is beside the point; why try to be objective when the story fits every stereotype painstakingly crafted previously by the same people who are now circulating the Bucha story? An audience that has never been exposed to critical thinking must be socially “preconditioned” in order for them to accept anything presented to them at face value, regardless of how egregiously the facts of the story strain credulity. Let’s be clear: the Ukrainian account of the events in Bucha appears to be stretching the truth.
The narrative’s chronology raises the first red flag that the story being pushed by Ukraine and echoed in the West is not what it appears to be. The fact that Russian soldiers withdrew from Bucha on March 30 is well-known. On March 31, Ukrainian National Police began entering into Bucha, and on the same day, the mayor of Bucha stated that the city was totally under Ukrainian authority. The mayor, or any other Ukrainian official, never suggested that Russia was carrying out acts of genocide. Ukrainian officials released the footage in question on April 2; it is unclear if the footage was taken earlier or on that day. What is certain is that the images on the video were not at all consistent with the mayor’s initial narrative.
Russia, for its part, has categorically disputed the charges and has asked the UN Security Council to convene an emergency meeting to investigate what the Russian Foreign Ministry has described as “criminal provocations by Ukrainian soldiers and radicals” in Bucha. The British mission to the UN, which currently holds the presidency of the Security Council, has declined Russia’s request, indicating that a discussion on Ukraine set for Tuesday, April 4 would serve as a platform for any discussion about Bucha.
One would expect that the Security Council, which has already demonstrated its willingness to meet on short notice to examine events in Ukraine, would try to accommodate Russia’s request on such a significant issue. The British purpose, however, does not appear to be a quick pursuit of truth and justice, but rather to buy time for the political fallout from the alleged slaughter in Bucha to play out.
The reaction of US President Joe Biden is an example of this approach in action. In comments to reporters, he said, “You saw what happened in Bucha,” adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin “is a war criminal.” Biden used the Bucha crisis to push for more weapons to be delivered to Ukraine. “We have to continue to provide Ukraine with the weapons they need to continue the fight,” he said. “And we have to gather all the detail so this can be an actual – have a war crimes trial.”
All of this from a president whose country refuses to recognise the International Criminal Court. For reasons that should be evident to anyone who is prepared to think critically.
President Biden and the Ukrainian government were fortunate in that Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor of the court, announced in early March 2022 that he had opened an inquiry into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated in Ukraine. Given the high profile of the Bucha allegations, Khan is likely to have dispatched a forensics team to take control of the crime scene and supervise autopsies on the victims to determine the time of death, mechanism of death, and whether the victims died where they were allegedly found or if their bodies were moved there from another location.
Khan would also have the authority to interview members of the Ukrainian National Police, who have a history of working closely with the Ukrainian far right, including the deadly Azov Battalion. Any examination into orders provided to the police about the treatment of Ukrainian residents suspected of collaborating with the Russian military during its possession of Bucha would be particularly interesting.
The findings of such an investigation would almost certainly contradict the Ukrainian government’s story, which has been repeated in the West by loyal media outlets and politicians alike. This is the main reason Khan is not present in Bucha right now. If and when Khan is allowed access to information about the Bucha deaths, it is likely that the Ukrainian National Police will have distorted it to the point where disproving the charges will be very impossible.
The truth about what happened in Bucha is out there, just waiting to be found. Unfortunately, individuals in a position to pursue the truth aggressively through a forensics-based, on-site investigation appear to find it inconvenient. If it turns out that the Ukrainian National Police murdered Ukrainian civilians for the crime of allegedly cooperating with the Russians during their brief occupation of Bucha, and the forces of international law are brought to bear against the true perpetrators of that crime, any true pursuit of justice must include both the US and UK governments as willing co-conspirators in any crime charged.