here is a woman asking, when did it happen that people were not considered people, andrei but it was, yes, they burned belarusian villages, and more than nine and a half thousand such villages. they burned some of them together with the inhabitants of belarus, yes. this is a modern khatyn, and the most outrageous. i agree with this lady the most outrageous thing is that not only that no one is investigating. this is a terrible crime - burning people, and these tortures are finishing off the victims. uh, inside the edition. uh, just some kind of ritual ritual such a murder cult happened before our eyes, but uh, i saw this reaction. and all the medical professionals who are involved in this know about it, that in kiev studios live a, both the participants and the public rejoiced at the burning of their compatriots. there were when they said that these

supposedly pro-russian colorados. uh, everyone was burned. uh, there was joy in the house of the trade union in odessa. this speaks of neo-nazism - this is xenophobia - this is neo-nazism. this is dehumanization. and this is a conscious act of terror against a significant part of its society, its citizens. that is it purposeful intimidation, and then in the fourteenth year and all subsequent years no one especially especially because of the so -called radicals who merged with the kiev regime. e, in in general arms, no one hid that odessa and mariupol there in the fourteenth year were needed in order to intimidate and ukrainians who speak russian , but who profess their own, in my opinion , true, tradition of the history of historical memory, i am going. not to bandera, but to the wars of the

liberators of the soviet army, but they had to be intimidated so that they were resigned, so that they do not defend their rights. uh, so that they do not dare to raise their voices of disagreement with this kiev junta. well, according to all the studies before this one, here's the burning, odessa was not a city in which they voted for the european vector. she always remained true. yes, like ukraine. but like many cities in the east. yes, this is a tradition of the south-east of ukraine, which, of course, gravitates more towards russia and large eurasian projects. eh, that's all. justified there is a turnover of people's well-being . uh, in these regions they are tied precisely to uh, east to east. that is, it is clear they are odessa, by the way, odessa is much more difficult because. this is porto city with a special

tradition, you know, both europe and asia are mixed up there, plus its own deep inner tradition and culture. not by chance. after all, this crime took place in odessa, that is, one of the most intelligent cities in ukraine, a city with a high culture, tolerance , and tolerance had to be brought to its knees. and it succeeded, but it's not the only worst thing that it's not the only crime. all uh, big ones the events on which the modern myth and the kiev regime rest, and, uh, the so-called heavenly hundred, killed on the maidan, the crime against journalists, bloggers and freelancers, even according to ukrainian statistics, has not been investigated. these are my colleagues from the national union of journalists of ukraine who live, but they give information that there are more than 35 journalists. only killed. over the past 8 years in ukraine although these statistics are incomplete. i think we are already

talking about fifty. unfortunately, our dead colleagues, because they are individual journalists because of the journalists they don't consider it especially for the military correspondents who die on the front line, who work from outside. e donbass pavel sheremet blown up in the center of kiev and climb elderberry. uh, just brutally shot, everyone in kiev, including the investigators of the prosecutors, knows who did it, but under the influence of these radicals and the crowd that stormed there, uh, raged near the court, the main suspects are released. well that's good october 18th human rights advice. the un recognized that the armed forces of ukraine committed at least two crimes against russian prisoners of war, is it worth it to feed on the hope that the west will still begin to see clearly, so to speak, but we already have it. uh, there were precedents when large international organizations, such as freedom chaos. there, reporters without borders published their reports, which were unflattering for the kiev regime, and immediately

a war of discrediting these public organizations themselves began, and they began to retreat and take steps back to say that yes, they are all so unambiguous. eh, in my opinion. so far it's more of a game so far this game including the game of un officials who can't help but notice the egregious crimes against humanity they're committing with the kiev regime because it's just, well, it's obvious on the internet. with all the censorship that is being built. uh, the so-called big number digital hostings and portals, and still videos of torture leak out, and russian wounded soldiers are killed, their throats are bandaged, all this nightmare thresh that a normal person cannot and should not watch, uh, it falls out by itself militants of the kyiv regime. they are this. yes, for braggadocio in order to intimidate someone out there from russian conscripts.

maybe, uh, they brag about it on this on this, the cult wore cruelty and blood. uh, the modern myth of modern ukraine has been built. unfortunately, i don't mean ukraine. e nations are not like a society, like a state of people who sing about bandera. well, yes, what are the main characters, uh, so you repeat their legacy well, an interesting case of bandera. in one of the villages of the vinnitsa region, they decided to rename stepany street, bandera vlaganskaya. it would seem that. well, a curious impulse, but it’s hard to call the reasons for this sound in connection with russia’s aggression against ukraine, rename yes, according to them, and the settlements associated with the aggressor country or the history of the russian empire of the ussr, i just think that these are the inhabitants of this community. uh, they're just trying to fit in. eh, in the general context, and so, well, they are cunning, by and large

they are cunning. and yes, it's true that the vast majority of ukrainians are not fans of bandera about it. they say even those sociological studies that do not have a special faith, but they are, as an indicator of what the authorities and customers of these social studies would like. even they say that bandera is not a hero for the whole of ukraine, uh, just uh, brainwashing, total brainwashing, new technologies that are being processed now. oh, unfortunately, the ukrainians are being kicked out. here is such uh, blind without uh, futile rage depression aggression. by the way, i personally observed this during the first maidan in 2004, the fifth year, the beginning of the fifth year, when such glazing in people's eyes. this is the level of outrageous manipulation propaganda. it breaks through the critical consciousness so much that it turns off this glass appears in the

eyes and people cannot perceive any information, except for the information that has already been forced into them , forcibly massively squeezed in. the same thing is happening now. but you say that people's consciousness was already switched off there. and how did the audience react here, in your opinion, you showed the film of the dk mtz and there were law students, spoke to the audience, in general, what our public's perception of this reality for someone is a shock, but, because many belarusians, although somewhat move away from this nightmare, because it does not fit in the head when the russians are with the ukrainians. uh, they're fighting. it just doesn't fit in a normal head. moreover, many have relatives in russia and ukraine, everything is intertwined with us. for someone. it is a shock someone is affirmed in his position that yes. these are indeed neo-nazis, but some cannot. it's to believe denies to the last. that's when the lights in the cinema turn on. i noticed it, then

the lights in the cinema turn on and people sit and they have this internal protest. well, no, well, it can't. here they saw. it was they who saw this refined nazism and still protest in them. well, no, it can't be, and they're trying to ask questions. here's to wilhelm e the director, that maybe something is wrong with you, maybe there is a production somewhere, but you understand, uh, the mind of a normal person can not come to terms with what is next to us. here there are literally hundreds. uh, kilometers from belarus, nazis walk around, who zigue, who burn people, finish off women with bats, throw them out of windows. well, it doesn’t fit in the head of belarus, uh, it’s lucky that we have this latest history, and we chose continuity from soviet projects and, of course, with the legacy, but ah, the great victory if this didn’t happen, we really are on the wave of this one perestroika

breaking the soviet project of a general depression. could repeat the path of the baltic countries, or ukraine when neo-nazi theories practices, could infiltrate our consciousness as long as we have. i think, uh, this is a vaccine. uh, this immunity from neo-nazi, uh, practices and theories, but uh, you can’t relax, because ukraine has shown that as soon as the state collapses and as soon as the systemic objects begin to process the consciousness of huge masses of the population, it can be swayed into the bandera neo-nazi collaborationist side. moreover, yes, ukrainian propaganda, this fake machine also works in belarus and well, for this, it’s enough to turn on youtube there or some other video hosting. or social networks to see all this paid mass advertising, when people in cinemas, by the

way, talked about it, that it’s impossible to turn on a cartoon for your child, because within the framework of this cartoon there, for five minutes, they will show you three times, uh, the nazi ukrainian propaganda of these marchers howl about kiev there and that's it. represent the rest. how much money are you in loaves, yes, our colleagues, by the way, from public organizations from their journalists in russia, somehow there came out a figure about $25 million per month for select social networks alone. that is, it is not taken. everything is impossible to count. let's take a moment. let's break, i remind you, we have a telegram channel. say don't be silent. subscribe let's ask questions. suggest guests we are in touch. on the air again, say the program, do not be silent. and today, our guest is the chairman of the belarusian union of journalists , the director general of the minsk news agency,

andrey krivosheev, andrey evgenievich, with the beginning of partial mobilization in russia, and naturally, various mistakes began to be clarified in the course of this process, people began to turn to journalists for help. here is margarita simonyan. in particular, she diligently sorted out and continues to actually sort out various situations. e. here is the question . should it be journalists who do this, where are the vaunted human rights activists? unfortunately, most of the so-called human rights activists are simply agents of foreign influence, those whom our people aptly call sarasyats, who receive grants to discredit most often their own state society traditions of their people. unfortunately. these are just fake companies that are making money. well, listen, if, uh, it’s a funny situation, when there are such sarasy, uh, in the name of which there was a

journalism support fund, there is a fund for the development of journalistic excellence there. e, advocated e. this means total censorship of russian and belarusian tv channels. that is, they have support for journalists in their title. and they are frida yes, they came up with a speech, there must be something like that for these passions name, otherwise no one will give them money. in the west, they also advocated blocking censorship, closing the persecution of journalists , the development of sanctions lists, and so on and so forth, it is clear that these are the salts of seth . should a journalist do the same? in my opinion they should. and why, if a journalist has a reputation as an authority like a margarita , as much as vladimir rudolfovich, solovyov as our colleagues why shouldn't they do this, people perceive them not just as leaders of public opinion and journalists. they perceive them as such

a channel for broadcasting one's position to power for people who make decisions and as citizens of their state, as people. naturally, journalists are not indifferent, if they can then they should do this. this is the fourth power in fact, yes, that is, this is what manifests itself. strictly speaking, this is the designation of journalism as the fourth power of journalists. recently, when journalists are called the fourth power, this is done with a purpose. to hang on us the responsibility, which is additionally uncharacteristic of journalists, to say, well, they, too, power is one of the branches of power, they say. here, let them pay for this, therefore, in my opinion, it will be necessary to be careful with this. i agree with andrei evgenievich, because at one fine moment this is perceived. how do you serve me. this is already the fourth. yes , the first three in social networks and messengers recently appeared information, and allegedly the military commissars are to blame for some of the failures of the russian

army. well, a number of such leaders of public opinion have appeared who literally began to peck at military correspondents, in your opinion. uh, it's their fault that they posted video photos with the advanced question is very difficult and lies in the plane of ethics and yes and no. on the one hand, as journalists, uh, and as war correspondents, they must objectively cover the situation that is developing on either one or another sector of the front - this is their mission responsibility, and also to their huge audience on the other hand. ah, as law-abiding citizens, all the more so now that martial law has been declared in these new regions of the russian federation. they need to match their content. e with those goals and objectives that set and the civil military administration and the security forces are simply, uh, because any careless shot can reveal the location of the military personnel

or the location of the medical center there, or , like the terrible tragedy in kherson now, when the journalists filmed an organized crossing across the dnieper and literally flew there a few hours later. uh, these famous chimeras, yes, hummers, uh, high-precision artillery, people died, that is, journalists already have double responsibility for military correspondents, double responsibility. teaches not only for himself and for uh, the reliability of the information that they broadcast, but also for the fact that people can suffer because of the frames that, uh, they broadcast, therefore yes and no. this is a very difficult ethical choice. for every soldier. uh, like absolutely the same difficult ethical choice that is described, by the way, in our classical literature, but should a journalist, uh, at certain moments of the battle , brothers take up arms, now, if he sees that

civilians can suffer, but there is an automatic machine in danger nearby or himself in danger can he take a weapon in his hand, because according to such, uh, the most, most classic and extremely clean. ah, ethics. no, he shouldn't, he should raise his hands and indicate that he, uh, means, uh, a military commissar journalist . well, what did the professor say? at the schirfak , the situation is stringent, yes, yes, but on the other hand. and, if this is the only way to save your life or the life of, uh, a peaceful person next to you, maybe or not. this is a difficult choice that every journalist and, in general, every person makes within himself. we can argue about it discuss. let's, as our president said, arguing and discussing this. after peace comes to the vast expanse. but after all, it seems to me that

a journalist does not even have the right to be photographed holding a weapon in his hands, of course. but this is again according to the same standard ones, but i repeat. uh, it's one thing when it's bragging, and we have roman protasevich like that. yes, he drowned for the fact that he was simply engaged in posturing on the front line. they say he didn’t shoot, he didn’t kill, he didn’t participate in anything, and then he had evidence yes photo with guns, well this bragging is such boyishness on the one hand, and on the other hand. well, if here is a random shot, e pulls you out when you made this transition from purely journalistic ethics to these human ones, you took up arms, being a correspondent, in order to protect a child there, close yourself there or ah repel a terrorist attack or attack by an enemy who you consider an enemy is just appreciated. difficult question, but he does not have, believe me, no, and there can be

no unambiguous answer to it. well, of course i internal censorship. here you must turn on your head before publishing something and think not to harm, but on the other hand. and if these pictures of you, uh, photos, a video sequence, your comment from the front line, where the situation is not the best, for example, for the russian group, if they reach the decision maker and help him more quickly. uh, let's say announce from here the troops, from a heavy direction, or throw in reinforcements and save a lot more lives. i repeat, no, a single recipe and war is and the fog of war. this is such a space of constant risk and the choice of journalistic ethics, and the principles of journalism are yellow plums on the telegram channel. now gs premium has published this information. that at once several overseas journalists with a solid audience on twitter complained

that someone was trying to buy their loyalty? yes , i promise to generously pay for what they will push through, but about the ukrainian agenda, let's call it like this: glorification of ukraine overcame, denigration of russia a. here they, er, refused these proposals. that is, suspicion is not groundless that i'll be here just for the opinion of my colleagues. here is wilhelm's house of keshulze and adrian baque, a french journalist and investigators, and many many others who say that yes, mainstream censorship has been established in their countries. how do they softly call it, when there are mainstream dominant media that either have temniks, or have a political task. they are put in front of them, or the founders give them a task, and they carry only one propagandist point of view, and everything else is marginalized.