© YouTube / Artyom GrishanovScreenshot from a 2015 music video by Artyom Grishanov
In particular, one clip featured the aftermath of attacks by Kiev's forces on Donbass, leading to accusations that filmmakers misled viewers.
Released last year, the documentary purports to depict the battle between Russian and Ukrainian forces for Mariupol, a large coastal city in the Donetsk People's Republic liberated by Moscow's troops in May 2022.
Ukrainian director Mstislav Chernov was on the ground covering the events for the Associated Press, and the film's narrative aligns with that of Kiev and its Western backers, by accusing Russian soldiers of war crimes.
However, at least one apparent inconsistency in the documentary, which has been bestowed with numerous prizes in the West, including the Academy Award for best international feature film, was picked up by several Russian Telegram channels.
The image shows a child's winter coat hanging from the branch of a tree and blowing in the wind, while the narrator explains how footage from Mariupol can serve as proof when explaining to his daughter what he did to stop the violence.
Rather than being from 2022, the same footage was used in 2015 by performer Artyom Grishanov in a semi-documentary music video. The video featured distressed Ukrainians in Donbass, particularly children, as the government in Kiev used military force in an attempt to seize control after the region rejected the 2014 Western-backed coup in the Ukrainian capital.
The song's title, 'Toys for Poroshenko', was a reference to then-Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko, and ends with a call for the government in Kiev to implement a ceasefire, arguing it would then realize there are no enemies in Donbass.
Under Poroshenko, Kiev signed up for a reconciliation roadmap, the
Minsk agreements, which were ostensibly intended to pave the way for the reintegration of Donbass and Lugansk into Ukraine.
Both Poroshenko and his successor, Vladimir Zelensky, refused to implement the agreements. Poroshenko has since admitted that he used the accords to win time for Kiev to build up its military with the help of NATO.'20 Days in Mariupol' has been screened at numerous international film events and received recognition from the Sundance Film Festival, the Toronto Film Critics Association, and the British Academy Film Awards, among others. It won the prestigious Oscar prize earlier this month.
Comment: In the YouTube video, the image is from minute 4:29 of 8:12 Viewing is restricted by YouTube to protect viewers of all ages from what the Western powers have helped along. If the video does not show up, try looking for the title: "Артём Гришанов - Игрушки / Toys for Poroshenko / War in Ukraine (English subtitles)"
On the topic of the children of Ukraine, there is this artice
Is the Olena Zelenska Foundation covering for sex trafficking? Mariupol has witnessed much history:
SOTT articles: in title, 50+
articles; in summary, 210+
articles
While the film is drawing eyes from the watchers are they being drawn to Ukraine and Mariupol, are they, even conveniently being drawn from Gaza and Israel? There are differences in the approach:
Scott Ritter: Russia, Israel and the law of war regarding civilians which ends:
During the 2006 Lebanon War, Israel Defense Force Northern Commander Gadi Eisenkot implemented a military strategy that sought to target and destroy entire civilian areas rather than engage in difficult and dangerous ground combat necessary to capture them. The goal of this strategy was more than simply trying to reduce Israeli casualties — the stated purpose of this new approach was to hold the entire civilian population accountable for the actions of Hezbollah fighters. Eisenkot did away with the requirement under international law to distinguish between military and civilian targets. This new doctrine was first used on the West Beirut Dahiya neighborhood, and the doctrine took its name from this location — the "Dahiya" Doctrine.
The "Dahiya Doctrine" specifically calls for the deliberate targeting of civilian populations and civilian infrastructure for the specific purpose of causing suffering and severe distress throughout the targeted population. The goal was to simultaneously destroy any enemy in the targeted area, to intimidate the targeted population into turning on the militants (in the case Hezbollah), and to deter other population centers from supporting Hezbollah. The "Dahiya Doctrine" was used extensively against Gaza since 2008, killing thousands of civilians. In its definition and through its execution, the "Dahiya Doctrine" amounts to nothing less than state terrorism, which means that the Israeli military, through its implementation of this policy, has become a state sponsor of terrorism.
As the facts emerge about the performance of the Russian military during the battle for Mariupol, it becomes crystal clear that the Russian soldiers behaved in an exemplary fashion, putting themselves at risk to ensure that the principles of distinction and military necessity were applied liberally and well within the spirit and letter of international law.
One cannot make a similar claim about the Israeli Defense Force and Gaza, where the "Dahiya Doctrine" is being executed with a vengeance.
Sure, what else would you expect? Back in the day, another film was showered with awards. Its theme was summed up in a song that began with the words "This land is mine. God gave this land to me." Unless God was/is personified by British/French elite-level politicians paid off by International Banksters, that was - and remains - an absolute lie.
I think there was a line about children playing freely, too. Not sure how freely the children of the God-given land are playing, but the children of the original inhabitants don't seem to be playing freely these days.