...
I see that you're also seeing "Kremlin copypasta" everywhere. Care to point where this "Kremlin copypasta" is? Is "Kremlin copypasta" with you in your room right now? Are the western news articles themselves now "Kremlin copypasta"? And if it's not, then somehow me citing them is what's making it propaganda in your head? Or we're down to the simpletron level with the following logic: IF negative coverage of Ukraine THEN yell Kremlin propaganda!
I see that you're also seeing "Kremlin copypasta" everywhere. Care to point where this "Kremlin copypasta" is? Is "Kremlin copypasta" with you in your room right now? Are the western news articles themselves now "Kremlin copypasta"? And if it's not, then somehow me citing them is what's making it propaganda in your head? Or we're down to the simpletron level with the following logic: IF negative coverage of Ukraine THEN yell Kremlin propaganda!
And this is a clear example of how someone who does not have an argument throws a smoke screen in the shape of a wall of text, an image that is unrelated to the topic and ends with this marvellous question "what is Kremlin copypasta".
Well, it is exactly what you do: give veracity to unverifiable information, use "information" coming from the regime loud-speaking trolls and attacking anyone who calls your bluff.
IF my lack of credibility is exposed THEN
Walltextit
Use bold letters
Throw unrelated pictures in
Go into rant
ELSE
Go to Kremlin and "copypasta" again
EN IF
Claims "veracity to unverifiable information...use "information" coming from the regime loud-speaking trolls" yet with plethora of my posts can't cite a single example. Credibility is "exposed" only when you get called out and cannot cite your claims, and if you read up i'm not the one who hasn't provided a valid sources for my claims, not my problem if you're not liking them. All Russian media is propaganda and cannot be cited, all Chinese media is propaganda and cannot be cited, all FOX news is propaganda and cannot be cited, all ultra right sources are propaganda and cannot be cited, all ultra left sources are propaganda and cannot be cited, all other western media is propaganda but only when it speaks negative of Ukraine. Seems legit.
Are you so confused that you believe registration date on this forum somehow indicates your true age?
You are the one who's confused and can't even calculate my age. We are on the internet, deal with it.
Ok, now we're getting somewhere. So we've established that you feel western media is now pushing Kremlin lies without addressing them, and you don't believe that people with critical thinking need to hear both sides to make up their minds.
Nope, obviously you are not capable to understand my post. 
I've described it above that the issue is "false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia) but who am I to explain this to a Kremlin troll like you, whose arguments are based on repeating Kremlin propaganda every day and false balancing.
Do you suggest that we all should only listen to Zelenskyy as the source of ultimate truth? Are there any articles that cover Ukraine negatively that you feel is just, or all negative coverage is Kremlins propaganda by definition to you? And on this specific topic, care to show at least one exact example from my many sources where they cite Kremlin lies? Or will you just post the same meme for the 20th time, feeling that it somehow helps your argument in some form?
You are obviously too dumb to research it yourself. Here is one case: https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/putin-droht-bei-einem-angriff-setzt-russland-atomwaffen-ein-li.295226
Quote
The head of the Kremlin declared on television: "If we are attacked, we will fight back." According to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, Russia will use nuclear weapons only in response to an attack. "We consider weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, as a means of defense," he said at a televised meeting of the Kremlin's Human Rights Council on Wednesday. Russia's strategy is based on a policy of "so-called retaliation". "If we are attacked, we fight back," he added. In the past, the Kremlin chief had announced that Russian territory would be defended by all military means. Now, with a view to the confrontation with the West as a result of the Ukraine conflict, he emphasized that "the danger of nuclear war is growing".
And that's it, article's end. Poor Pootin, is playing his strawman and victim card again, "evil West want's to attack friendly Russia".
Russia isn't "threatened" in any way.
The west won't start a nuclear war.
Russia is the one who's repeatedly threatening to use a nuclear bomb in Ukraine and is already bombing Ukraine deliberately.
I'm not saying Berliner Zeitung launched this low quality BS intentionally to spread Putin's lies but it's just very fortunate for Putin to get his message out there.
But useful tools, like you, will still find an excuse for Putler's propaganda and continue to spread it willfully.
Let's go back to school again and i'll try to build a basic logic chain for you to understand. Let's try to objectify things so you're not as confused.
When reading your comments, one can get the impression that you are the one who's in dire need of some education. Don't you have any education in your cell?
I believe it's unlikely that A happens. is a good answer to the question of What do you think are the chances of A happening. But is not an answer to the question of Will you do X if A happens. It's like me asking If it rains, will you agree that the weather forecast was correct and you saying I believe it'll be sunny. And you know who else enjoyed rain? Hitler! and pretending if that somehow answers the asked question. Shall we actually try answering the third time without you going on a tirade against evil AfD? But if you're unwilling/unable to answer that and enjoy rambling about AfD, at least opine on this. Considering AfD support jumped from 16% to 21% in less than a year, how high do you expect them to get, and do you expect them to beat CDU/CSU? Pretty simple question no? Can be answered with just one line like this: I think AfD won't get above X% and they will/will not beat CDU/CSU.
How many % our radical far-right AfD will get can't be answered because I'm not able to look into the future. The previous radical far-right organization achieved 43.91% and we all know how it ended...
In addition, I'm not surprised from someone who's behind bars and is unable to avoid pyramid quotes...
Keep pushing your Kremlin propaganda.
I asked how old you are and you wasted two posts pointing to your forum registration date only to ultimately claim that your age is how long you've been registered on this forum.
"false balancing", where two opinions are cited while the one is true or close to the truth (Ukraine) and the other one is a straight out lie (Russia)
I've cited many sources which claim Ukrainian involvement in NS explosion, now can you stop wasting time and PLEASE cite at least one recent source which claims the true or close to the truth (Ukrainian) version that Russia is responsible for Nord Stream sabotage?
I asked for an example from my citations where they cite Kremlin lies, you proceed to call me "too dumb" and post a new resource with a totally different story which I never cited or even talked about.
I asked if you'd concede UA involvement in the sabotage of NS if Germany puts a warrant out on Ukrainians involved, you wasted two posts speculating on probability of AfD getting into power, when i finally asked you to speculate on what % AfD will get up to, you finally say that you're not able to look into the future
You yourself run an ad campaign, but you keep posting a meme about getting money for posts
