By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During a recent meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin, journalists attempted to question Putin about the killing of Ukrainian civilians, but the Russian leader repeatedly ignored the queries. When asked about the situation, Putin appeared to disregard the questions, seemingly avoiding a direct response. Questions regarding trust were also posed, but Putin’s response was inaudible. Trump’s primary objective for the meeting was to negotiate a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, expressing his dissatisfaction if a resolution was not achieved.
Read the original article here
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice. It’s a simple, yet damning observation. Twice. The same question, about the same atrocious acts, met with the same practiced indifference. It’s a move that speaks volumes, and it’s a tactic that’s been analyzed, dissected, and criticized, but it still hits you, doesn’t it? The deliberate choice to feign ignorance, to sidestep accountability, to avoid even acknowledging the question… it’s a calculated act of evasion that screams volumes about the individual in question and his disregard for the lives lost in the conflict.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice. This act can be seen as a deliberate tactic, a way to control the narrative and avoid answering difficult questions. It’s a performance, designed to project an image of strength and control, but in reality, it reveals the opposite: a fear of being held accountable. By simply not acknowledging the query, he avoids the possibility of directly contradicting his own propaganda, which often denies Russian involvement or blames Ukrainian forces. This tactic gives the illusion of ignoring the question without actually addressing it.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice, and the implications are vast. We can see this in the reaction. What would he say if he actually answered the question truthfully? Would he admit culpability? Almost certainly not. The preferred method is denial or deflection, and the most effective way to do that is to simply act as if he hadn’t heard the question. The implication, of course, is that he is unwilling to engage with the truth and afraid of the ramifications. It’s a display of arrogance, a clear signal to the world that he doesn’t believe he is beholden to any standards of accountability.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice, and it brings into stark relief the brutal realities of the conflict. The victims of the Bucha massacre, and the thousands of other Ukrainian civilians killed, deserve justice. Their families are entitled to know that their loved ones’ deaths were not in vain and that such atrocities will never be repeated. The deliberate act of ignoring these questions, of pretending not to hear the pleas for justice, is a slap in the face to those who have suffered so greatly.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice, and this method reminds us of the power of perception in shaping international relations. The image that’s crafted, the narrative that’s presented, can have a profound impact on how events are understood, how people react, and how the world at large responds. It is also important to consider the power of propaganda. The Russian propaganda machine, and other sources, often present a vastly different account of events, attributing responsibility for civilian deaths to Ukrainian forces or claiming that such deaths are military targets.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice, and his behaviour also raises questions about the role of the media and journalists. The press has a vital duty to hold those in power accountable, to ask the tough questions, and to shine a light on wrongdoing. The journalist who persists, who keeps asking the questions despite the attempts at evasion, is performing a courageous act that deserves our respect. It exposes the underlying reality of the situation: a leader who is unwilling to acknowledge the suffering of others and who uses denial as a shield.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice, and it raises concerns about the moral decay of a political movement and the hypocrisy of some individuals. The blatant disregard for human life in this case is a stark reminder that it’s important to question those in power, regardless of their political affiliation or the narratives that are presented. We must demand answers, seek the truth, and hold those responsible for atrocities accountable. This applies not only to this situation, but also to any circumstances where human rights are disregarded.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice. The actions are a reflection of the character of the leader. He’s been in power for many years, and this behavior is not an isolated incident. It is a pattern, a calculated strategy. It’s a clear signal that he is unwilling to acknowledge the suffering of innocent people or be held accountable for his decisions. It’s a choice, and it’s a damning one.
Putin cynically ‘did not hear’ question about killing of peaceful Ukrainians twice. The world is watching. The families of those killed in Ukraine are watching. They are demanding answers and justice. The cynical refusal to answer is not just an act of evasion; it is an act of contempt. An acknowledgement of the question, a genuine response, is the bare minimum expectation. The failure to do so reveals the depth of the tragedy and reinforces the need for accountability.