Here's the News: Dissecting The Truth Behind the Legacy Media’s Narrative on Ukraine
As a New York Times report now demolishes the narrative of the “unprovoked war” in Ukraine, does this reveal the legacy media’s own coverage of the Ukraine war over the past two years to have been nothing more than war propaganda? --💙Support our channel and become an awakened wonder through Locals:https://bit.ly/RussellBrand-Support WATCH me LIVE weekdays on Rumble:https://bit.ly/russellbrand-rumble Visit the new merch store:https://bit.ly/Stay-Free-Store Follow on social media:X: @rustyrocketsINSTAGRAM: @russellbrandFACEBOOK: @russellbrand
Hello there you Awakening Wonders on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you download your podcasts.
We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content.
We will be delivering a podcast every day, seven days a week, every single day.
You'll get a detailed breakdown of current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, but if they are covering, they're amplifying establishment messages and not telling you the truth.
Once a week we bring you in-depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson, RFK Jr, Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Mate and many more.
Now enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Remember, there's an episode every single day to educate and elevate our consciousness together.
Stay free and enjoy the episode.
No, here's the fucking news!
Hello there you Awakening Wanderers!
Thanks for joining us on our voyage to truth and freedom.
Remember you can support our work by clicking on the link in the description and joining us where we do additional content and we do things like interview Ram Paul and you can join us for that conversation and post questions to Ram Paul directly and you can participate in this conversation with us and that way we'll get closer to the truth more quickly rather than the agenda of the legacy media and the establishment.
Slowing the truth down as much as possible so that by the time the truth arrives You've already got the funding for the wars you needed it for.
What we're talking about is the New York Times have now admitted, acknowledged that there are CIA bases inside Ukraine and have been for the last 10 years.
And they've been waging a shadow war on Russia from within Ukraine.
And essentially, deep state interests have been in control of Ukraine for the last 10 years, which is old since that 2014 coup, which we've been talking about in independent media, but they've not been talking about in legacy media.
And that's before we talk about NATO's role in exacerbating these conditions and the escalation of conflicts between Russia and Ukraine.
So why are the New York Times telling us now that there are CIA bases in Ukraine and probably biolabs and all the sorts of things that we've been discussing in these spaces for a while and were of course called conspiracy theorists for discussing?
It's evidently true.
So what's the agenda of the legacy media?
Is it as simple as ensuring that funding can continue?
And is it clear now that the legacy media are starting to acknowledge that you cannot completely suppress truth?
You can employ agencies like Logically AI.
You can have government agencies using proxies to crush dissent and censor.
But ultimately, and this is actually pretty good and exciting news, we're too powerful now to be controlled.
I don't mean we, just me and literally you.
I mean the people that occupy these spaces, all of your various resources that you use to formulate your understanding of reality so that you are not subject to the reality that Google and Google AI and the establishment would have you live with him.
Because remember, it's not that long ago that they told you pretty repetitively and with absolute determination that this was an unprovoked war.
But because of their odd, peculiar amnesia of our times, you may have forgotten that, but they did do that.
Have a look.
The Russian military has begun a brutal assault on the people of Ukraine.
without provocation, without justification.
On Russia's unprovoked and unjustified attack on Ukraine.
The prayers of the entire world are with the people of Ukraine tonight
as they suffer an unprovoked and unjustified attack.
Imagine if those announcements, just the ones you've heard already included,
We do have CIA bases within Ukraine and have been waging on a shadow war.
And as you know, NATO have been provoking Russia for years by inviting Ukraine to join NATO since 2008.
Knowing that that's a red line for Putin.
That can no longer be called an unprovoked attack.
It's a provoked attack!
It's still terrible for the people of Ukraine.
I'm aware and I pray that Ukrainian people are watching this and I pray that they're safe.
Obviously not within Ukraine, I'm assuming.
You know, elsewhere as refugees due to this terrible war that could be prevented because I bet you wouldn't be so willing to spend your tax dollars funding the perpetuation of a war that is provoked rather than unprovoked.
We'll get into looking at why the legacy media have changed their tune right now.
But for this moment, we can double down on the fact that we can't trust them.
We could never trust them.
Why would you ever trust them?
What do you think they are about?
Let's have a look.
Russia commenced its full-scale, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
President Putin has launched a horrific, unprovoked attack on their country.
That image, so full of pointlessness and lies, is essentially an artwork at this point.
These masks don't work.
We know they don't work.
This war is completely Completely illegitimate.
I shouldn't even really be Prime Minister.
I'm pretending to be all nice and I'm evoking emergency air.
I mean the whole thing.
You could literally go to Broadway in New York City and watch a show and be hit with more truth than watching the news.
We are united in condemning the Kremlin's unprovoked aggression.
And he also actually knows because that's Jens Stoltenberg from NATO who's directly been in contact with Putin and going, so what will you do if we, yeah that would be a war with it.
Fuck them.
No justification apart from the fact that he is a warmonger that wanted to build an empire.
You can't call someone a warmonger when you've done what that man is purported to have done with a piggy.
Putin is the aggressor.
Putin chose this war.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the sign language lady have to sort of retract all of that complete lie.
Biden.
Okay, let's get into some analysis of why the New York Times have chosen this moment to seed a different story.
And by my reckoning, this is comparable to the recent study on coronavirus that does indeed reveal, oh yeah, there are adverse injuries.
Oh, there are peculiar cerebral conditions.
Oh, we should have perhaps looked at whether or not we need to vaccinate this community or that community.
All stuff that could have been discussed years ago.
Curiously, Before they made all the money.
It's very interesting that the most censored events in history are the most lied about events in history.
And they're not being lied about by conspiracy theorists, they're being lied about by the establishment and their legacy media attack dogs.
Let's get into this story.
In the past two years, nearly every reference in the US media to the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine by Russia has been preceded with an obligatory word, unprovoked.
The public was told that this was a war without cause, that Ukraine was blameless and that the invasion was to be explained entirely in terms of the intentions and psychology of one man, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Of course, that's why there was so much hysteria about the now famous Tucker Carlson interview, because then you can watch him with your own eyes and you can make your own evaluations about Russian propaganda.
Versus US propaganda and you can make decisions about your own tax dollars and your own family and your own military and your own community and your own nation, but they don't want you making any of those calculations.
However, on the weekend of the second anniversary of the war, the New York Times has published a lengthy article revealing that the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24th, 2022 was instigated by a systematic and widespread campaign of military intelligence aggression by the United States.
The article details long-standing Central Intelligence Agency, CIA of course, operations in Ukraine, in which the agency sponsored and built up the Ukrainian Military Intelligence Agency, HER, using it as a weapon of spying, assassinations and other provocations directed against Russia for more than a decade.
Why are the New York Times writing this piece now?
Why are the New York Times, which are a mouthpiece and an amplifier of the establishment agenda, choosing This moment to reveal that the CIA did indeed have bases and assets and engaging provocative activity inside Ukraine, which means that it can't any longer be referred to as an unprovoked attack.
A provoked attack doesn't mean that, you know, that the Kremlin is Disneyland and that Putin's a great guy or that Ukrainian people aren't being brutalized.
It just means that we have to have an adult conversation rather than propaganda.
The Times writes, Towards the end of 2021, according to a senior European official, Mr Putin was weighing whether to launch his full-scale invasion when he met with the head of one of Russia's main spy services, who told him that the CIA together with Britain's MI6 were controlling Ukraine and turning it into a beachhead for operations against Moscow.
Does that make sense to you, the idea that British and American intelligence agencies essentially had control of Ukraine?
Does that sort of Does that ring a bell of truth somewhere in your belly?
Or do you think that Zelensky is some sort of military genius cum activist campaigner who is Churchill-like leading the charge against Russia, the indefatigable yet evil enemy?
Or do you reckon that what happens is countries like the United States and the UK puppet various nations in order to either win resource or strategic global wars to fulfil an agenda where it wouldn't be popular to go to face-to-face good old-fashioned gloves-off wars with Russia and China And much like the wars that took place in Vietnam and Korea and Afghanistan and basically all of all the wars that have happened since the end of the Second World War, proxy conflicts are being fought for military-industrial complex reasons or strategic reasons and we're just given a narrative up front that stops us going, how do we benefit from this?
Who's funding this stuff?
Am I paying for this war?
Is this unwinnable?
Hey, ain't they a nuclear superpower?
So that those questions are all sort of lost in the miasma of total lies, the New York Times et al.
propagandize us with images of brutality and suffering in Ukraine, which we should of course be aware of and doing everything we can to prevent, so that they could just get on and get a bunch of funding for Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Boeing.
The Times report demonstrates that this Russian intelligence assessment was absolutely true.
For more than a decade, dating back to 2014, the CIA was building up training and arming Ukrainian intelligence and paramilitary forces that were engaging in assassinations and other provocations against pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, against Russian forces in Crimea, and across the border into Russia itself.
Huh, so that's sort of like there's been a war going on for ages anyway and all that's really happened is they've just reframed what's happening and increased funding.
In a critical passage, the Times writes, as the partnership deepened after 2016, the Ukrainians became impatient with what they considered Washington's undue caution and began staging assassinations and other lethal operations which violated the terms the White House thought the Ukrainians had agreed to.
Infuriated, officials in Washington threatened to cut off support.
But they never did.
In other words, the Ukrainian paramilitary forces, armed, funded and led by the United States and NATO, were systematically assassinating forces supporting closer relations with Russia.
Ukraine have their own autonomy, they have their own dignity and of course they have their own sovereignty.
The fact that they have their own attitude to their relationship with Russia and the fact that they took advantage of an opportunity to escalate tensions knowing they were backed by a military superpower is hardly surprising but it It is concerning because it's led to this conflict, but I suppose ultimately the United States elite have an agenda to drain and destabilise Russia.
And don't you imagine that the increasing hostility in the South Pacific are about draining and destabilising China?
And isn't it becoming increasingly clear that the country of America is one thing, you, you people, your culture, your country, your beliefs, your values, your Christianity, your tolerance of other religions, all of that stuff is there, down here.
And then over here are this set of interests controlling To some degree or another, both political parties and ensuring that they can maintain the forever wars that are their lifeblood but sadly the death of literally every other territory in the world and a good many of your own citizens if this mentality continues for much longer.
The newspaper's account begins with the maiden coup of February 2014 when right-wing and neo-Nazi forces backed by the US and European Union overthrew a pro-Russian president and installed a pro-imperialist regime headed by the billionaire Petro Poroshenko.
In a way, there could have been an entirely different trajectory, couldn't there?
There could have been sort of an easier, if still somewhat tense, relationship between Russia and Ukraine that didn't really involve the United States, and therefore didn't require siloing of weapons that were now no longer needed in Afghanistan into this new territory.
A new paradigm was possible, and it seems like it was prevented.
Furthermore, neo-Nazi and right-wing, I mean, if our culture is defining itself by one thing, it's its opposition to, oh, these bloody right-wing fascists.
There's barely a mainstream media news program ends about some new person being called a neo-Nazi or a right-wing fascist when it comes to actual people who come out and tell you, do you know who I am?
Please, tell us.
I'm a neo-Nazi.
I'm a new one.
Now, can I have some money to go to war against other people?
Yes, you can, because we don't care about anything except our own agenda.
And yet we will talk about how much we hate Nazis when it's someone like off the news who wears a tie who's basically a Christian who doesn't think about race that much because they live in America and they're American.
This coup was the culmination of two decades of imperialist inroads into the former Soviet bloc with the expansion of NATO to include virtually all of Eastern Europe in violation of pledges made to the leaders of the former Soviet Union.
The Times is silent on this earlier history as well as on the role of the CIA in the maiden events.
Why are they silent on those important facts?
Maiden set the stage for a massive escalation of the CIA intervention as detailed in the Times Report.
The intelligence agency played a central role in fueling conflict between Ukraine and Russia, first as a low-level war against pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, then as a full-scale war after the Russian invasion in February 2022.
Three US administrations were involved, first Obama, then Trump, now Biden.
I'm sure you know by now that what I suppose that indicates is that whoever you vote for when it comes to significant issues like perpetuating forever wars you don't really have the right to vote.
That's why independent candidates like Robert Kennedy who say they will end these wars and I pray they mean by that all of these wars ought to be taken very seriously.
According to the Times' account, CIA operations included not only widespread spying, but assisting direct provocations like the assassination of pro-Russian politicians in eastern Ukraine and paramilitary attacks on Russian forces in Crimea.
The Times reported that a Ukrainian unit, the 5th Directorate, was tasked with conducting assassinations, including one in 2016.
in 2016. The Times writes, "A mysterious explosion in the Russian-occupied city of
Donetsk in eastern Ukraine ripped through an elevator carrying a senior Russian separatist
commander named Arsen Pavlov, known by his nom de guerre, Motorola." What?
After the phones?
So in the end it was television that killed him?
Yep.
Very good that, yeah.
Have you got a battery for an Ericsson?
The CIA soon learned that the assassins were members of the Fifth Directorate, the spy group that received CIA training.
Ukraine's domestic intelligence agency had even handed out commemorative patches to those involved, each one stitched with the word LIFT, the British term for an elevator.
Oh, as long as you're all having fun, guys, now in this massive, expensive, mad war that you keep lying about and simplifying so you can keep funding it and people still going, oh, it's really terrible this is happening.
Here, have a patch with Lyft, because we blew out that person, didn't we, in an elevator.
That was a lot of fun.
You guys called it a Lyft?
We've got so much in common.
Why don't we sub-bomb some new countries?
Yeah.
OK, then, old chap.
Cheers.
The report describes another such operation.
A team of Ukrainian agents set up an unmanned shoulder-fired rocket launcher in a building in the occupied territories.
It was directly across from the office of a rebel commander named Mikhail Tolstik, better known as GV.
Using a remote trigger, they fired the launcher as soon as GV entered his office, killing him, according to US and Ukrainian officials.
It's quite provocative, isn't it?
It's not unprovoked.
Anything that happens after that, again, like Putin, illegal war, terrible, children dying, buildings destroyed, tragedy, devastation, it should stop as soon as possible.
But this is going to annoy someone like Putin, all of this, isn't it?
Since the outbreak of full-scale war, the Ukrainian Hurs extended these assassination operations to the whole territory of Russia.
Again, that's pretty provocative.
Including the killing of Darya Dugina, a leading pro-Putin polemicist in the Russian media and Russian government and military officials.
I mean, seems like designed to irritate him into a bellicose state, which it eventually did with the ongoing attempt to recruit Ukrainian to NATO.
The CIA found its Ukrainian allies very useful in collecting vast amounts of data on Russian military and intelligence activity, so much that the Hurt itself could not process it and had to forward the raw data to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia for analysis.
An earlier, less detailed report on this intelligence collaboration in the Washington Post cited a Ukrainian intelligence official's estimate that 250,000 to 300,000 Russian military intelligence messages were being collected each day.
So they were spying on Russia to an extraordinary degree.
More funding, more spying, more transgression, more provocation.
So again, we just watch the news, unprovoked, unprovoked.
Were you spying on us for ages?
Yeah.
Did you blow up a geezer who was really nice about us on the news?
Yeah.
Did you get a load of badges done celebrating the brutal assassination of someone with Lyft on it?
We did do that, yes.
We all thought it was jolly good fun back at the office, didn't we?
Yes, we did.
This data was not just related to Ukraine, but concerned Russian intelligence activity all over the world.
Long before the Russian invasion, the CIA was seeking to broaden its attack on Moscow.
The Times reports, The relationship with the Ukraine in her was so successful that the CIA wanted to replicate it with other European intelligence services that shared a focus in countering Russia.
So they wanted to establish it everywhere.
A bit like, I suppose, Russia's concern that Ukraine will join NATO, then other border countries will join NATO, then they'd have secret CIA spying bases in them where they would engage in provocative activity and spying missions in an attempt It seems to me, at least, to create one global government, ultimately, controlled by the interests that currently control the United States, the biggest economy and most powerful nation on Earth.
Replicate that everywhere.
And the only things that are powerful enough to prevent that at the moment are Russia and China.
So let's crack on and destroy them.
Is that basically what's happening?
The head of Russia House...
The CIA department overseeing operations against Russia organized a secret meeting at The Hague.
There, representatives from the CIA, Britain's MI6, the HUR, the Dutch service, a critical intelligence ally, and other agencies agreed to start pooling together more of their intelligence on Russia.
Again, provocation, provocation.
The result was a secret coalition against Russia and the Ukrainians were vital members of it.
All these activities occurred well before the Russian invasion of February 2022, not to mention the 2014 coup, and placing what sounds like a puppet government that was ultimately being controlled by deep state interests.
I don't know what provocation could be, if not that.
That's some of the most provocative stuff I've ever heard.
The outbreak of full-scale war led to even more direct CIA engagement in Ukraine.
CIA agents were the only Americans not covered by the initial evacuation of US government personnel from Ukraine, removing only to Western Ukraine.
They continually briefed the Ukrainians on Russian military plans, including precise details of operations as they were unfolding.
This is, just is, and has always been, a proxy war.
Nomination of Russia's invasion of Ukraine as the start date seems like the type of narrativisation that's favourable to the interest engaged in these years of provocation after sponsoring a coup and insisting that Ukraine join NATO.
Actions that seem designed to provoke Russia.
So when Russia invaded Ukraine, killing loads of Ukrainian people, causing all that decimation and destruction and all of that criminal and illegal activity, it's because of all of this stuff.
And because, temporarily, Ukrainian interests align with those interests, they're a convenient conduit for the expression of the power of the establishment.
And when they're no longer a convenient conduit, they will be pretty mercilessly dispatched, I'd guess.
According to the Times, within weeks the CIA had returned to Kiev and the agency sent in scores of new officers to help Ukrainians.
A senior US official said of the CIA's sizable presence, are they pulling triggers?
No.
Are they helping with targeting?
Absolutely.
Okay, so aim the gun there.
Now, are you able to pull that trigger yourself?
Well, I am in the military, so... Okay, well, pull it now and aim it there.
Well done, that's good.
Any assistance we can give you in this war we're not involved with, you just ask.
Could we have some more money?
Of course you can, yeah.
Some of the CIA officers were deployed to Ukrainian bases.
They reviewed lists of potential Russian targets that the Ukrainians were preparing to strike, comparing the information the Ukrainians had with the U.S.
intelligence to ensure that it was accurate.
In other words, the CIA was helping direct the war, making the U.S.
government a full participant, a co-belligerent in a war with nuclear-armed Russia, despite Biden's claim that the United States was only aiding Ukraine from afar.
And all of this without the American people having the slightest say in the matter.
Don't you sometimes forget that.
Don't you sometimes forget that vital detail that America is men-a-bee, your country, was established on those principles.
And I really now see more clearly than ever Mike Benz, the expert in deep state activities analysis, that when people say we have to protect democracy, what they mean are a set of institutions that preserve oligarchical power rather than the electoral process by which ordinary people go, um, I think I'd like to Not being a nuclear apocalypse, because that kind of democracy isn't happening, is it?
The Times account also provides an inadvertent indictment of America's media, as it writes, the details of this intelligence partnership, many of which are being disclosed by the New York Times for the first time, have been a closely guarded secret for a decade.
It's written out like it's telling you.
Here's the inside scoop.
Taylor Swift's new beauty secrets are avocado on each of her cheeks.
It's not that, is it?
It's like, we've been using your money to provoke a nuclear superpower into a war, then we've been telling you that it was an unprovoked war.
Oh my god, no wonder she looks so young and fresh!
This is propaganda and lying, and no doubt the New York Times are only revealing this now because it's convenient to another agenda that we'll be revealing later in this brilliant article.
This admission means that these secrets were closely guarded by the Times itself.
So, all the time, hey listen, please don't tell people there have been no clinical trials on this product, just tell them that if they don't use this product, it's irresponsible and kills old people.
You got it boss!
As former editor Bill Keller once observed, freedom of the press means freedom not to publish, and that is a freedom we exercise with some regularity.
Particularly, we might add, when it comes to the crimes of US imperialism.
The Times article is not so much an exposure as a controlled release of information.
Yeah, that's what I figured.
We're starting to spot that now.
As independent media becomes more robust and yet more agile, they have to at points recognise, look, do you know what?
People can no longer be expected to believe this was an entirely unprovoked attack.
There's people going on Joe Rogan, there's Bobby Kennedy out there.
People are all the time saying, wait a minute, what about NATO?
What about that agreement between Gorbachev and Reagan?
Oh, well, let's just say whataboutism is a thing.
Yeah, we'll try that for a while.
You can't do whataboutism!
Just shut up, or you're helping Trump!
But in the end, we just found out too much.
Too much accumulative and aggregated information.
So, in order to, to a degree, keep a sliver of credibility, they're sort of acknowledging, okay, yeah, we provoked this war, and we've known about it for ages, and the Deep State's been inside Ukraine for ages.
But also, there's another agenda to do with getting Republicans to support the ongoing funding of this war, rather than withdrawing the funding.
And that's coming in a second.
The US newspaper Record reports that the two authors of the piece, Adam Entis and Michael Schwartz, conducted more than 200 interviews with current and former officials in Ukraine, elsewhere in Europe, and in the United States.
This activity could hardly have taken place without the knowledge, permission, and even encouragement of the CIA, as well as the Zelensky regime and Ukrainian intelligence.
Wow.
As we've been saying for some time, the legacy media works in conjunction with the establishment and Deep State to maintain a particular In the meantime, a real journalist, Julian Assange, is awaiting the decision on his final appeal against extradition to the United States where he faces 175 years in prison or even a death sentence.
The crime of Assange and WikiLeaks, which Assange founded, is that they did not obey the rules of bourgeois journalism and did not seek the permission of the military
intelligence authorities before publishing their revelations about US war crimes in
Iraq and Afghanistan, the efforts of the US State Department to subvert and
manipulate governments and the spying activities of the CIA and National Security
Agency.
In short, he released information that was favourable to what you might call
the electorate or the citizens or the subjects or the people of nations like yours
and of mine in order that we might more discerningly regard our establishment,
including the legacy media who lies to us.
And what happens to people like that is what's happened to Julian Assange.
But there are other examples of how the establishment behaves if you act against their interests.
The exposure of a decade of CIA operations in Ukraine, clearly at the request of the agency itself, appears to be linked to the ongoing conflict within the US ruling elite over what policy to adopt in that war, in the wake of the debacle suffered by the Zelensky regime in last year's offensive, which gained little and suffered colossal losses.
Congressional Republicans have blocked further military and financial aid to Ukraine, effectively declaring that the US must cut its losses there and concentrate on the main enemy, China.
Concentrate on peace?
No.
Different enemy.
Wow.
So this isn't being done in order to, you know, all the news that's fit to print.
This is like all the propaganda that's fit to use to manipulate ongoing forever war so that we can keep the offices open and the lights on.
Although we convey mostly darkness.
This is the most important couple of paragraphs I think in the piece.
Have a listen to this, then you will understand exactly what's going on.
You can use this to argue with people who still believe propaganda.
Check it.
By reporting the virtual control of the Ukrainian regime by the US military intelligence apparatus, the Times is seeking to pressure the Republicans to support the war funding.
It is arguing that this money is not going to a foreign government, in a foreign war, thousands of miles from US borders, but to a subcontractor of American imperialism, waging an American war, in which US personnel are deeply and directly engaged.
Although some American service personnel are deeply engaged in opposing these wars,
as you remember from the sad self-immolation and death of Aaron Bushnell recently.
In so doing, the Times has revealed its own coverage of the Ukraine war over the past two years
to have been nothing more than war propaganda aimed at using a fraudulent narrative
to dragoon the American public to support a predatory, imperialist war of aggression
aimed at subjugating and dismantling Russia.
And the only way, I suppose, that you could argue that that's a good thing is if you saw yourself somehow as a subject and ally of this establishment, or at least your own destiny tied to their ongoing success.
In order to believe that, you would have to be in constant fear that both Russia and China have their own imperialist agenda.
And if they're not stopped, thwarted, attacked, drained, and covertly and insidiously dismantled, then you and your way of life will be under threat.
We learned so much from this.
We learned that the New York Times suppresses information when it wants to, that they support the agenda of the establishment, that they totally believe in lying and omitting information in order to ensure that the establishment agenda can be met even when it's a bloody war that's killing Ukrainian people and Russian people.
So you can assume that they might employ similar policies when it comes to the wars in the Middle East and the terrible and tragic deaths that are taking place there.
What this ultimately reveals Is that the legacy media is part of the establishment.
You can't trust anything you read or hear in the legacy media.
You can assume from the get-go that what they are doing is either trying to distract you, dumb you down, shut down any possible avenues that are challenging to establishment interest, and even if that extends to claiming that current wars were unprovoked, when the truth is they were anything but unprovoked.
And that's not to mitigate, undermine, or dilute the tragedy that Ukrainian people are experiencing.
It's just to point out In the meantime if you can stay free.
