Non-violent grass roots reform and Democracy: If You Care About Children, It Must Include Victims Of Both Russia & the USA

Recently media outlets have been stirring up emotions for children that are victims of the invasion of Ukraine, and often trying to raise money for them, which is fine, assuming the money is used appropriately; Ukrainian children should be protected as much as other children. However there have been millions of other children going back decades that have been the victims of our own government, the CIA or other governments allied with our government, that get little or no media coverage in traditional media. Furthermore, our government has always been in a much stronger position to protect those children, often by not supporting coups, invasions, or arming tyrants serving corporate interests.

I'm certainly not saying that Russia is justified to invade Ukraine; but, it should be clear to anyone that doesn't rely on traditional media for their information that the United States starts far more wars than any other country in the world. If anyone relying on traditional media for news wants to know of other sources I went into several of them, including a couple of William Blum's books, "The Jakarta Method" by Vincent Bevins 2020, and more in Death Squads Can't Happen Here? Yet? and United States Coups & Entrapment of Immigrants and there are plenty of other sources including some listed at The American Empire Project but there's plenty more elsewhere when you become more familiar with alternative media.

This incredibly large double standard isn't new, although most of the public isn't aware of it. When our enemies commit atrocities they're highlighted wide and far, over and over again, often exaggerated, with the truth marginalized or ridiculed. When our government commits atrocities, if they're mentioned at all they're usually forgotten much quicker, and often only reported in a low profile manner. The saying "The Truth is the First Casualty of War," is accurate, although at least one researcher, Jimmie Briggs, claims the children are the first casualties of war, although at best I suspect it may be close to a tie.

In most cases they simply refuse to report on children victims at all, pretending they don't exist but in other cases they even demonize our victims, sometimes even the women and children that have nothing to do with the decision making process and are the worst victims. Liv Ullmann describes the treatment of refugees by writing:

Not long ago, with a small group of women, I visited some "detention centers" for Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong. Our time there was deliberately limited. Most press people, most civilians were denied entry into these “jails." The only journalists who seemed welcome to the camps were writers who described a refugee like this--and I quote from newspapers in Hong Kong at the time of our visit-- as "thuggish individuals" or "human vermin."

Men, women, and children who were given numbers and not allowed to keep their names once they entered the camps. Thus so much easier to think of and treat them as less than human. It has been tried before with "success" by Hitler's Nazi soldiers. Today we are succeeding even more easily--to write the history of refugees as if their history is not ours, their future is of less concern--because they are simply numbers, statistics. Their life and misery "self-inflicted" as if we were witnesses only. No Place to Be a Child: Growing Up in a War Zone - James Garbarino, Kathleen Kostelny, Nancy Dubrow 1991 Forward p.xvi

This was written over thirty years ago, but there are still plenty of examples where our politicians demonize victims of coups or invasions of other countries; the most obvious include Donald Trump's demonizing of immigrants, who happen to be victims of governments installed by our government, often with the help of the CIA, and many of these governments supported deaths squads for years, if not decades, and even if they don't have death squads anymore or aren't officially at war, they still have many social problems, including high rates of violence caused by these dysfunctional governments.

Even though Liv Ullmann's comments were written in the late eighties there was still a strong bias in the media to demonize the victims of the Vietnam War, including children, some born after the war, others that would now be in their twenties, that had no influence on the war, over fifteen years after it ended; and most Americans still, to this day don't know how many lies the Vietnam War was based on. The vast majority of the public is unaware that Ho Chi Minh was an ally during World War II and helped defeat the Japanese, doing far more in that part of the world than the French, who the United States tried to support when they tried to re-invade Vietnam. Nor do most people know that on September 2, 1945, Ho Chi Minh signed their own Declaration of Independence, using both our declaration of Independence and a similar one written by the French, declaring that they wanted to govern themselves as a Democracy. Nor do most people know that Ho Chi Minh had far more popular support than the French or any of the puppet leaders propped up by the CIA. This means we were never fighting to defend Democracy, as our government tried to convince us, when we invaded Vietnam; our government was always fighting to suppress Democracy, while the Vietnamese were the ones fighting to defend their right to rule themselves. Later in the same book Garbarino etal. explain several cases where our government supported the oppression of children either directly or indirectly in Nicaragua, the Palestinian territories, and Cambodia, which was related to the Vietnam War as indicated in the following excerpt:

.... Despite Cambodia's desperate need throughout these years, the United States refused to help. Why?

We refused to help because we had "lost" the Vietnam War, and because it was the Vietnamese who overthrew Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge. We refused to help because the government in Phnom Penh was a Communist-and a Vietnamese-dominated government. Instead of helping the Cambodians we funded the opposition, knowing that our actions meant more fighting. Never mind that hundreds of thousands of Cambodian children were in dire need. Never mind that we were unintentionally responsible for permitting the Khmer Rouge to take power in the first place. Never mind that funding the opposition guaranteed more dead and maimed children, and more orphans. We had to destroy these children to save them.

When the Allied blockade of Germany in World War I led to massive famine, humanitarian groups were formed to help the famine victims. In England writer George Bernard Shaw was criticized as unpatriotic and traitorous for supporting these groups (one of which eventually became Save the Children). His reply was on the mark then and it remains pertinent today: "I have no enemies under seven years of age," Apparently we did have such enemies; the children of Cambodia were our enemies because they had the misfortune to live under the Vietnamese "puppet" government. This government is corrupt and has had a very poor human rights record, but that is not why we opposed it.

The American refusal to help Cambodia because of the Vietnamese presence seems a rather childish response. We may be generous victors, but we do hold a grudge when we lose. ... No Place to Be a Child: Growing Up in a War Zone - James Garbarino, Kathleen Kostelny, Nancy Dubrow 1991 Forward p.42

Our government even supported the Khmer Rouge even after they knew about the genocide, because of their opposition to Vietnam, based on previous lies. Furthermore, there are other reports that indicate that if Ho Chi Minh had been allowed to rule without having to fight a major violent invasion, the more corrupt factions of the Vietnamese government might never have taken control, although this wouldn't guarantee a totally honest government, which is virtually non-existent.

Also not only are opposing views exposing how we fight wars based on lies absent from traditional media and the debate in Congress about setting policies, but so is the best research to avoid wars in the first place, or to solve many social problem, including violence in abandoned inner cities. In addition to studying children of War, Garbarino etal. also researched children in Chicago's abandoned inner cities and studied programs that solved many problems, although they were greatly underfunded, especially during the Reagan years, but to this day funds haven't been restored to most of these programs even though the evidence is much stronger showing how ell they work. In a follow up book "Children in Danger: Coping With the Consequences of Community Violence" J Garbarino; N Dubrow; K Kostelny; C Pardo 1992 Garbarino etal. write:

William J. Wilson states: "In the 1960' only a hard-core group of conservative observers would have endorsed the view that social programs to help the truly disadvantaged inevitably fail. In more recent times, and especially during the years of the Reagan presidency, this view has been adopted by many who represent the political mainstream" (Wilson, 1988a, p.ix).

....

But Schorr and Schorr, in their volume Within Our Reach (1988, p.xxvii), come to a somewhat different conclusion: "If the superb health, education, and social services described in this book, now provided to a fraction of those who need them, were more widely available, fewer children would come into adulthood unschooled and unskilled, committing violent crimes, and bearing children as unmarried teenagers. Fewer of today's vulnerable children would tomorrow swell the welfare rolls and the prisons. Many more would grow into responsible and productive adults, able to form stable families and contributing to, rather than depleting, America's prosperity and sense of community."

....

These comments from Zigler (1990, p.ix) also suggest that the question of successful early intervention (for example, Head Start) has been "put to rest": "In regard to economically disadvantaged children, a consensus now exists among behavioral scientists, policymakers, and even taxpayers that early intervention is a cost-effective method for combating the effects of poverty experienced earlier in life" (italics added). p.116-7

....

... "Programs" will not substitute for social reform. Zigler (p.xiii) puts it this way: "The problems of many families will not be solved by early intervention efforts, but only by changes in the basic features of the infrastructure of our society. No amount of counseling, early childhood curricula, or home visits will take the place of jobs that provide decent incomes, affordable housing, appropriate health care, optimal family configurations, or integrated neighborhoods where children encounter positive role models." p.118

Even at the time these two books were written there was plenty of evidence from academics showing that spending on social programs before problems escalated saved far more money than it costs, since it would prevent much worse problems, including increased violence and other crime; but the evidence has grown even more since then, some of it reported by James Garbarino or other sources. In "Lost Boys" James Garbarino cites a home visitor program which reduces social problems by helping young at risk mothers shortly after they give birth, I included an excerpt that discusses this in Burying Solutions to Prevent Gilroy, Dayton and El Paso Shootings; In another book, "Listening to Killers" 2015, Professor Garbarino cites Zagar's study which claims that for every dollar spent helping at risk or abused children six dollars are saved I previously included an excerpt from that in Ten Ways To Reduce Violence, Backed Up By Research; and he also reported that a program providing mentors to at risk children in areas with high murder rates can cut those murder rates in half which I reported in Burying violence prevention education, including Crumbly shooting, is routine!; this article also cites research from other academics in Finland that show they can save far more money by housing the homeless which prevents many other social problems and expenses associated with them, and researchers from Portugal showed they could dramatically reduce drug addition by treating it instead of criminalizing it as we do in the United States, and other researchers in the United States proved we could do it just as successful, although they only implemented solutions on smaller scales at the local level.

Obviously, if they really were as concerned about protecting innocent children, both the media and the government would start by reporting on how they can do a far more effective job in cities under their own control or stop supporting tyrants or coups that destroy the lives as much, if not much more than they destroy the lives of their percieved enemies. Furthermore, despite the biased reporting there were also many children victimized by Ukrainian bombing of Eastern Ukraine, where Russian separatists were in control since 2014, although there's been little if any coverage of this in traditional media. Nor has there been much if any coverage for the destruction of lives for thousands if not millions of children's lives around the world in wars at least partially started by our government, and when there is coverage of some of these stories they're usually very limited and quickly forgotten.

One example that might seem like an exception to some people might be when Leslie Stahl asked if the price was worth it and Madeleine Albright said ‘We Think the Price Is Worth It’ NOVEMBER 2001:

Media uncurious about Iraq policy's effects--there or here Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.

—60 Minutes (5/12/96)

For many people who pay much more attention to alternative media outlets this was a a notable exception that has been repeated over and over again; however, for those still relying on traditional media, they may have heard about it in the nineties for a few weeks during the mainstream media news cycle, but then quicky forgot about it within a few months, since it was rarely repeated by traditional media and most people forgot about it decades ago. On one case, when she was confronted by Democracy Now! in 2004 Madeleine Albright acted with self riotous indignation, outraged that anyone would remind her about it and seemed outraged that alternative media outlets weren't following the mainstream spin by forgetting about it. She said she regretted her comments, but not the sanctions, which she claims didn't include food and medicine, but many other sources, including Leslie Stahl, indicate they did an enormous amount of damage. However, neither she, or many other establishment officials discussed the damage done to many other children around the world, including a lot of children in South or Central America, who are refugees from conflicts started by the United States, and are now being demonized as "illegal immigrants," unlike the Ukrainian refugees who are being described as victims of Russian aggression, as pointed out by numerous sources including Aviva Chomsky's book "Central America's Forgotten History." Aviva Chomsky also explains how intervention by the CIA and other factions of our military are also a major contributing factor for Central America's high rates of crime, including violence and murder, and it doesn't take much research to show the same applies to South America as well.

Furthermore, there's an enormous amount of evidence showing that many other claims repeated by mainstream media or some viral propaganda sources on the internet, including photos that were widely distributed on the internet making it look like Ukrainian President Zelensky was on the front lines leading the defense against the Russians; however, according to Old photos circulate in misleading posts claiming Ukrainian president led troops on the battlefield amid Russian invasion 03/02/2022 those photos were all taken in 2021 during four trips to the front lines against Ukrainian separatists within their own country in the east, in February, April, October and December, all before Russia attacked.

The implications of this are much greater than most people relying on traditional media realize. Mainstream media hardly covered this conflict at all, and still hasn't put it in it's proper perspective. Just before the invasion I asked online "Why didn't MSM or CNN tell us the disputed area of Ukraine was controlled by separatists weeks ago? Why no referendum?" 02/22/2022. One person responded by saying "Zachery Taylor the rest of us have known for 8 years, it's not news you just missed it," which may be partly true. I think it's highly unlikely that the majority of the public relying on traditional media was aware of this, although it may have been reported by MSM briefly eight years ago and in much more detail by alternative media outlets since then, including some that this person may have been checking. However, there has been little or no coverage of it in Mainstream media or cable news recently.

This is common for just about any given subject, especially since mainstream media picks one subject at a time to obsess over, repeating the same things over and over again, with little or no diversity, which is a common propaganda tactic that is far from the most effective way of educating the public about a variety of subjects. I've always kept track of various other subjects even though mainstream media doesn't cover them well, I suspect more than most people; however, no one person can keep track of all subjects not adequately covered by traditional media. Fortunately others on social media have kept track of this subject, and with increased attention on it they're informing the rest of us about what we've been missing, except, of course, those that only check mainstream media, who are the most susceptible to propaganda.

The truth appears to be that when the government changed hands in 2014, which the west refers to as Revolution of Dignity and many others refer to as The 2014 coup in Ukraine Russia immediately took control of Cypress, which was presented differently by opposing sides, and the self-proclaimed breakaway states of Donetsk and Luhansk separated from the rest of Ukraine, which hasn't controlled them since, and there's been a low profile war, almost ignored by our media since then. This invasion is actually an escalation of that war, not an entirely new conflict.

Apparently according to Censored Reports from Donbass Make Clear Ukraine and Not Russia Started the War—Eight Years Ago 03/13/2022, they did have a vote, and the local people wanted to succeed from Ukraine. This article says, "Censored reports from the Donbass in Eastern Ukraine, however, make clear that the war was started eight years ago by Ukraine–after its legitimate government was overthrown in a U.S.-backed coup (known as the Maidan revolution), and the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces voted to secede." This clearly indicates that the people in that region don't support the Ukrainian government, and even though I don't consider this adequate justification for Putin to invade, it is enough to show that his invasion wasn't entirely unprovoked, and that our media is ignoring the oppression of the people, including children in this region.

Furthermore, the claims that there's a large Neo-Nazi faction in Ukraine that Mainstream media is ridiculing, since the president is Jewish, clearly appears to be true according to many sources listed below including this one, How Ukraine’s Jewish president Zelensky made peace with neo-Nazi paramilitaries on front lines of war with Russia 03/04/2022, which explains some of the details better than most articles, although there's much more below or in other alternative media outlets. Their denial about alleged chemical weapons in Ukraine, with or without the support of our government clearly appears to be a lie as well as indicated by Victoria Nuland declares US is protecting ‘biological research facilities’ in Ukraine 03/09/2022 which explains that even if both sides are lying for their own benefit, Victoria Nuland has admitted that these reports are at least partially true and that a total denial has no credibility. Alternative media outlets also show how the United States and NATO have been breaking their promises not to move closer to Russia's border. This might not seem like a problem if NATO really was a defensive organization, as they claim, but they've been leading the arms trade, mostly with the help of the United States, and repeatedly worked together to intervene in other countries, not part of their alliance. This is downplayed, if it's mentioned at all in the mainstream media, but covered much more in alternative media, which is much more credible.

Even the reports of a Russian newscaster protesting the war, which has been used for massive propaganda purposes, isn't being reported accurately, although if it were it may be hard, if not impossible to make sense of it. When the Intercept reported Anti-War Protester Interrupts Live News Broadcast on Russian State TV 03/14/2022 on Facebook I responded by saying the following, which was partly sarcastic, but was informed that many Ukrainians agreed with me, although I can't understand how this could be pro-Russia propaganda.

Zachery Taylor
Either she's incredibly brave, or this is an incredibly bizarre staged event.

Sasha Amelchenko
Zachery Taylor second.

Sasha Amelchenko
She has been the main editor of a propagandistic channel! She created narratives to support the war against Ukraine for years! So there is nothing even close to bravery.. but another act of propaganda.

Zachery Taylor
Sasha Amelchenko That could explain why she was let off so easy; but it's still hard to explain why they would stage it.

Sasha Amelchenko
Zachery Taylor easy peasy, to draw attention from war, to come back to their stupid narrative of fraternity between our nations, basically to make imperial propaganda sound & look liberal.

In the Western world this was repeated relentlessly for several days, being used to show that Putin allegedly doesn't have the support of his own people or even producers helping to create his own propaganda, but this makes no sense for several reasons, some which the Ukrainians noticed, although their explanation isn't much if any better. For starters, the claim that this reporter was able to raise a protest like this makes some people ask why our reporters don't do so, even though we fight many more wars based on lies. And this isn't the first time this has come up in our country, and as a result many of our own broadcasters now have Broadcast delays that may last at least seven seconds or longer, other taped delays can last hours when they broadcast in different time zones, or, as Rachel Maddow has pointed out, many of Fox's Prime Time shows are actually prerecorded, while her show was recorded live, or perhaps with a shorter seven to thirty second delay, although they don't typically tell us when this happens. Many people, including additional Ukrainian responses to the above article, which I listed below, claim that Russia has never had real live broadcasts, which would make this impossible.

Furthermore, our own media has described Russia media as strictly controlled and heavily censored for years, which seems to support this conclusion. Following these claims Politi-Fact reported A recent on-air protest can’t be real because "there are no live on air television broadcasts in Russia. None. Ever.” 03/15/2022 declaring this claim to be false, which raises doubts about whether their media is as draconian as our media and government is trying to claim they are. The fact that this producer was only given a $270 fine, also raises doubts about how draconian they are, although our media tried to present this in the worst possible way claiming she was put through a fourteen hour interrogation and went two days without sleep before being released. However, what they don't remind people of is the fact that many prisoners in our jails or POWs during our wars are often treated much worse, not that I think their war or treatment of prisoners is justified either. Our treatment of journalists or whistle blowers like Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, or Edward Snowden is actually much worse, although in order to make this look like Russian propaganda they would have to repeat this over and over again, instead of repeating the lesser oppression of the Russian producer who got off much easier.

Not only this, but when they filmed unarmed Ukrainian people taunting armed Russian invaders as being brave defenders of their country and the Russians as evil invaders, this isn't nearly as bad as the way previous occupiers treated peaceful protesters, including our own allies like the British who famously carried out the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in 1919 where they were faced with thousands of peaceful protesters and blocked their exit before ordering troops to fire, and they didn't stop shooting until they ran out of bullets, and there were "Estimates of those killed vary between 379 and 1500+ people[1] and over 1,200 other people were injured of whom 192 were seriously injured.[5][6]" Another more recent incident took place in Mozambique where Garbarino etal. report in "No Place to Be a Child: Growing Up in a War Zone" - Page 61:

One day in the spring of 1960 the colonial governor traveled to a provincial town for an official visit. He arrived to find an orderly delegation of several hundred Mozambicans who sought to present a petition of their grievances. This was done, and the crowd waited quitly and patiently for a response. The governor simply turned to his military commander and said, "Kill them." Government soldiers opened fire and shot several hundred people.

To the best of my knowledge the United States hasn't done anything quite so brazen, or at least not directly; but our government has supported many coups and wars that resulted in death squads that were as vicious, if not more vicious and went on killing sprees that were much worse and sometimes lasted years, if not decades. To the best of my knowledge this may still be going on, although I don't know of many if any death squads as bad as they were during the Cold War or in the nineties. Yet the media isn't reminding the public of this as they demonize Russia; and they continue to describe many victims, either directly or indirectly, as "illegal aliens" or other derogatory descriptions without reporting the truth.

Mainstream media is trying to convince us that anyone that disagrees with them is Russian propaganda, yet many of their critics do a much better job checking their sources; and in many cases, they point out contradictory stories previously reported by the same mainstream media, which happens on many other subjects as well. There's no doubt that some alternative media outlets really do have credibility problems, but the best ones are much more reliable and shouldn't be lumped in with less credible sources, often including mainstream media. There are plenty of good sources listed below, after a few quotes from those criticizing the coverage of the protesting producers, who make some good points, but get others wrong. One good source about the rise of Russia's corrupt oligarchs exposing how they were supported by our own oligarchs is Naomi Klein"s "Shock Doctine" 2007 which has a chapter on Russia on p.218; and one of the best sources that I've seen so far might be "War with Russia?: From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate" 2019 by Stephen F. Cohen which will have an updated version in about three weeks, but for now the Kindle version is only $1.99. There are plenty more good sources listed below, which are mostly free, following these replies from the article about the protester, which make some good points, but the claim that this is Russian propaganda simply doesn't make sense.

Another thought to consider. A standard live broadcast delay is 5-10 min according to TV specialist. So, if something like that happens, they should have plenty of time to cut it off, but they didn’t. Another thing that bothers me: the main message is in English, not in Russian. Like it was written for the western audience. And one more thing. Some saying that this propagandistic channel doesn’t have live broadcasts at all. Sure, it’s a beautiful video, but do not forget Russian soldiers continue killing Ukrainians at this very moment. Over 2k people were killed in Mariupol. Lida Nesterenko

Omg guys there are no live streams in Russia, this is staged, she's been working for so many years for a propaganda channel and now suddenly this? They want us to forget about their part in creating propaganda all of a sudden? Please, it's 21st century, it's called information war. They are distracting you. Rita Avilova

This woman is not an antiwar protester. She supports the Russian war in Ukraine, just check her Instagram. moreover, there is no live news streaming in Russia, they are all recorded so she couldn't get so much time there to show her "protest".

please, check the news before posting them! turn your critical thinking on 🙏 Sonia Dmytrenko This story isn't heroic or brave. For years, Marina Ovsyannikova was an editor at one of the biggest propaganda channels in Russia. Its co-owner and ideologic leader is Kostyantin Ernst, a master of fake news and propaganda. Marina Ovsyannikova helped create and spread disinformation, denying the fact of war. This is exactly what happened on air on 14 March — except the message was different.

A video of her repentance was immediately posted in so-called "liberal" Russians' outlets. In her speech, Marina reiterates the mottos about "brotherly nations" and doesn't make a single step out of the common propagandist cliches.

At the same time, recordings of the news programme, filmed supposedly by normal viewers, appeared on the internet right away. Although we do realize normal viewers don't just sit around filming their TV with their phones.

Even the fact that the largest message on her poster was in English isn't a coincidence: it's staged. Its target audience is the West, not Russia. Believing it was "live air" that Marina ran into is naïve.

The goal of this stunt is distracting from the monstrosities and war crimes being committed in Ukraine. While Marina was doing her bit, Ukrainian civilians were hiding in bomb shelters. Western media constantly publishes articles about the hardships of normal Russians, about runaways and oppositionists of the regime. This is all part of Russian propaganda, which is now fabricating a "victims of the regime" narrative. But the war in Ukraine started 8 years ago. Russians were lied to about it on TV, but they did have access to information on the internet. As well as about all the previous Russian wars, for example, in Georgia.

Stand with Ukraine — not with those who are complicit in its destruction. Kateryna Yatel Same message from Zhenka Kramar

More free to protest than most US/UK news shows then. Did this ever happen for Iraq? Did any reporter dissent? No. Putin may be a war criminal, but the idea that Russian media is more authoritarian than UK/US is inaccurate. RT was a pluralist 'big tent' from Left to Right on the spectrum, with pro- and anti-Putin perspectives throughout, which has been literally cancelled by Western media platforms. The hypocrisy is glaring. This is not a Manichean heroes and villains tale. Don't even get me started on NATO worship... Simon Cole-Savidge

This story is a theater play. Russian TV is not broadcasted live, the poster specifically features messages in English. They are trying to evoke sympathy for a nation that has done nothing to stop its government. #StandWithUkraine Orest Boichuk

People do u really believe that this thing has not being approved by chairmans of the channel? Have u seen her instagram with post full of support of invasion in Ukraine? You are soooo naive on a West) Alex Fed

We really need better news from someone. There is a massive delay on Russian “live” … yet you guys bite and report this. Do better. Even the “decent” is propaganda… so maybe don’t spread it either. Don Whitmore

Even the fact that the largest message on her poster was in English isn't a coincidence: it's staged. Its target audience is the West, not Russia. Believing it was "live air" that Marina ran into is naive.

The goal of this stunt is distracting from the monstrosities and war crimes being committed in Ukraine. While Marina was doing her bit, Ukrainian civilians were hiding in bomb shelters. Western media constantly publishes articles about the hardships of normal Russians, about runaways and oppositionists of the regime. This is all part of Russian propaganda, which is now fabricating a "victims of the regime" narrative. But the war in Ukraine started 8 years ago. Russians were lied to about it on TV, but they did have access to information on the internet. As well as about all the previous Russian wars, for example, in Georgia. Oleksandr Melnyk