Eva Bartlett: How the disinformation of the leading media continues in Ukraine (part 1)

02.09.2022 | www.kla.tv/23485

Eva Karene Bartlett is a Canadian journalist, activist and commentator. In an interview with the investigative Internet platform The Last American Vagabond, she uses the war in Syria to show how the disinformation strategy of the leading media is now being continued in Ukraine. It is particularly important to take a close look when "satellite images" are mentioned, or when the leading media suddenly appear to be "investigative" and "forensic“. This is exactly where a gigantic information war is raging, perfidiously sophisticated but not inscrutable. Transcript of the interview: Welcome to the last American vagabond. I'm very excited to bring on the show today, Eva Bartlett to discuss what she is seeing on the ground as a real live actual investigative journalist that doesn't exist today in Donbass as well as a larger Ukraine proper territory and discuss what she's seeing in contrast to what we're being forcefully reported from the corporate Western press. So today, we're going to get into some of the things that she's been seeing such as the mass graves topic, which I feel has been just completely exposed because of her recent work on the ground there. So welcoming back and Bartlett to the show. How are you today? I'm doing well - better than people in Donbass. Yes, yes, exactly Well, as I was opening, I was thinking, you know what, let's just go and ask you. What are your thoughts on how, why that's happening and why it's so easy for people, just average people, to get sucked into the partisan and it isn't always going to be partisan. But the manipulations around these topics where either it's all fake, and the Donbass situation is a PSYOP that's meant to cover up this, or it's all the other side of it. Right? So you know, it's an interesting dynamic of how that got covered up, and how these people have been suffering for quite a long time. Well, I mean, yeah, I don't understand the people that are saying, what's happening here, it's fake. I mean, I will get into what I saw today, but the dead bodies I saw in the marketplace today are very, very real. This is not theater, and actually, frankly, quite insulting to the people who've been living under eight years of Ukrainian bombing, to the utter silence of the complicit Western media, you know, in addition to hypocrisy of the West, you know, claiming Ukraine to be this democratic and, you know, wonderful nation that we should all adhere to, you know, support and this is nothing, of course, against Ukrainian civilians. I'm talking about Ukraine, the Ukrainian regime and power that has been waging war on the people in Donbass for eight years, you know, and so, yeah, it's insulting to imply that this is just political theater. And I mean, as you know, Ryan, I was here in 2019. And at that time, I went to an area I do plan on going back to: North of the Donetzk, Horliwka and villages around that city where being and shelled on a daily nightly basis. And we might get into this a little bit later. But you know that the monitoring bodies that's supposed to monitor whether or not either side violates the ceasefire or the the Minsk accords, was not doing its job, according to various people I spoke with. And you know, these people are being terrorized, literally terrorized by the Ukrainian shelling with heavy weaponry on a routine basis. Right. And this has been documented, that's the frustrating part about that. You can look at Wikipedia for crying out loud. And it says right on there that they claim they've killed 14,000 people on just the one side, and it cites the Ukrainian military. So as much as that gets dismissed as fake news currently, it just shows you this breakdown of logic and truth and reality, as you can show their cited material and yet the mainstream Western press says it's fake news. It’s just really controlled topic. And I think we all kind of feel that coming out of the COVID-19, you know, discussion, we're watching these things kind of devolve into. Well, I mean, as I think you've even pointed out just now the Western media, the government's aren't even saying we're censoring because it's - they're just simply saying it challenges the narrative, therefore, we can't allow it, which is pulling the mask off. Right. So that's kind of what I think your work has been so important in exposing. So let's talk about the mass graves conversation, and how you recently went and you're they're currently on the ground in Ukraine, and what you actually saw at the location they were discussing, and I'll bring up some points after you if you discuss what you saw there in regard to Mariupol in the mass graves, supposedly and the civilians buried there. Yeah, so I came to the Donbass again on my own. I'm actually the reason I have this strange background is that the small flat I'm renting, has no internet today, for whatever reason, so I came to this hotel. But anyway, I did join RT journalist Roman Kosarev because number one, they don't speak Russian, unfortunately. And he speaks English very well. And also he had a vehicle and for me to go there, which I could do on my own. I do have military accreditation, it would have cost me 150 or $200. And, you know, I'm on a shoestring so it was advantageous to go with Roman, particularly given the language deficit on my part. So we went to the village of Manhusch, which is I believe it's 12 Miles, might be wrong that distance, but anyway, it's west of Mariupol. And what what corporate media have been alleging is that there's a mass grave or mass graves with up to 9000 bodies thrown into pits. This is the kind of language they've been using. They've been citing the exiled mayor of Mariupol. I don't know where this man is, as saying this is greatest war crime of the 21st century. I mean, that's pretty darn preposterous, given what we know about the US invasion and destruction of Iraq, the US destruction of many areas of Syria, including notably Raka and, you know, all the other war crimes, Israel's routine bombing of Gaza every few years, including two times when I was there in 2009 2012, but also, notably, 2014 the widespread destruction and leveling of entire neighborhoods to Israel, to Gaza, Are currently bombing Raka. Or excuse me, Damascus right now, right? Um, yeah, last couple days, it's currently happening. So please continue. You know, as our colleague Kevork Almassian noted on Twitter yesterday, I think it was maybe today, maybe we should change some Syrian cities to Kiew and Liviw and other Ukrainian names in order to get the outrage and indignation and virtue signaling that anything to do with Ukraine is, and by the way, this is again, not to dismiss any loss of life that might be occurring in Ukrainian cities, but there's a lot of disinformation out there. So which brings us back to this mass grave. So basically, another advantage of being with Roman and his two cameramen, we weren't militarily escorted or anything, by the way, was one of them had a drone. And so he was able to get the drone aerial footage, which, you know, the fancy Washington Post put out these fancy satellite images alleging this was a mass grave. So he was able to compare, you know, what they're alleging is a mass grave with the footage they got. What we saw on the ground was, as I've said, in the video I put out in an Op-Ed that just came out, I just wrote, and it came out on RT today, that what we saw was orderly rows. At the beginning, it was like five rows of freshly dug graves, how fresh I can't say, and extended for about like 23 graves of five rows. So that's an estimated 115 or so. And then the next plot had roughly the same number. But then notably, the next couple of plots had like two empty rows. Next one, one empty row. So I estimated just under 100 empty graves. So in a total of at most, maybe 400 graves in that plot. There was an existing cemetery but I'm talking about the new ones where the satellite images are focusing in on. There were maybe 400 graves of those maybe roughly 100 empty, and the rest were, as I said, orderly. Some of the graves had markings denoting the person's name and date of birth. Others had numbers. But the really interesting thing was as we were there, two men responsible for digging in burying, digging the grades and burying the dead, arrived and they were burying someone else. And when they finished, we were able to speak with them. And we presented the Western claims of specifically 30 meter wide trenches, bodies being thrown into pits, and I think your viewers would agree that the term mass grave implies bodies on top of one another in a pit, you know, and that's not what we saw. And these men, they were both very offended by the claims and they said, No, we buried each person carefully with dignity. And they even noted there was a plot where, at the end of the rows of graves were Ukrainian soldiers were buried in coffins individually. So they utterly refuted us. Now I know, you know, back to your first question. When you said: why is this, that people are confused, or maybe think what's happening in the Donbass is theater or whatever. It's because anytime someone like me, goes to a place like that, sees with my own eyes and takes images with my own video, by virtue of the fact that I contribute one Op-Ed a month to RT, which I'm not sure if people are aware, it does not pay much, I put in far more money than in going to places like this than I ever earned from one off at a month. But by virtue of that fact, people don't take what I say or what Roman, who's an excellent journalist, he has been covering this war on the Donbass for eight years, its entirety, they don't take those words as credible. And, you know, everything to do with Russia has been vilified. But I've always maintained that what I say whether or not I could write for RT, or if I'm just blogging, or writing on Facebook, or my telegram channel, I'm going to say the same thing. The difference is RT has given me at least a platform to say what I'm going to say. But you know, it's really disgusting that we've gotten to the point in this world where anything to do with Russia is labeled like this state controlled Russian state controlled on Twitter, on Facebook. But we don't apply the same standards to the state control, the BBC, CBC, etc. So and the other thing is, you know, we can get into this in a moment, but media, they're reporting from abroad, and they always do this thing, and they do it in Syria, they always do this thing where somewhere in the middle of the report, they'll say, well, you know, we can't independently confirm or verify this. But, you know, after the screening headline and the allegations of the genocide and the worst massacre of the 21st century, you know, people don't read the whole, the little caveat. And they know that. It’s intentional. Yeah, I call them title skimmers. I mean, that's what they bank on, you know, it's the people that want to maybe just look at the first paragraph, that's why they bury it, you know, oh, by the way, we can't confirm anything we're telling you as fact at the top. But before we go back, I'm gonna go through your video and some of the information around those graves. But you bring up an interesting point that I think is, anybody out there, and rightly so, being skeptical, right? No one here, not even myself is asking you to blindly trust us. We're asking you to consider the facts that are being reported and do your due diligence. That's it, right. And this is what's so frustrating about this childish juvenile dynamic that we have today, where people are clearly choosing a political side, because they just they either invested in it, or they believe that's what they're supposed to do. And it's just childish, because we're not looking at facts here, right? So bottom line is: sure you want to pretend that, and it's a valid point, though, she contributes Op-Eds to or RT or anything else we discuss or I've interviewed people or I've been interviewed on Sputnik, let's say in the past, you should consider those points. But the bottom line is what she's producing, what we're discussing are things you can verify for yourself, you can compare it with what people for Mariupol are saying on the way out in the 1000s of videos. And compare it to the other side where you get anonymous one names with people not showing their faces. And you know, this, kind of, it's the contrast. And that's really all that we're really trying to get out here. And so I'm glad that you made that discussion and that disclaimer because it really doesn't matter. I mean, look, you shouldn't have to differentiate, like, it's a good thing. You're being paid for your work wherever that is, and the reality that you can't get paid or can't get people to even look at or publish work on the other side of the argument or the multiple other sides of controlled Western media. It's as if they're trying to suggest that you went out of your way to only go to one place and this this inherently dishonest reporting that you just described, right? You know, if I can just draw an example I've given before. I don't know necessarily, if I've given it to you, but I've certainly cited it in articles I've written. A Canadian journalist attended a talk I gave in Montreal in I think it was January 2017. And that would have been like after I'd come back from Aleppo before it was liberated but you know, at a time when it was being bombed intensively by terrorists, which the Western media was dubbing rebels. Anyway, I gave a lecture in Montreal and I talked at length about what I'd seen at that time. It was four visits to Aleppo and the bombing and like the nearly 11,000 civilians alone that had been killed not including military by these terrorist bombings, and to two journalists with one was with radio Canada, the other was with La Presse attended my lecture specifically with the intent of getting a soundbite, getting an awful photo of me to make me look like demonic, which they succeeded in and then writing a smear piece on me, which I issued a lengthy rebuttal to, it was so full of holes, it was ridiculous. But after that this this man, Junid, came up to me said, Hey Eva, I want to tell you something. He said, I was in Iraq when the US forces invaded. And I was working for La Presse at the time. And the woman who just interviewed you was my editor. And he said, I wrote a I think it was a 1400 word article, talking about what Iraqis really felt about the invasion of their country and the toppling of Saddam Hussein. And he said, she cut it down to like three or 400 words and completely changed the tone. He said, he's never experienced such censorship in his life. So there's an example of a journalist on the ground writing for publication, and his whole entire article being distorted. And so back to what we're saying, like, even if I could, not that I would want to, add any sort of legitimacy to CBC or other Canadian corporate media, even if I could, they would distort my words. There's another example I can give briefly, and that is a journalist Ali Hashem, who used to work for Al Jazeera. And at the beginning of the war in Syria in around April, and May, he saw armed men entering Syria from Lebanon. And he got footage in May. And he wanted to air it on Al Jazeera. And they said, forget that you saw armed men and they wouldn't air it. So he quit. So I mean, there's countless examples like this. Yeah, I mean, if anybody just, this, again, speaks to due diligence discernment, if you just simply take the time to look into anybody. I mean, almost anybody who actually breaks away from Western corporate media, you'll hear what they say, I've referenced Allison Morrow, since she's the most recent person in my mind, who I connected with after she broke off, she runs a channel on Rokfin. Now, and, you know, and has been openly telling you, and even showing her colleagues that are saying the same thing quietly from within, you know, we're not allowed to say what we want, if we bring any kind of challenge to the narrative, even with facts to back it up, they push it away, they hide it. I mean, this is just reality. And I think even people invested in this dynamic, know that, and again, they're just, it's advantageous for them to stay with it. But we could talk about this forever. I'm really I mean, from a, like a mental sort of, like psychological standpoint, it really interests me. But I want to come back to your point about the facts, because that's really what this really is about, and the on the ground information here to reference your video, which I'm going to play a clip from in a moment, here's just the image that I think really encapsulates what's going on there that it’s completely wrong. It's not BS, right. But so what's interesting is, I want your take on a couple of things. First of all, here's your fantastic blog. I'm going to include all this in the show notes for everybody to check out. Really great stuff. Thank you, I appreciate that. Yeah, from all the way back from Gaza to Syria. I mean, the name is from where it began. But there's so much good information here. Western claims of Russian mass graves, near Mariupol, another fake news hoax - I know, I went to see it for myself. I mean, that's the point that just sticks out for me, you don't get that as much as you, outside of the kind of embedded with, I mean, that's what's interesting is they always frame you as being embedded with certain people except then the, even if that is a fair point, in contrast, you would argue, which I don't think it is, that they're always embedded with the obvious extremists, which you can verifiably prove are that which is interesting to me. But, here's what we're seeing: Russian forces accused of secret burials of Mariupol citizens in mass graves, Mayor says, which my first point is, it's amazing that we're literally running on people, I mean, even if it's people that you don't have information to challenge as the mayor being involved with the Neo Nazis in the ground, but just an average Mayor on a side of the war, why do they just take it face value, what they're saying, first of all, right, I mean, it blows me away that we're at a point where it amounts to “Ukraine says”. And that's your first point that within this, you'll find that they really can't confirm it other than Maxar technologies. Right? Do you have a comment on that before we go to the fact that CNN already admitted that you are right? Well, so the point is that at the end of the day, it's all Ukraine information, right. That's all that's coming out: “Ukraine says, Ukraine says” and then… And that's precisely how it was in Syria to you know, again, when they had New York Times, for example, had an article where they had media activists they had, you know, their favorite sources were sources, unnamed sources, or media activist and I remember one article, I think it was on Eastern Ghouta. And they had like, three different sources one was a cameraman to were, I might be misremembering, but one was a media activist, one was a camera person, and I don’t remember the other and I took like, two minutes, maybe five minutes, whatever. I took some minutes to find their names on Facebook and find their allegiances to ISIS and Al Qaeda. So thereby, rendering them not neutral sources and I do not believe for a moment that the New York Times were not aware of their sources, I believe that they were just hoping people wouldn't find out their sources. Were terrorist lovers, let's say. You have an interesting point to insert right there. Now, first of all, the reason that's incredibly valid is because even the other side, you know, the West, the US government would argue that al Qaeda, ISIS or bad guy terrorists, which is pretty ubiquitous, but nonetheless, they're still bedding with them. So that's valid either way. But to insert a pretty radical point, because you could argue, well, okay, so that's still a side, we should still consider what's being put forward to make that point in contrast to what you're doing. But the bottom line is, it's very compromised, because the other side even considers them a terrorist organization. But within that, you're still taking one side of an argument, which is the same point and saying, here's what they say that means fact and nobody within this on our side of it is going to say that that makes sense from which either side it comes from. I mean, this is just basic, basic tenets of journalism, objectivity, right. That's why this is so frustrating, and almost juvenile, that they're just leaning into this. But what I found very interesting is, so you play, you talk to the people on the ground. And then right after you expose the story, here comes CNN, stepping into the picture. Rather Portugal's CNN, which is not being broadcast by CNN, as far as I can tell, and literally within their article now confirms what you just said yesterday, where it says when we arrived at the cemetery, we did not find mass graves, contrary to what the former mayor of Mariupol denounced, supported by satellite images. Now, I just can't get past how important this statement is. Because they just basically argued that Maxar Technologies lied about what they saw, right? I mean, what's your take on that? Well, I mean, I hadn't really seen that I'd seen because I've been out all day. And I, as I mentioned at the beginning, I didn't have internet at home or on my phone today. But I was aware of via a telegram channel that CNN had published this. I didn't read this. So, I don't know, I mean, my take is that CNN is trying to claim some sort of credibility. Now that I mean, what would be interesting would be to go through CNN archives and see did they push the original hoax? Because all the media was doing it as they do, as they always do. They always just, you know, essentially copy paste the same statements, and what's screaming headlines about genocide. So when I have time, I would like to do that and see what was CNN saying before? Yeah, well, most definitely, I can confirm that they were definitely toeing the line for sure, at the very least, reporting that Ukraine said this, which is the same thing, right. And at the end of the day, you're pushing the narrative with nothing to back it up. But what they said on the ground, it's pretty awful. Do you remember in March, I think was March 2019, when the West was engineering or trying to engineer chaos in Venezuela beginning with a manufactured power-outage. And there was an issue of alleged food aid coming from Colombia into Venezuela. And you know, they're very sternest teleSUR journalists were there on this bridge, where food aid trucks were alleged to be attacked by Venezuelan forces. And it was like big bad Venezuela doesn't even allow food aid in. Venezuela was like, no, we allow it in just through the proper channels, you know, in any way, then Ahmed Cabello was there on the ground for Press TV, and he was like I saw inside those trucks and they had razor wires and nails and other things. New York Times originally pushed the big bad Venezuela attack the food aid trucks, and then later retracted when there were multiple sources saying actually, no, that's not what happened. The attacks came from the Colombian side. So this is another example like them pushing the hoax and then when it's been proven to be a hoax, okay, well, then we're going to try to claw back some credibility, by now reporting what's widely known. Right, very quietly on a on a different language version of the site where no one's going to pay attention, like, very obvious how they're trying to play this. And our audience is well aware, I was almost going to try to grab it real quick, but I don't know where to find the title. But we covered that extensively, that you had live video of the Colombian side of this building. And these are Guaidó forces at this point, at least, you know, US backed entities that were building Molotov cocktails, you watched them doing it on their side and then throwing it. And then even as you heard that video, they were still pushing the other side of the narrative. I mean, this is this is why I argue that most people who aren't invested in one side or the other have the illusion or politically so are aware of this, I think most people can see that these people aren't to be trusted. That's my opinion. I mean, maybe it's wishful thinking. But what else are we going to do these days, I think it's clear, there's plenty of evidence. So I'd like to play the clip of your video really quickly before we go forward. I just wanted to get right to the point of how obvious it is that right now CNN is quietly challenging the very narrative that still is being pushed today by the entirety of Western media. I think it's embarrassing, but here's the video. Now and by the way, you, so basically the first part of this video was what you were discussing how you can see the different plots, the different names, the dates, you know, which right out of the gate challenges the argument and we shouldn't even have to explain what a mass grave is. Everybody's very aware what they're implying: that they just dumped them into a hole together because they don't care about them. But here's what the people said, which we referenced. But I just want to play it really quickly for everyone to see: The two men responsible for burying the dead arrive. For those in the podcast, it basically just says that it's fake, but I'll let the people see it for those watching. Yeah, they also, for people on the podcast, they also say there's an inventory at the morgue, you know, and all this can be fact checked at the morgue. I'm glad you said that. This is one thing I keep drilling down on and you get the occasional information like this. But then it turns out the evidence they're pointing to the person works for USAID or something which I've already proven in Mariupol. But these people like Eva’s reporting here, you can do your due diligence, you get their names, you get backgrounds, you get information, you have a location, there's more than enough, especially from the Western media side with all of their resources to be able to actually dig down on this, not after Eva blows up the story, right to make it look like but before you report it, do your due diligence, you know, like you're supposed to be. But I just love that point. Because you'll find that contrast, you'll find endless reporting from people like you know, Eva Bartlett from Patrick Lancaster from plenty of others out there that continue to give you all the information you need to check it. And I just find it’s a very good point because that's not what you're getting from the other side. Now I'm going to jump to the next one where she asked him about the actual narrative of the Western media. That's BS. They’re Fakes. The other guy is smiling while he's even saying it right. So now, you know, as always show discernment question this? Who knows? Right? But the end of the day? Does this align with the endless amount of videos we're seeing from people coming out of the area? Does it align with the background we know about the Azov movement and the Right Sector and Swoboda and you know, that's what I'm trying to get people to recognize is we should question everything. That's my motto. But… Yeah, and if I may, at that point, I can't remember if I put it in my video. I know, I was making this point to Roman when we were walking around just like you know, clearly there are graves here. Clearly they’re recent graves. And I did, I think I did in the video make the point that the most that had the date of birth were elderly. Born in the 40s 50s 60s. We don't know how they died. They could have died of war. They could have died of natural death. They could have died if point blank execution by the Azov? We don't know. But that's the point. This is not a mass grave, and we don't know the cause of death. Well, that's the interesting part about this, like, okay, you could even say okay, well, could they have died from the other side? Could they have made this to make it look like it wasn't? Sure all of this is possible. But we need facts and evidence to back up any allegation, which is not happening from plenty of sides today. The point is ultimately that, what did they say? They said, mass grave. So even if you want to pretend that there's something else that happened, you can't just skip over the fact that they've already been caught lying. That's what keeps happening is this kind of equivocation and mental gymnastics where they say that's fake. And then you prove it's not like, but well, here's the, you know, wait a minute, we just proved it was fake, you can't just jump over that and try to continue to explain your point, right. And as he says here, also members of the Ukrainian military, so just everything about this has been shown to be false. Again, just going back to the part for those that will still try to challenge it. Even CNN is now quietly stepped in to go yep, where they are to which again, they should have done before they reported on the story, and saying that there are not mass graves, and that the Maxar Technologies satellite imagery are either lying or incorrect. So I want your thoughts on this. I made a big point about this, when I realized that Maxar Technologies, as far as I can tell, was pretty much a CIA cutout. And right now on their board, I don't know if you've seen this, but Louie Gilman is currently or at least was one of the board directors, but currently is on the board or was the board director. And now, excuse me, I keep saying that incorrectly was the director on the board of directors, but was and is a president of In-Q-Tel the capital fund for CIA, as well as commissioner on the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. And there's plenty more than I've gone in depth on to find the obvious crossovers between CIA. And I just think it's interesting that now they're being exposed twice, because in Bucha, it was already shown that their satellites weren't even in location to be able to take pictures the time they said they did. So I kind of wanted your thoughts on, I know, I'm just kind of throwing this at you. But your thoughts on how this works with foreign policy and how it always seems to rely on these distant satellite images that we just kind of go, is that what it shows and they'll tell you what you're supposed to see. And now they're being exposed as either lying or incorrect. What are your thoughts? Yeah, I mean, that's really interesting what you're saying about Maxar and Bucha. I didn't know that. But I mean, if you look at the, for example, the Washington Post has the satellite images showing like before and after, if you look carefully, you see what I filmed, you see, mounds and rows. And if they had zoomed in which I'm quite sure they had the capability of zooming in, they would have shown the empty graves. But that didn't fit the narrative. What fits, what they showed and what they implied is that, like, all this new activity has happened. And that therefore equates a mass grave, but it doesn't equate a mass grave it equates an existing cemetery, expanding in a time of war, you know. So it's, but the thing is, people again, the combination of the screaming headline, the mayor of Mariupol who's nowhere to be found, claiming genocide and the worst crime of the 21st century, he actually by the way, he actually compared it to World War Two and the extermination of 33,000 Jews. And, you know, this is like, a supremely ironic, because he's whitewashing the Nazis in Azov in his former city, by I mean, I don't know what his position on them is. But clearly, it's probably going to be like the Western media's position. Oh, they don't exist. So he's white washing their assassinations of civilians. He's white washing they're using civilians as human shields. He's white washing their militarization of apartment buildings, you know, which led to those apartment buildings being fired on. And then he's grossly exaggerating the number, again what I saw was at best 400 graves 100 of those at least nearly 100, sorry, empty, the media has whitewashed, or sorry, exaggerated up to 9000. And then by comparing it to, you know, the deaths of 33,000 that's even more of a whitewash. It's ridiculous, I think, my opinion is, and I've done plenty of background research on why this is clearly at least a CIA agenda by the US government, but that they're trying to create the narrative to where it's the exact inverse. Now, I think anybody honestly realized that there are white supremacy neo Nazi people with extreme ideologies in any country, anywhere in the world, right? That's just the reality of human species. But the problem is that they make it out to be like “Putin Nazis” is what we keep seeing, and it's just so inherently dishonest about what we're currently seeing, I think there's more of an agenda to create the narrative that this is because of Russia, in some way. But I'm glad to let this play out. I keep kind of pushing that narrative, because that's what I see coming. But I think it's really interesting to see how this has been built. And I think we could check on that later if we want. It's not only extremely dishonest, it's extremely insulting to Russians. Who lost, you know, what is it 26, 27 million in World War Two to Nazis. And Ukrainians too, by the way, right, the Ukrainian civilians on the ground that are getting misrepresented as the entirety of them. And this is the same thing we see in Israel or anywhere else, where I think there's an obvious even in Ukraine specifically, you can see these football stadiums full of people, you know, they're chanting certain things. And you know, so there's obviously been an eight year plus agenda to influence the minds of people on the ground, but that's still not every single Ukrainian. So it's the same kind of thing, this is always dynamic, where they're trying to misrepresent the reality. But there is part of it, people are being radicalized, but it's not by the people you think, in my opinion, right. They're trying to frame that any other way. I think it's the governments just as always using the people like they did in Syria.

from hm

Sources/Links: https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/eva-bartlett-interview-evidence-ground-ukraine-directly-contradicts-western-narrative