Then you're disputing The Guardian, Reuters, and the BBC
Sources:
https://simplifiedprivacy.com/Sources/monero-vs-tornado-cash/index.html
Even mainstream propaganda outlets such as The Guardian, Reuters, and the BBC reported on leaked audio of Barrack Obama’s head of Ukraine policy Victoria Nuland. [9a] This leaked phone call revealed that the US backed an illegal and violent coup of Ukraine’s Democratically elected leader. [9b] The Obama administration admitted the leaked audio was true, which demonstrated the US picked the supposedly democratically elected leaders that resulted from their planned uprising. [9c][6]
Funding Nazis
Barrack Obama funded violent Nazis to overthrow Ukraine’s government. [11a] The media tries to brainwash voters by calling it “Russian propaganda”, but the evidence is clear in an FBI indictment of Americans involved that’s posted on the New York Times website. [12b] To quote from journalist Max Blumenthal:
“… an unsealed FBI indictment of four American white supremacists from the Rise Above Movement (RAM) declared that the defendants had trained with Ukraine’s Azov Battalion, a neo-Nazi militia” [12a]
I figure at some point of asking why they will either give up or show limited knowledge on the events. I'm hoping to be surprised with a solid answer though
Selective info propaganda. You are disputing personal historic experience of all the nations having the unfortunate "luck" to deal with russia anytime before.
If Ukraine will be betrayed and sacrificed to ruzzian dictatorship, you will get peace on ruzzian terms: recover forces and new attack. What will you sacrifice then? Nazi Alaska 🤡?
What you wrote is not even close to a coherent or logical reply. And none of the sources cited from mainstream press were disputed. Typing the word “propaganda” does not mean anything if you can’t prove or demonstrate why the facts are wrong.
I question if you speak English. Ironically, as you call me a secret agent for Russia