Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND, . . .

Grow the fuck up.

---

Just yesterday, Russia threatened to destroy SpaceX satellites because Ukraine was connected to those satellites. Just before Russia invaded Ukraine, Russia demonstrated how it could destroy SpaceX satellites or anybody who displeased Putin. Perhaps a stern warning from the UN would work better than nukes, but I'm unsure if Putin reads warning labels before he acts. Some forms of communication that don't use words work far better with people, such as Putin, who don't understand written words. Possibly Putin has a severe learning disorder.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

...during a United Nations working group meeting on reducing space threats last week. Konstantin Vorontsov, a member of the Russian delegation, said that the country "would like to underline an extremely dangerous trend that goes beyond the harmless use of outer space technologies and has become apparent during the events in Ukraine. Namely, the United States and its allies use the elements of civilian, including commercial, infrastructure in outer space for military purposes."

Received the second shipment of Starlink stations! @elonmusk keeps his word! Thank you for supporting Ukraine and peace in the entire world! @OMarkarova thanks! pic.twitter.com/hNZwsXkOCT
— Mykhailo Fedorov (@FedorovMykhailo) March 9, 2022

Vorontsov never mentioned Starlink by name, but there was no doubting what he was referring to. The Russian Foreign Ministry member and head of the country's UN Office for Disarmament Affairs delegation added a warning: "It seems like our colleagues do not realize that such actions in fact constitute indirect involvement in military conflicts. Quasi-civilian infrastructure may become a legitimate target for retaliation."

"At the very least, this provocative use of civilian satellites is questionable under the Outer Space Treaty, which provides for the exclusively peaceful use of outer space, and must be strongly condemned by the international community," Vorontsov added

---

Quote:

---

Putin Blasts West's Nuclear Narrative: "It Doesn't Make Sense" To Use Nukes In Ukraine
Importantly, he rejected head-on the allegations from the West that he ever so much as hinted at plans to deploy nukes in Ukraine, describing a nuclear strike in the context of the "special operation" to be ultimately pointless. "We see no need for that," Putin said. "There is no point in that, neither political, nor military." He underscored, "it doesn't make sense for us to do it.

He went on to emphasize that Russia had "never said anything proactively about the possible use of nuclear weapons by Russia." At the same time he lashed out at Washington, for being the "only country in the world that has used nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state" - in reference to WWII and the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

He specifically referenced prior statements of Liz Truss and vague references to his saying he's willing to defend Russia "by all means available" as having been intentionally misinterpreted and distorted:

Putin said an earlier warning of his readiness to use “all means available to protect Russia” didn’t amount to nuclear saber-rattling but was merely a response to Western statements about their possible use of nuclear weapons.

He particularly mentioned Liz Truss saying in August that she would be ready to use nuclear weapons if she became Britain's prime minister, a remark which he said worried the Kremlin.

“What were we supposed to think?” Putin said. “We saw that as a coordinated position, an attempt to blackmail us.”

Literally as Putin was speaking, the Pentagon decided it was a good time to unveil a stunning nuclear strategy reversal, saying it would no longer rule out use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear threat.

---

Quote:

---

THIS IS HOW I KNOW WE'RE LOSING IN UKRAINE (AND ELSEWHERE): PENTAGON’S STRATEGY WON’T RULE OUT NUCLEAR USE AGAINST NON-NUCLEAR THREATS

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

SECOND, Russia has had the capability of destroying our satellites for a decade now. The fact that they have not utterly destroyed us is due to their restraint, not our strength.

Grow the fuck up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Cross-posted from here

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=65340

Quote:

---

THIS IS HOW I KNOW WE'RE LOSING IN UKRAINE (AND ELSEWHERE): PENTAGON’S STRATEGY WON’T RULE OUT NUCLEAR USE AGAINST NON-NUCLEAR THREATS

---

What our neocons have done so far

Sanctions war (failed to implode Russia's economy and cause regime change in Moscow).
Cross-border military support (Insufficient. And the Pentagon knew it.)
Monetary support (going to end soon).
Intelligence sharing
"Volunteers" and military intel officers in Ukraine
"Dirty bomb" false flag planning

Been posting for MONTHS that the combined USA/NATO conventional forces were insufficient.

Gonna hand out "I told you so's" from time to time.

The reason you guys fucked up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Been posting for MONTHS that the combined USA/NATO conventional forces were insufficient.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It is Kiev, not Russia, using "human waves". Bc Kiev doesn't have air superiority, artillery, missiles and hardly any tanks they have to rely on what they DO have: cannon fodder. Kiev is losing approx 5-8 soldiers for every one of Russia's.

You really CANT handle the truth, can you? Your whole mental world would crumble, wouldnt it?
That's pathetic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It is Kiev, not Russia, using "human waves". Bc Kiev doesn't have air superiority, artillery, missiles and hardly any tanks they have to rely on what they DO have: cannon fodder. Kiev is losing approx 5-8 soldiers for every one of Russia's.

You really CANT handle the truth, can you? Your whole mental world would crumble, wouldnt it?
That's pathetic.

---

Who told you "approx 5-8"? Be truthful, Signym.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Who told you "approx 5-8"? Be truthful, Signym.

---

That's my estimate, based on what I've heard from various sources, including Kiev.

It stands to reason that Kiev would be losing more soldiers. etc. etc.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It is Kiev, not Russia, using "human waves". Bc Kiev doesn't have air superiority, artillery, missiles and hardly any tanks they have to rely on what they DO have: cannon fodder.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Kiev is losing approx 5-8 soldiers for every one of Russia's.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

I don't think I've ever encountered someone as delusional and clearly wrong as you are. Why keep at it? Does it hurt that much to see Russia flop so completely? What do they have to lose if they just declare victory, go home and open their roadside gas station of a country back up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Who told you "approx 5-8"? Be truthful, Signym.

---

That's my estimate, based on what I've heard from various sources, including Kiev.

It stands to reason that Kiev would be losing more soldiers. etc. etc.

---

I knew you made up numbers to make yourself feel good. I just wanted you to admit what you did.

(If "approx 5-8" is approximately true, Russia should declare victory today to convince the West it is being hoodwinked by Kiev's nefarious plans. Soon Russia's victory will be obvious to the world and Kiev was being devious about its defeat only to milk NATO for more weapons to resell on the black market.)

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

In the Donbas region Russia is estimated to be firing 40,000–60,000 152mm shells per day. This compares to about 6,000 155mm shells per day being used by Ukraine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

I don't think I've ever encountered someone as delusional and clearly wrong as you are. Why keep at it? Does it hurt that much to see Russia flop so completely? What do they have to lose if they just declare victory, go home and open their roadside gas station of a country back up?

---

Tucker Carlson is a big cheerleader for Trump and Putin, as is Signym. If you find out why Carlson is as he is, you can infer Signym's motivation.

“Right now, one of the biggest cheerleaders for Russia is also the host of the number one show on Fox News.” - https://www.thewrap.com/tucker-carlson-defends-putin-not-treason/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

I shouldn’t have to write this article. And yet, here we are...

I don’t care who you are or how much Palmer Report you read: accusing someone who disagrees with you of conducting psyops for a foreign government is never, ever a normal or acceptable way of conducting political discourse.

I tweeted the above yesterday after noticing another uptick in the bizarre habit establishment loyalists

---

Quote:

---

have of labeling anyone who disagrees with them as Russian trolls. And, though I didn’t address it to her and made no mention of her, Louise Mensch took it personally.

This led to a deluge of fascinating interactions with Mensch’s followers, in which I was sincerely informed that Twitter has admitted to half of its users being Russian agents, though it is likely more. I was also called a Russian agent many, many times, because saying it’s not okay to accuse a stranger you disagree with of being a Russian agent is just the sort of thing a Russian agent would say.

Well, let me start off this weird, stupid article that I shouldn’t have to write by saying that I myself am not a Russian agent. I’ve never been to Russia, I have no ties to the Russian government, I rarely use sources in my articles that have ties to Russia, and to the best of my knowledge none of my patrons are Russian. I say this not because I feel a need to defend these foam-brained accusations but to point out that it is, in fact, very possible to disagree with the establishment Russia narrative without being incentivized to in rubles.

Political discourse between establishment loyalists and everyone else has been trampled to death by the gratuitous use of this obnoxious debate-avoiding tactic.

---

Quote:

---

Everyone who publicly questions the MSNBC Russia narrative will be met with these accusations. Everyone who speaks about it with much of an online following will receive these accusations on a daily basis.

This is not normal.

---

Quote:

---

Anti-Trumpists have been trained over the last year by people like Rachel Maddow, Louise Mensch, and the Palmer Report to believe that accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being a Russian agent is a normal thing that sane people do, but they are wrong. It is a bizarre, obnoxious tactic, and when you use it, you are admitting that you have no argument.

The accusation would not be baseless. You should remind yourself what the USIC's official report said on the matter of Russian interference. — Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) November 27, 2017

Yes it would indeed be a baseless accusation, @LouiseMensch. You do not know who is and is not a Kremlin agent, and the odds that you are interacting with one are rare. If you have to resort to baseless accusations of Russian espionage, you are admitting you have no argument. — Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) November 27, 2017

In the unlikely event that any Louise Mensch types are still reading at this point, let me explain how normal online discourse operates:

Party A presents a position on an issue.

Party B presents a rebuttal to the position, often supplemented with links substantiating their claim.

Party A returns with their own counter-argument and their own substantiations.

Repeat this back-and-forth for as long as both parties remain interested.

The civility with which this discourse takes place varies wildly, and it can leave both parties feeling like they wasted an hour or two of their lives talking to a brick wall. But it can also be very informative to people watching, it can often lead to one party realizing that their argument isn’t nearly as strong as their partisan echo chamber had led them to believe it was, and it can cause both parties to do more research and rigorous thinking as they strive to come up with a compelling case.

---

Quote:

---

It can even lead to someone realizing that they don’t know nearly as much about a given issue as they thought they did and privately questioning their previous assumptions.

Conversations like this are socially enriching and lead to a more intelligent and better-informed humanity.

Compare that to:

Party A presents a position on an issue.

Party B accuses party A of conducting psyops for a foreign government.

Discussion ends.

These accusations always kill dialogue. And they are meant to. It is a safe way of slamming the door on ideas which make the person who uses this tactic uncomfortable.

There is no legitimate reason to ever accuse a stranger you disagree with of being a Russian agent. Firstly, you cannot possibly know that the stranger you’re dialoguing with works for the Kremlin. Secondly, even in the highly unlikely event that the person you are speaking to really is a secret Russian agent, you should still be able to out-debate them.

Kremlin trolls don’t have magical powers. They can’t hypnotize you. If you’re interacting with one they’ll be advancing arguments and ideas just like anyone else, and if your arguments and ideas are defensible you should be able to defend them clearly and articulately.

A related accusation is conceding that while it is possible that the individual you are speaking to may not be a paid Kremlin operative, they are at the very least a “useful idiot” who has been brainwashed by Russian propaganda and is unknowingly advancing pernicious ideas. This is also an admission that you have no argument. You’re shutting down dialogue instead of debating your position articulately. You’re also making a fallacious case which assumes from the beginning that nobody could possibly disagree with your omniscient, infallible worldview unless they were deceived by a malevolent party. [But] If your position is defensible, defend it like a normal human being.

I’ve had some success with simply drawing attention to the fact that the person levelling these accusations is using a tactic that is not a normal or acceptable part of political discourse. Individuals with a bit of personal insight

---

Quote:

---

can get pretty embarrassed when you calmly point out that they’re doing something they know deep down is really weird and unhealthy, so they’ll back away from it once you bring a little self-awareness to their McCarthyite chicken dance. I recommend my readers try it if you ever run into this tactic yourselves.

* * *

Bottom line: when a stranger on the internet accuses you of being a Kremlin agent, of being a “useful idiot”, of “regurgitating Kremlin talking points”, this is simply their way of informing you that they have no argument for the actual thing that you are saying. If you’re using hard facts to point out the gaping plot holes in the Russiagate narrative, for example, and all they can do is call your argument Russian propaganda, this means that they have no counter-argument for the hard facts that you are presenting. They are deliberately shutting down the possibility of any dialogue with you because the cognitive dissonance you are causing them is making them uncomfortable.

Yes, paid shills for governments all over the world do indeed exist. But the odds are much greater that the stranger you are interacting with online is simply a normal person who isn’t convinced by the arguments that have been presented by the position you espouse. If your position is defensible you should be able to argue for it normally, regardless of whom you are speaking to.

Yes, propaganda exists. But what is propaganda other than arguments and ideas? It isn’t witchcraft or wizardry. It isn’t going to melt your face like that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark; you can engage it rationally without plugging your fingers in your ears and screaming “propaganda!”

---

Quote:

---

In the event that the ideas you are debating against online are indeed the product of government deception, you should be able to debunk them using truth and rationality. If there are lies, point them out using truth and facts. If there are half-truths, bring in the other half of the equation. If there are bad arguments relying on bad thinking, refute them with good arguments and good thinking. The methods of refuting propaganda are the same as the methods of refuting anything else, so it’s stupid to act like plugging your fingers in your ears and screaming “propaganda” is a legitimate tactic.

If “propaganda” can’t be refuted using legitimate debate methods, then what you are calling propaganda looks an awful lot like truth.

I fight what I consider to be establishment propaganda for a living, but if all I ever did was type “that’s propaganda!” over and over again, nobody would ever read my articles. I have to make a compelling case for what actual disinformation is being presented and present clear arguments for why I think they are wrong. The same is true for everyone, even if they believe their position is supported by 17 intelligence agencies and the infinite wisdom of the Palmer Report.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's up Cap'n?

You ready for Democrats to get destroyed?

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

No, I didn't just "make it up".

About two months ago, a major British publication (I forget which, it may have been The Guardian) . . .

And which is why the PENTAGON just pulled out the nuclear trump card.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Accusing Someone You Disagree With Of Being A Russian Troll Is Admitting You Have No Argument

---

Quote:

---

And what is happening now? At one time, the Nazis reached the point of burning books, and now the Western “guardians of liberalism and progress” have reached the point of banning Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. The so-called “cancel culture” and in reality—as we said many times—the real cancellation of culture is eradicating everything that is alive and creative and stifles free thought in all areas, be it economics, politics, or culture.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's up Cap'n?

You ready for Democrats to get destroyed?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's up Cap'n?

You ready for Democrats to get destroyed?

---

Why? Is it... hammer time?

Now that's funny.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What's up Cap'n?

You ready for Democrats to get destroyed?

---

Why? Is it... hammer time?

Now that's funny.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I think you'll find that all the vices you mentioned above have no party affiliation.

You're a walking comorbidity who doesn't do enough walking yourself.

Get some exercise today dude. Touch some grass. Pray that your booster shots don't make your heart explode.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I think you'll find that all the vices you mentioned above have no party affiliation.

You're a walking comorbidity who doesn't do enough walking yourself.

Get some exercise today dude. Touch some grass. Pray that your booster shots don't make your heart explode.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

---

yes,somehow SECOND managed to overlook the Pelosi's very public drunken escapades.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I think you'll find that all the vices you mentioned above have no party affiliation.

You're a walking comorbidity who doesn't do enough walking yourself.

Get some exercise today dude. Touch some grass. Pray that your booster shots don't make your heart explode.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

---

yes,somehow SECOND managed to overlook the Pelosi's very public drunken escapades.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake

---

That's the problem when you deal in absolutes, innit?

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

yes,somehow SECOND managed to overlook the Pelosi's very public drunken escapades.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

yes,somehow SECOND managed to overlook the Pelosi's very public drunken escapades.

---

You really and truly do NOT understand the concept of angry poor white trash and its connection to struggling with staying in the middle class. I first saw that concept in action when I was a little kid. My whole extended family was angry poor white trash in East Texas. At the time, they all believed they were good Christians and doing great, prospering in America, but looking back from 2022, they were not prospering. This was around 1962, when the Jehovah's Witnesses first came knocking at my parents' door.

The Witnesses are truly opposed to the 7 deadly sins - lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride - which was exactly what was holding back all my relatives. My parents switched religions and they slowly became more prosperous because they actually avoided the sins, unlike their lying hypocritical relatives who were no more Christian than I am. My parents kept working at Burger King, but life got much smoother for them and their children. My father died a millionaire. My mother died a multi-millionaire. Her two daughters, a teacher and a nurse, in very middle class occupations, are far richer than our parents were. The whole family is still Jehovah's Witnesses, except for me.

What has happened to my angry poor white trash relatives over the 60 years since 1962? They did not prosper. They did not even live very long. My father died at 80, far older than his parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, and cousins, but he would have lived much longer if the Jehovah's Witnesses had gotten him to stop smoking sooner. My mother, who only smoked occasionally, died at 94. Her sister, who never smoked and was also a Jehovah's Witness, lived to be 96. Funny thing about Natalie, she got rich, too, unlike everyone else on her side of the family, who stayed Southern Baptist and poor.

And who are my angry white trash relatives voting for? Trump. When the man who embodies all 7 deadly sins - lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride - is signing Bibles it means that it is time to reevaluate your religion. And what do my angry poor white trash relatives say about the war? Fuck Ukraine.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

A troublemaker and a villain, who goes about with a corrupt mouth…who plots evil with deceit in his heart—he always stirs up conflict. Therefore disaster will overtake him in an instant; he will suddenly be destroyed…

There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies, and a person who stirs up conflict in the community. (Proverbs 6:12-19)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

yes,somehow SECOND managed to overlook the Pelosi's very public drunken escapades.

---

You really and truly do NOT understand the concept of angry poor white trash and its connection to struggling with staying in the middle class.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
You've posted this before. It's boring, racist, and wrong in so many ways.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

So, how about we turn this thread away from your favorite subject (your vitrue signalling) and back to the OT?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

So, how about we turn this thread away from your favorite subject (your vitrue signalling) and back to the OT?

---

The topic is "Russia Invades Ukraine. Again."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, how about we turn this thread away from your favorite subject (your vitrue signalling) and back to the OT?
SECIND: The topic is "Russia Invades Ukraine. Again." Got that much, Signym?

---

Quote:

---

Putin has given many phony reasons for the invasion but the true reason is that this is how he rules.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

IN REALITY, SECOND, YOUR posts display every single reason for the invasion.

Your mindless, brainwashed hatred of Russia and Russians, characterizing all of them as barbaric, stupid, genocidal cannibals. (Did I miss anything? Probably.) Willing to believe everything negative about Russia and Russians, tarred with everything terrible from time immemorial thru days of the tsars thru Stalin to today. Genetically, unchangeably, unalterably inferior. etc. etc.

---

Quote:

---

You talk about me just like Russians talk about Ukrainians and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

You talk about me just like Russians talk about Ukrainians and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

---

No, you stupid sod. I'm not talking about you as a rich, white, Democrat Texas oil/ gas baron, or Jehovah's Witness ... or whatever category you claim to belong in.

I'm talking about YOU. Individually. YOUR individual posts, YOUR libel and lies and intimidation and harassment and propaganda.

What you, personally and individually, have said and done and are responsible for.

Stop trying to shield your personal liability behind some persecuted (as you claim it) category. Your own posts and actions indict you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Ukraine sinks a Russian ship (Russia denies it sank) and Russia retaliates by starving people (which Russia denies it is doing).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

As reported by DW "News". An outlet that doesn't even have an entry at MediaBiasFactCheck.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

As reported by DW "News". An outlet that doesn't even have an entry at MediaBiasFactCheck.

---

You're not competent at finding stuff, 6ix.

---

Quote:

---

Try dw-news, which is short for Deutsche Welle News

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/dw-news/


Failed Fact Checks None in the Last 5 years

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Mines, Missiles, Warcrimes And A Warning To Zelenski


SECOND: Ukraine did not kill Ukrainian prisoners. The Russians did it.

SIGNY: So you say. Videos from the scene show wreckage of a short-range HIMARS rocket.


SECOND: Stop using the Firehose of Falsehoods, Signym. According to the Geneva Conventions, those prisoners are to be moved outside the zone of battle

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Ukraine sinks a Russian ship

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Ukraine sinks a Russian ship (Russia denies it sank) and Russia retaliates by starving people (which Russia denies it is doing).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Ukraine sinks a Russian ship

---

According to ... Kiev?

Kiev puts out so much disinfo ...

55,000 Russian dead. NO! 90,000 Russian dead!
100 Kiev soldiers lost per day. NOPE! 600. NOPE AGAIN! 200
Ghost of Kiev.
Snakes Island resistance to the last man! (Er, no. Total surrender)
Mass rapes of children (Someone in the Kiev government actually got fired for that one)
Russia killed Kiev POWs.
The GOAT of Kiev.

I mean, I can't even track all of bullshit coming out of Kiev.

Everything Kiev said about Russian troops (so far) is psyops.
I can't trust their claims of success because most are lies, too.
I can't even trust their claims of LOSSES bc that depends on whether the narrative that day/week is "Help us bc we're winning" or "Help us bc we're losing". They've done both.

Since it's a firehose of shit, I don't even try to dredge any flecks of truth out of the muck. I put everything "Kiev says" into a huge holding pond, even if it's repeated in western press, and I suggest you do the same.

---