“Putin's Lies”
Truth-seekers are invited to look into the evidence exposing the fallacy of alleged Putin's lies
Languages: UA | RU || BG | CS | DE | EL | ES | FR | HR | HU | IT | PL | RM | TR |
Reading time: 33 minutes (41 with footnotes)
Welcome to the peace initiative for Ukraine in which you can contibute by raising your awareness as well as your consciousness[+] and spirit to the modes[+] of neutrality[*], decency, respectfulness, wisdom, objectivity, mastery of the intellect, surrender (ego and mind to God/Holy Spirit), and finally peace (inner then outer). To properly grasp everything, we recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative in the order that we designed it, which is listed in the Contents. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we urge you to do it, please. Did you read the Intro to this “Beware of Propaganda” segment? Please, do so for a better grasp of the topic of this article.
In our previous article of the “Beware of Propaganda” segment, we exposed Zelensky’s Lies as well as the lies of his team and allies with plenty of evidence proving how untrustworthy and unreliable they are, and now we let you compare all those clear-cut lies with alleged Putin's lies to see whether you are a victim of propaganda and whether you should then break through the shackles of it in order to make your judgements and decisions more wisely.
We searched high and low to find Putin's lies but could not find any. We also posted a question about it on Quora[+] but despite many views, no one could give us an answer with evidence of Putin lying. We did find some who claimed that Putin lied this and that but when we investigated it all, we were as surprised as you will be after you read our findings here that these were not lies but just his views or opinions or official policies that are different from those of NATO leaders and their followers, as well as malicious misinterpretations of his words.
No one is saying that Putin never lied in his life but to put him on the spot in order to demonize him while ignoring much worse lies Zelensky, Biden, and their allies have been telling us, that is duplicitous and deceitful. If anyone puts Putin on a spot for anything, then they should be fair and provide a context as well as put also other relevant leaders (Zelensky, Biden, von der Leyen…) on the spot, too.
Let's analyze alleged Putin's lies and provide a context:
➡ Putin has been accused for lying about having no plans to invade Ukraine but he himself never said that! Even Russian officials who said[+] that did not lie about it as there is a huge difference between lying and changing mind or plans after being provoked! People with low IQ don't know the difference and keep using that to prove Putin and Russians are liars as they have no other evidence of him and them ever lying. Are Putin and Russians not allowed to change their mind?! They changed their mind after Munich Security Conference 18-20 Feb 2022 when Zelensky announced[+][+] reacquiring nuclear weapons and US Vice President encouraged Zelensky to join NATO by praising his desire to do so[+]. This was the last straw for Russians on top of all other provocations such as on 24 March 2021, Ukraine’s President Zelensky signed National Security and Defense Council Decree no. 117/2021[+] to prepare and implement measures to ensure the de-occupation and reintegration of the Crimea peninsula, including military measures[+][+] – Russia has responded to Ukraine’s threats and provocations by mobilizing many thousands of troops near the borders, then in August 2021, further disregarding the will of people of Crimea and their right to self-determination, Zelensky pledged[+][+] to return Russia-annexed Crimea and subsequently gathered troops for an offensive – by early December 2021, the NATO-backed Armed Forces of Ukraine deployed 125.000 troops[+] against the Russian ethnic minorities at the borders of Donbas1 close to the Russian border, and in February 2022, OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine reported[+] (before Russian SMO[+]) a massive spike in Ukrainians shooting at Russian ethnic minorities in Donbas, thus on 13 February 2022, OSCE had to withdraw from Donbas due to deteriorating security conditions as Ukraine was violating Minsk accords[+][+].
However, even if Russians or Putin did lie about not invading Ukraine, this would be no proof of Putin being a liar as in the circumstances of war or armed conflict, it is necessary not to reveal the plans to the enemy but is necessary to deceive them as Sun Tzu pointed out in his book The Art of War: "All warfare is based on deception,” which is also incorporated in the Russian Military Doctrine[+], as a deception tactics called Maskirovka[+]. It would be very stupid to announce in advance to the enemy that they plan to invade them, as the Ukrainians could have built the fortifications along the borders to prevent it.
Therefore, anyone condemning Putin for being a liar based on this must be either liars themselves (due to hatred-driven Russophobia) or seriously dumb not to know the difference between lying and changing plans or not to know that military plans should never be revealed to the enemy. The fact that they never made a similar video exposing Zelensky's lies is revealing enough of their bias and propaganda.
➡ Here's an example[+] when they condemn Putin for lying as he was saying something that is an official Russian military doctrine and policy: The Russian army does not target civilians – does not strike at civilian facilities[+]. Those who use that claim as a proof of Putin's lies must have very low IQ when they do not distinguish that any facility used by a military is no longer a civilian facility. Also, it is one thing that civilians get killed in missile attacks and quite another that Russians attack civilians. Russians attack military targets (including civilian objects which Ukrainian military uses) where civilians may go to at their risk and sometimes get killed. The full report on that with all the evidence is in the upcoming article Russians Do Not Target Civilians[*], so make sure to read it. While it is true that Russia’s armed forces have destroyed many civilian facilities, it did so only after those became military facilities! What used to be schools, hospitals, hotels, residential buildings and such, Ukrainian army turned into military bases, shelters, and warehouses, according to Amnesty International[+] therefore, it should be Zelensky, not Putin, condemned for endangering civilians by establishing military targets in civilian areas and civilian facilities (even using ambulances to transport soldiers[»]), which is against the law and a war crime.
➡ British MSM2 say[»] Putin lied that "Ukraine is not a state" but he has never ever said or wrote that!!! This is just malicious misinterpretation of his words, twisting his words. Russia's enemies put their own spin or totally missed the point of Putin’s 2021 essay ”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians“[+] because they have approached it form a low level of consciousness[+] – hatred and Russophobia, assuming moral superiority, etc. There are many Western media reports that in 2008, then-Prime Minister Putin told President George W. Bush, “Ukraine is not even a country,” but not a single media outlet did fact-checking on that. As per the protocol when two presidents meet their conversations get recorded officially in a transcript – why don't they show this transcript as a proof? Obviously, because they lie. Without any evidence[+], it is just a hearsay from Putinophobes.
It's like if Putin said Bush told him that Afghanistan is not even a country – should we base a theory that Bush is a liar on something that Putin allegedly said (without any evidence that either Putin or Bush have actually said that)? If not, then let's all refrain from double standards and from calling Putin a liar based on some unfounded rumors. Besides, if Bush lied3 [+] about Al-Qaeda motives for 9/11 attacks[»][+] and WMD in Iraq, then who is to say that he is not lying about Putin?! This tall tale was surely invented to discredit Putin and heighten urgency regarding Ukraine’s entry into NATO.
Ignorant people should better educate themselves also about the definition of a state or country and Ukrainian history[+] before making such malevolent allegations and propagandizing Ukraine's neo-Nazis (Bandera followers) version of history as if they are arbitrators of truth. If to the West, a state is what Americans and the EU call their states that are not independent nor sovereign, just like they call “friends” the people they never met (like on Facebook), it must be clear that Russians have then a different definition of the word “state”, which means a sovereign, fairly independent country recognized as such by a majority of the world. A state is not when you declare independence on the radio but no other country recognizes you, like Banderites4 did in 1941 in Lviv (without even asking Ukrainians to vote for it in a referendum) and were then killed or imprisoned for it by their allies, Nazi Germans, for doing it behind their back.
Putin never denied that the Ukrainian state with its pre-2014 borders only existed since 1991 with borders that Russia agreed upon firstly under condition of Moscow governance during Soviet times and then upon Soviet disintegration, under conditions set in Ukrainian Declaration of Independence and special treaties, which Ukraine violated in 2014. Similar to Israeli state, Ukrainian state was only constructed recently by no merit of Ukrainians. Before 1991, Ukraine was never an internationally-recognized sovereign state and there was no state of Ukraine on any map of the world before 1991. With different borders, it was a republic in the Soviet Union from 1922-1991 and before that a much smaller territory in Russian Empire and it was not even called Ukraine then. A state under the name of Ukraine, and under the borders they claim as theirs now, exists only conditionally since 1991 – Putin never denied that and Russia acknowledged it then under certain conditions (set in the Ukrainian Declaration of Independence and affirmed later in treaties with Russia), which Ukraine breached.
What Putin clarified[+] to American journalist Tucker Carlson in an interview[»] in February 2024, by explaining some history, was that Ukraine is ‘artificial state’ that was artificially created as a Soviet republic and not a state by the actions of the late Soviet leaders Lenin in 1922 and Joseph Stalin after World War II. He recalled that, during the feudal fragmentation of Russia in the Middle Ages, Ukraine – which he described as being part of Russian lands – came under heavy Polish cultural, religious, and political influence. In the 17th century, the people of this region wanted to join the then-growing power of Moscow, so Moscow decided to bring this “part of old Russian lands” back into the fold, which resulted in a war with Poland. Moscow reclaimed all of its “historic lands” during the reign of Catherine the Great, who ruled between 1762 and 1796. In the 1920s, the Bolshevik government established a Soviet Ukraine that “had never existed before.” The Soviet authorities were “Ukrainizing” this region, in line with similar indigenization policies pursued in other areas. “After the Second World War, Ukraine, in addition to the territories that had belonged to Poland, received part of the territories that had previously belonged to Hungary and Romania… So, we have every reason to affirm that Ukraine is an artificial state that was shaped at Stalin’s will.”
So, this statement is not a lie but a petty argument of semantics as well as Russian version of history, which is not something Putin invented but what Russian and other historians[+] hold as truth. However, Putin's haters are making it sound as Putin is intentionally lying and deceiving anyone, when his outspoken advocacy of unity of Russians and Ukrainians is a well-meaning expression of how Russians view Ukrainians as their kin folk. Besides, it is undeniable fact that the Ukrainian state was created only under Soviet rule, incorporating the lands of Russia, so Ukrainians should thank the Soviets, especially Russians for their statehood and borders but since they are unappreciative and denying the reality, Russians reserve the right to do it as well.
If Westerners had been more aware of Ukrainian history, they would have raised reasonable doubts about the validity of Ukraine’s territorial aspirations. If Russian Czar Alexey in 1654 had not protected[+] the Zaporozhian Host’s Cossacks, the precursors of Ukrainians, from annihilation[+] by the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (which spurred the Polish-Russian war; Russia paid a heavy price for protecting the Ukrainians from the Poles), we would never have heard about Ukraine. When it comes to Crimea, in all of history, Ukrainians has never lifted a finger to win or deserve it. It was not Ukrainians but Russian empress Catherine the Great who acquired the Crimea in 1783 as well as much of south and east Ukraine came under Russian rule as a result of her and Russian efforts, not Ukrainian, against the Ottoman empire and Tatars. And in 1954, it was a Russian president Khrushchev who ascribed Crimea to Soviet Republic of Ukraine without any merit by Ukraine. In 1991, taking advantage of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Ukraine declared independence. So, when the initial jubilation and smoke of promises of democracy and prosperity cleared, Ukrainians who had never governed themselves, lacking strategic vision and experience in geopolitics, faced the gloomy reality of governing. Trying to make a clean break from Russia, Ukraine failed economically and politically, crippled with endemic corruption exploited by Western predators who bribe their officials. Saying Ukraine is corrupt is like saying water is wet. In 2013, the EU forced Ukraine to turn their back on Russia, to stop trading with Russia, but it did not integrate Ukraine into its bloc. Ukraine lost the Russian market for nothing, for hollow promises, and became totally dependent on the West (lost its independence and sovereignty; it's all just on paper). Up to this day, the EU, just like NATO, dangles a carrot on a stick and foolish Ukrainians just do not get it. When will they ever learn that the West is just exploiting their natural resources and using them to denigrate Russia?! It is very easy to fool them as long as there is no critical mass of free-thinkers there. And, as this failed state, with the borders drawn by the Soviet Union rather than some Ukrainian heroes, rotten with incompetence and corruption, collapses in blood and destruction, the eerie premonition is that what will be left of Ukraine will remain a wasteland for generations.
To put things in perspective, for some hypocritical reason, in the Western twisted frame of mind, it is okay for American senators[+][+][+] and Western mainstream media[+][+][+][+] to deny Russian statehood by calling Russia “a gas station masquerading as a country” and no one is condemning them or calling those senators “liars” for that!
➡ British MSM say[»] Putin lied that "Stalin was not that bad" but again, if he indeed said that, this would be his view or opinion and not a lie! Some people are so in the dark that they can't even distinguish a lie from an opinion! They probably even don't know that Joseph Stalin (ruled 1922–1952) was not a Russian and not even a Slav but a Georgian5, so Putin is not defending him based on ethnic bias but on facts while also minding the fact that Stalin also did some wrong things, which Putin never denied.
The statement in question, if Putin said it as such6 [+] at all, is not saying that Stalin was not bad at all but not as bad as his enemies (anti-communist West) portray him to be (just like they portray Putin as evil now whereby 80% of the world revere him; they portray both Stalin and Putin to be as evil as Hitler, just because they’ve opposed the Western hegemony). In NATO countries and Nazi propaganda, Stalin is exaggerated, his crimes are blown out of all logical proportion, mis-attributed, and most important, provided without context[+]. History is a battleground, perennially fought over, endlessly contested, with much falsification of history[+].
If anyone knows the truth about Stalin, it is not the Westerners but primarily Russians and their history-lover President. Western anti-communist propaganda has made every effort to fabricate facts and demonize all communist Soviet leaders because they did not comply and serve Western interests, just as they do it with Putin. Anyone who is not submissive to American or Western hegemony, the US and its allies call either “dictator” or “terrorist”. It is worth investigating why many Russians revere Stalin[+][+][+]. Putin called[+] for balanced assessment of Stalin and said that Stalin was not all good or bad. No need to point out all the bad things he did as it is common knowledge but to balance it, here are some great things that Stalin did:
a) Stalin defeated Nazis and Hitler, conquered Berlin and so made Nazi Germany to capitulate, which means he did also something good. It was his army that surrounded Berlin and got Hitler and his gang to commit suicide. If it was not for Stalin and his Red Army and Soviet sacrifices (26+ million people killed[+], 14 million of them were Russian, Ukrainian nationalists fought on the side of Nazis), who knows when and how WWII would end – we might have been all under fascist or Nazi rule until now.
Ernest Hemingway, who served as a WWII war correspondent and an unconventional soldier in Europe, was cited[+][+] in a Soviet newspaper Pravda7[ꚛ] on the 23 February 1942: “Anyone who loves freedom owes such a debt to the Red Army that it can never be repaid… Anyone who fulminates against Hitler should consider the Red Army a heroic model which must be imitated.” And let's not forget who the leader of Red Army was – Stalin.
And, as recorded and reported by the Free Library[+], in the 3rd January 1943 issue of Pravda, on page four, with praises of the Soviets by Dreiser[+], Hemingway, Leon Feuchtwanger[+], and Thomas Mann, Hemingway wrote: “In 1942 you saved the world from the forces of barbarity, offering resistance alone, almost without help.”
Since the Cold War, NATO countries censored and suppressed all the praise for the Soviets and communists but the truth has its ways to come out[+][+].
b) Stalin with his Red Army liberated virtually all of Poland from the Nazis![+] If it were not for Stalin, Poland would be now Germany! No one else was interested in liberating Poland; all the UK and US were willing to do was airstrikes here and there but not everywhere and no actual ground combat necessary to defeat the mighty Nazis. Despite the disapproval of the Polish government-in-exile, the Polish underground resistance tried and failed[+] to liberate Warsaw from German occupation, as usual blaming the Soviets and Stalin for their failure because they did not join the fight in time – why should have they? They owed nothing to the Poles, who did not even ask them for help (Poles wanted to take all the credit for defeating the Nazis, did not want the Soviets to take any credit) and were hostile to Soviets, even blaming them for the Katyn massacre8 of Polish army officers and preferred Western style democracy and capitalism but the Western Allies did not come to rescue them in combat (although the Polish government-in-exile[+] was in the UK at the time), just in air strikes. Wonder why Poles didn’t blame Roosevelt and Churchill for not supporting them9. Aligning themselves with the West rather than with the Soviets and relying on them turned out to be very fatal10, just like is the case with Ukraine then and now. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Three months after Poles were defeated, the Soviets started their offensive and in a matter of two weeks, defeated the Nazis in Poland, liberated all of territory, including Kraków, Warsaw, Poznań, Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps. Soviets suffered around 200.000 casualties and how did Poles thank them for their sacrifices? Don't ask.
Although Stalin seized the Eastern Poland (gave it to ungrateful11 Ukraine and Belarus, as agreed with Roosevelt and Churchill), he gave to Poland almost as much of Eastern Germany, in terms of value if not in size, as Poles got a much-more valuable Silesian coal mines and a Baltic Sea coastline while losing the rural agrarian territories where Poles were a minority anyway as mostly Ukrainians, Jews12, and Belarusian lived there because the region was previously part of Russian empire since 1795-1917 when Bolsheviks took over (Poland had seized those territories in 1921 from the weakened Bolsheviks (and Ukrainian People’s Republic under Skoropadsky’s rule, which was a German-Austrian protectorate until the end of 1918, and later under Petliura’s rule); USSR was only formed later in 1922 when Stalin came to power, so the natives were not Poles as Poland only captured it in 1921 until 1939; the region was under Russians from 1795-1921; before that, parts of it were part of the Kingdom of Poland and from 1569-1772 were under Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth[+]). If Stalin were evil as they make him to be, he could have just annexed it all to the Soviet Union but he turned out to be a liberator of Poland. The fact that Poland lost more territories than won in WWII is not Stalin's fault but Poland's fault or predicament. Stalin did not annex all the liberated territories because it might have been against Soviet agenda and law as it is now against Russian law for any state to be accepted into the Russian Federation without mutual consent and the annexation request initiated by the other party. USSR had never annexed any territories where people did not want to be annexed, they never forced anyone to join USSR. So, Stalin only annexed the part of Poland , which used to be Russian and where the locals were willing to be annexed, as majority of the population there were Ukrainians, Belarussian, and Jews, who surely liked to join the rest of their folk in the Soviet Union and resented their Polish government for abandoning them (fled first to Romania and France, and then to the UK in 1940) so they might have preferred the USSR rather than stay with Poland. And perhaps they appreciated their liberators, the Soviets, to whom they might have felt indebted for not ending up under Nazi or German occupation.
Unappreciative Poles gave nothing to their liberators, to the Soviets whom they should thank that Poland is not under Nazi or German occupation now and who sacrificed their lives for liberating Poland. Soviets died to liberate Poland but no Pole has died to liberate the Soviet Union. Those Soviet soldiers must be turning in their graves now seeing how Poles repay for their sacrifices. If Poles do not appreciate Stalin's or Soviet liberation from German Nazi occupation and are therefore siding now with Germans and Ukrainian Banderites, this surely reflects their consciousness level and the matching reality (low life satisfaction13, and deteriorating quality of life[+]). Also, the alliance with the USSR protected Poland from German revanchism. West Germany wanted to regain Silesia and Pomerania and if it was not for USSR and this long Soviet overlordship over Poland, Poles would have had yet another aggression by Germany[+]. This is a thing most Poles do not seem to be aware of and live in a land of make-believe in which the communists and alliance with USSR were all bad and Germany all good.
c) Stalin also gave part of Polish lands14, including Lviv, and parts from Romania and Hungary to Ukraine, so Ukrainians should glorify Stalin rather than Bandera (who was a loser and achieved absolutely nothing for Ukraine). Ukraine got territories from Stalin in 1939[+] and 1945[+] – some regions (including Lviv) with 131.000 square kilometers (50,600 sq mi)[+] were annexed from Poland and Romania and a region (that was called Transcarpathia) with 12.777 km² was taken from the Czechoslovak Republic and given to Ukraine. Ukraine owes much to Stalin but they are ungrateful.
d) Stalin gave refuge to Jews during WWII when no other country did! Albert Einstein, who was a German Jew, in his address at the Fifth Nobel Anniversary Dinner in December 1945, in New York said[+][+]: “We do not forget the humane attitude of the Soviet Union who was the only one among the big powers to open her doors to hundreds of thousands of Jews when the Nazi armies were advancing in Poland.”
e) Stalin also advanced[+] the proposition that Ukraine was an independent state and gave Ukraine a sit in the UN, for which independence-loving and land-loving Ukrainians should sing praises to him – however, they condemn him for the controversial[+][+] and tragic famine in 1932-1933 in the Soviet Union, even though the responsible Soviet's mismanaged or improper agricultural policy of termination of private ownership of farmland is very similar to what improper American enterprises (managed by BlackRock) have been doing as well in Ukraine but in the 1930s Ukrainian nationalist peasants resisted it which destroyed them, plus more Ukrainians died of unnatural causes pro year under Zelensky's rule than under Stalin's rule (the death rate in Ukraine was the lowest of that of any of the other Soviet republics)! Not to mention that Stalin gave Ukraine new territories while Zelensky made them lose much of territories!!! Stalin demanded and achieved that Ukraine (and Belarus) be admitted to the UN as a separate, distinct nation with all the rights and privileges that come with full membership, including its own ambassador and participation as a member state in all UN sessions. So, looking at all what Stalin did for Ukraine, all the pluses and minuses, and minding the hate-driven revisionist presentation of history, Ukrainians should appreciate Stalin more than Zelensky.
f) Stalin transformed a poor USSR to a superpower and under his leadership, millions of people in Soviet Union raised from poverty and their living conditions significantly improved, so he did much good for his people, which can’t be said about any current Western leaders, who ruined their whole countries for the sake of own ideology or enrichment. By the 1950s, under Stalin, the Soviet Union had rapidly evolved from a mainly agrarian society into a major industrial power and had the second largest economy in the world from the end of World War II until the mid-1980s[+] when US-darling Gorbachev ruined it15. The annual growth rate in Russia under Stalin's rule was close to about 13%[+][+][+]. From about 25% the size of the US economy in 1928, the Soviet economy climbed to about 40% in 1955[+]. Stalin era was the most growing time of USSR and Putin era is even much better in terms of economic growth. Besides colossal industrialization, Stalin’s legacy urbanization, military strength, education and Soviet pride. His dictatorship had a positive effect on the development of the country that was devasted in power struggles since the end of monarchy in 1917 until 1922
Russophobes’ unappreciative attitude toward Stalin's war effort is a sign of their low level of consciousness[+]. To undermine or devalue Stalin's contribution to ending the WWII and his grand industrialization projects as well as his territorial gifts to Ukraine and Poland (see footnote 13) in such a condescending manner is perhaps a valid justification why Russians (who are generally very history-minded) are against the Western value systems. The whole topic is even more absurd given that the British haters who “expose”[»] Putin's lies mention one single monument to Stalin in Russia but do not say anything condemnatory about hundreds[+] of WWII Nazi collaborators’ monuments in Ukraine, including 40 monuments[+][+] of WWII Nazi collaborator Bandera, and 94 streets[+][+], 2 avenues[+], and 5 lanes[+] being named after him, 5 museums[+] opened in his honor...
The only thing Western haters have against Stalin, apart from being a communist leader, and rightfully so, are prison labor camps known as gulags (for Nazi collaborators such as Tatars and Ukrainians and foreign agents seeking to overthrow communism) but according to that logic, British Prime Ministers and American presidents should be equally condemned as Stalin due to the fact that they have done the same! The Brits had their gulags[+] in Africa at the time. The US has the highest incarceration rate[+] in the whole world with people being jailed for lesser crimes (e.g., drug possession) than Stalin's prisoners. All who condemn his strict rules against all Russian “foreign agents” who sought to destabilize USSR and oust him, whom he persecuted, should look up “McCarthy era” and how Americans under President Truman executed even worse or as bad political repression and persecution of all left-wing individuals and alleged communists (there’s a huge coverup of the number of victims). So, all who condemn Stalin for his repression, they should be fair and condemn Truman for doing the same, otherwise they are nothing but a hypocrites. Not to justify Stalin's repression but it needs to be judged in the right context: millions of people died in the African and Asian colonies of European powers, and in the "prosperous" USA, it was not for nothing that these years were called the Great Depression. When condemning the fact that allegedly four million people were deprived of the right to vote in the Stalin period, if this is regarded as a full-fledged political repression, then the over 12 million[+] of African-American population of the US in the first half of the twentieth century, who not only did not have voting rights but were also segregated on a racial basis, should also be called the victim of political repression by Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, and other American presidents. To accuse Stalin of repression but not the American presidents who did it on much larger scale is nothing short of hypocrisy. And what about capital punishment[+] being a legal penalty throughout the US?! The only Western nation that applies the death penalty – somehow American leaders have the right to sentence people to death but Soviet leaders did not. The US mantra[»] “rules for thee and not for me”[+][+]. If we are to judge one, let's be fair and judge them all. No excuse for American exceptionalism[+]. President Barack Obama stated[+] that the US had 5 percent of the world's population but 25 percent of the world's prisoners. Prisons are turned into forced labor camps[+][+][+][+][+] (like Stalin’s gulags[+]). But somehow it is ok for Americans to lock up people and even torture them (in Abu Ghraib in Iraq, at Guantánamo naval base in Cuba, Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and secret detention camps in Eastern Europe) but when Russians do it, then they are monsters. The US has many political prisoners[+], too. Of, course gulags, like all prisons and labor camps, are horrible but to scapegoat Soviets for it, without taking look at the mirror, is telling of how bad and hypocrite all anticommunists and Russophobes are, although like Stalin, "they are not that bad". And where do they[»] get the idiocy about Stalin being “a symbol of Russian fight against Ukrainian neo-Nazis”, is anyone guess. As usual, they provide not a single evidence to back up their claims.
To expose the Western hypocrisy, what about mass murderers Churchill and Roosevelt who, like Netanyahu but unlike Stalin and Putin, ordered indiscriminate bombardments of German and 71[»] Japanese towns (such as air raids in Hamburg, Dresden, etc. and nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki) killing around 400.000[+][+] civilians in Germany, as many as 900.000[+] in Japan and 12.000 innocent French civilians[»]?! And what about the French and many Westerners revering and celebrating mass murdering Napoleon whose army killed millions[+][+] of civilians?! There are countless statues of him in France and all over the world even though he was a mass murderer – Napoleonic Wars casualties (military and civilian deaths) are estimated between 3,2 to 6,5 million. Nevertheless, NATO countries made him into a hero and raised countless monuments of him. Only hypocrites think it’s okey to praise and raise monuments to mass murderers Churchill, Roosevelt, and Napoleon but not to Stalin!
➡ British MSM say[»] Putin lied about Russians winning the WWII almost single-handedly! When did Putin ever said that?! No proof of Putin ever saying that! Even if he did, again, this would be his view or opinion, not a lie. But we suspect that they again twisted Putin words or interpreted some of his statements through their prejudiced filters. When anyone approaches Putin's speech with hatred or any other low mode of consciousness[+], they only project and twist the perception of reality.
Actually Putin said[+] the opposite: “The great contribution of the Allies to the victory over Nazi Germany cannot be denied.” Putin is extremely history-minded, so he is naturally very much aware of the Allies in WWII and that Stalin told that Lend-Lease16 [+] enabled the Soviet Union to defeat Germany. But, if we take the word “single-handedly”, this is not far from truth because the UK and US Allies only bombed Germany but it was Soviet infantry who defeated the Nazis by their hands. Why this British main-stream media outlet is quick to blame this as a lie is the fact that many Brits prefer to think that their Churchill actually won the war, which we all know is not true – the only thing Churchill had to offer was a bombing campaign against Germany killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, worse than what Netanyahu did.
Churchill was so “great” that he was thrown out of the office by the end of the WWII[+] and was guilty of many imperial atrocities[+] such as for example, starving 3 million people to death in India and calling for Gandhi's murder, British concentration camps in South Africa with the death toll of almost 28.000 and a Britain’s gulag in Kenya with 150.000 rebels. Also, during WWII, Churchill and Roosevelt were indiscriminately bombing German and Japanese towns killing around 400.000[+][+] civilians in Germany, as many as 900.000[+] in Japan and 12.000 innocent French civilians[»] – the cruel air raids in Hamburg, Dresden, and 71 Japanese towns were much worse war crimes[+] than what Netanyahu did in Gaza – in Hamburg[+], in just eight days of July 1943, around 37.000 civilians were killed (plus 180.000 wounded, 60% of the houses destroyed), while in Dresden[+] in just three days in February 1945, around 25.000 civilians were killed (though some estimates[+] are as high as 250.000, given the influx of undocumented refugees that had fled to Dresden from the Eastern Front). Despite all these Churchill's atrocities, he is held as hero whereas communist Stalin, the Nazi conqueror who never ordered indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets like Churchill did, is held as evil. Go figure! Revisionist history at play. And no one condemns UK and US gulags, just Stalin’s.
What those condemning Brits[»] omitted to mention while conducting their smear campaign of Putin is the fact that it was not British or American but Soviet troops that singlehandedly liberated USSR, Poland, concentration camps, and captured the center of Nazi regime, Berlin, defeating and frightening Hitler so much that he and bunch of his officers and officials committed suicides! It was not the Brits or Americans that Hitler feared but the Soviets and Stalin!
What those condemning Brits[»] also fail to mention is military deaths[+] ratio between the Allies, which proves who fought the most and so deserve the most praise. Around 10 million Soviet soldiers died fighting while only around 400.000 of each British and American troops lost lives – so, 25 times more Soviets died fighting than Britons but the shameful Britons have the nerve to condemn and undermine Soviet contribution!
Since the British main-stream-media outlet accused Putin for allegedly telling (no more17 than) three lies, perhaps they themselves should be also accused of telling many lies, such as they lied[»] that Soviets lost 24 million lives, when the truth is that they lost over 26 million lives[+][+][+] (two more million lives matter). They also lied that Ukrainians lost 14 million lives, which is not truth because it is Russia that lost 14 million of lives[+] in the WWII whereas Ukraine lost 6,8 million lives[+] and many Ukrainians fought on the side of Nazis but they omit to mention that! There were more lies than we can count. Evidently, yet another case of “adulterers casting stones” or “the pot calling the kettle black,” which is why it should be taken with a grain of salt if at all.
➡ Someone wrote an article[+] in September 2023 titled Putin Lies (Again) About Why Russia Quit the Black Sea Grain Deal, citing Putin's allegedly false arguments that Ukraine “used humanitarian corridors for terrorist attacks against Russian civilian and military facilities” and that the grain deal “did not justify its humanitarian purpose” and had “lost its meaning.” Again, vicious spin doctors spin his opinions as lies! By accusing Putin of lies, they shifted the blame and focus to conceal the fact that Russia did not extend the grain deal mainly because the West did not fulfill its obligations of the deal (while Russia honored its part of the deal) and because Russia got nothing from this deal, which was enough of a good reason not to extend it! The other reasons cited by the scornful author were not at all reasons for ending the deal but only his defenses for Western accusations. The only proof given there[+] for Putin's alleged lie is that he provided no evidence at that time but he did. Even if he didn't, if providing no evidence for claims is classified as a “lie”, then author of that article is a liar, too, because he provided no evidence for his own claims. He claimed that there was no evidence Ukraine has ever launched strikes from the grain corridor or used the designated humanitarian sea route for any military purpose but only because he got no evidence, it doesn't mean that there is no evidence. Putin pointed to attacks on ships guarding TurkStream and Blue Stream in the Black Sea through which gas is supplied to the Republic of Turkiye from Russia – Putin did not need to provide evidence[»][+][+][+][+] because those attacks were well known (common knowledge) and broadcasted even as Ukrainian triumphs. Russian ships were guarding these streams, these pipeline systems, but they were constantly being attacked with Ukrainian and Western drones. As for unjustified humanitarian purpose, Putin argument[+][+][+] was that the African states received less than 3% of the grain supplies (less than one million tons out of the total of 32.8 million tons from Ukraine), so if the author slandering Putin claimed it was not true, then why did he not give any evidence to back up his claims? Because the whole point of that smear campaign was just to discredit and vilify Putin, not to seek truth. The contemptuous author himself gave the link to a spreadsheet[+] that actually proves that Putin indeed told truth because in it, everyone could see that the low-income countries received only 822.092 tons (<3%) out of 32.856.036 tons. And if we would count in also the lower-middle-income countries, which altogether got less than 6,5 million tons, that would still mean that only 20% of Ukrainian grain supplied impoverished countries while more than 80% of grain went to rich European countries to feed their livestock, which means that Putin was right that the grain deal did not justify its humanitarian purpose. Putin's claim is further validated with the fact that suspending the deal did not affect the global food market or food security. Also, the mere fact that all those African states (except for corrupt Kenya) are siding with Russia rather than Ukraine in their conflict is a further confirmation that Putin was right and not lying. Soon afterward the grain deal ended, all African leaders or their delegations gladly attended Russia–Africa Summit. With their ill-intent to vilify Putin and Russia any chance they get, Western and Ukrainian smear campaigners omit to mention the facts like that humanitarian Putin donated 200.000 tons (over $46 million18 worth) of grain to Africa[+][+] and wrote off 90% ($23 billion[+]) of Africa's and Cuba's debt with no strings attached19, out of goodness of his heart.
By accusing Putin of lies, they shifted the blame and focus to conceal the fact that Russia did not extend the grain deal mainly because the West did not fulfill its obligations of the deal (while Russia honored its part of the deal) and Russia got nothing from this deal, which was enough of a good reason not to extend it! By not honoring its part of deal, the West endangered the world’s food supply and global food security but they condemned Russia instead. If there were any bad consequences of the termination of the grain deal, it is only because the West did not honor its part of the deal but the masters of the art of blame-shifting conceal their faults and guilt by gaslighting and projecting the guilt onto Russia. No one in their right mind was buying it, only dummies were. What those accusers also omitted to mention was the fact[+] that Ukraine managed to ship 4.4 million tons of cargo including 3.2 million tons of grain via a new shipping corridor[+] which further proves that Russia did not endanger any food supply or food security.
➡ Another attempt[+] at vilifying Putin as a liar alleged Putin said "I'm not going to change the constitution"; "We treat Ukraine as a sovereign state"; "We have no plan for Crimea"; "Our soldiers are not there and have never been there"; "There will be no war"; "It's not a war, it's a special operation"; "They're bombing themselves"; "We're carrying out precision strikes"; "There will be no mobilization." First of all, Putin never said these phrases – they are not Putin citations but twisting his words with obvious malicious intent to smear Putin to serve Ukraine's and NATO's agenda. That said, he did say similar things but they are not lies because he is allowed to change his mind and have his opinion on all matters, isn't he?
Since Ukraine is no longer acting as a sovereign state, why should Russia treat it as such? No one can deny that since 2014 Ukraine is under total influence and control of the West, which is not a mark of a sovereign state.
Before Ukraine ditched its Constitution in 2014 and instituted illegal anti-Russian policies such as banning ethnic Russians to use their native language, Russians had indeed no plan for Crimea. If they did, they would have acted earlier, wouldn't they?
Putin never said that Russian soldiers were not there in Crimea – of course they were there as it was all regulated by a Treaty[+] in which Russia was legally allowed to station up to 25.000 Russian troops in Crimea, so the author is the liar here.
As for “no war”, it is not Russia that started the war but Ukraine backed by NATO as we will explain in an upcoming article[*]. Also, Putin's and Russian definition of war is armed conflict with battles in more than one country – so far it is true that there is no war in military glossary terms, which justifies calling Russian intervention just a military operation and armed conflict rather than a war. If Russia wanted a war, it would not attack a 40 million people country with less than 100.000 troops[+][+] (plus 40.000 local Ukrainians of Russian ethnicity)!
Furthermore, the evidence that Ukrainians are accidently bombing themselves are prevalent and some are provided in another article[*] but in this context we will just point one evidence provided by the New York Times20 article[+] about the 6 September 2023 missile strike on the market in the Ukrainian-controlled town of Kostiantynivka (Donetsk region), killing 16 civilians and injuring 33 others. In this instance, they proved that it was Ukrainians misfiring a 9M38 missile but in many other cases it was Ukrainian air defense missiles missing their targets and hitting civilian areas.
Furthermore, Russians are undeniably carrying out precision strikes and there was no mobilization since September 2022, so no lies there either.
We could go on and on explaining how most if not all alleged Putin's lies are like these examples just pure inventions by malicious information warfare legions in an attempt to conduct character assassination and smear campaigns. However, we hope these samples suffice to at least equalize the score – to point out that Putin is by no means a bigger liar than Zelensky[*]! Putin is more trustworthy because he tells more truth (less lies) than Zelensky.
Thank you for reading this article and participating in this peace initiative by raising your awareness and, hopefully, your consciousness and spirit. To properly grasp everything, we recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative for Ukraine in the proper order, which is listed in the Contents. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we recommend that you do. This article is part of the “Beware of Propaganda” segment so far covering Intro & Zelensky’s Lies
When you are ready, please proceed to the next article in this “Beware of Propaganda” segment: Mainstream Media Lies
Donbas[+] is a coal mining region that was part of eastern Ukraine from 1922-2022 (now part of Russia) consisting of two Republics – Donetsk and Luhansk – where most residents have been Russians for centuries
MSM = main-stream media
Bush lied about Al-Qaeda motives for 9/11 attacks[»] – when explaining why Al-Qaeda attacked and hates Americans, Bush lied "They hate our freedoms - our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other." Click here[+] for evidence. Osama wrote[+], it was because the US has killed millions and displaced millions more of Muslims so as to justify Israeli illegal occupation of Palestine since 1948 as the US uses Israel to contain the Middle East & exploit its natural resources for decades
Banderites are Bandera followers or neo-Nazis – Ukrainian nationalist Stepan Bandera[+] was a convicted murderer, a war criminal, and an anti-Semite leader of the ultranationalist Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and its paramilitary wing, Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)[+][+][+] with Nazi ideology collaborating with Nazi Germany in executing ethnic cleansing & genocide of Jews and other perceived subhumans including Slavs, Gypsies, gays, etc. massacring around 100.000 civilians in World War 2. After the war, Bandera collaborated with CIA and MI6 against the Soviets until a KGB agent assassinated him in 1959.
Bandera has millions of followers (Banderites) in Ukraine today, especially in military and police forces, as well as former (2014-2019) President Poroshenko[+][+][+][+][+] and former Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine General Zaluzhny[+][+][+][+]. Despite the world condemnation, millions of modern day Ukrainians glorify Bandera and his neo-Nazi followers as national heroes and since 2014 revolution, new Kyiv regime has installed hundreds[+] of monuments of WWII Nazi collaborators, including 40 monuments[+][+] just of Bandera and not one but 5 museums[+] dedicated to him, as many as 94 streets[+][+], 2 avenues[+], 5 lanes[+], and bridges were renamed after him, issuing postage stamps[ꚛ] with his portrait, and he was named an honorary citizen of many western Ukrainian cities. Since 2014, more than a thousand settlements and more than 50.000 streets have been renamed after those Nazi collaborators in Ukraine[+] – in 2022 alone, 237 streets, squares, avenues and boulevards were renamed just in Kyiv. In May 2015, they passed a law[+][+] that gave the OUN-UPA Banderites the honorary status of "fighters for independence" of Ukraine, making it also a crime to “publicly exhibit a disrespectful attitude” toward them, and in December 2018, they gave the original Banderites (1.201 people) a full recognition and the status of veterans[+][+] with all the benefits, such as the right to social security, and accolades. Ukrainian schoolbooks[»][»][+][+][+] glorify them while all other countries in the world consider them war criminals. And they teach[»][»] school-kids to be and salute like neo-Nazis and to hate and kill[»] Russians.
Stalin[+] was Georgian by birth and ethnicity. Georgians are not Slavs, they speak a different language, not Russian or any other Slavic variant, and use a different, unique alphabet.
Putin haters[+] twist his words and put words in his mouth all the time; we could not find anywhere that Putin said that "Stalin was not that bad". Putin called for balanced assessment of Stalin and said that "Stalin was not all good or bad".
Katyn massacre[+] of up to 22.000 Polish army officers found in several mass graves in 1943 is blamed by NATO countries on Stalin and the Soviets, which is part of NATO propaganda. Let's not forget that the Chairman of NATO in 1961–1964 was a former Nazi officer and Hitler's Chief of Staff during WWII, Adolf Heusinger[+][+]! After the WWII, NATO & Nazis not just worked together against the Soviets but were one and the same. NATO secretely released all Nazi war criminals convicted in the farce called the Nuremberg trials, which took place in the zone of American occupation[ꚛ] – most of them were released in a matter of couple years and all of them by 1958, when the Landsberg prison[+] that held convicted Nazi war criminals was emptied and closed. The courts at Nuremberg served as classrooms from which the German people would emerge redeemed and ready to participate in American-style democratic politics which was highly anti-communist. By legal statute governing the American occupation in Germany, Americans had the absolute authority to alter the sentences of the Nuremberg war criminals, which was entirely discretionary, so prioritizing politics over law, they released most of the convicted Nazi war criminals in the course of just a couple of years so as to use them for their anti-Soviet and anti-communist agenda. Former Nazi commanders were recruited to fight the common enemy, the communist Soviets, with Nazi command turning into NATO command.
Since 1943, Nazis blamed the Soviets for the massacre they did so as to antagonize the Poles against the Russians in their “divide and conquer” scheme, which worked and is working till this day. NATO continued that Nazi blame game and scheme. Stalin denounced the claims as German propaganda assuming that Nazis did it but it could have also been Ukrainian Banderites (Nazi collaborators), both of whom executed massacres on regular basis, unlike the Soviets - such an one off massacre by the Soviets makes no sense.
the pro-Western Polish government-in-exile and its underground armed forces in Poland were pro-Western and anti-communists, therefore were blaming everything on the communists or the Soviets or Russians like these days, too
during that fatal Warsaw uprising[+] in August – October 1944 (63 days) the Polish rebels were crushed and endured catastrophic casualties - 20.860 KIA & MIA, 5.000 wounded, 15.000 POWs, 150.000–200.00 civilians killed, 80–90% of Warsaw destroyed!!!
ungrateful[+] Ukraine – Ukrainians got from Stalin a huge chunk of land (Kresy), including Lviv city, but did not erect any monument to him. They should then return all the given land to Moscow, since they do not appreciate the gift. The whole area was part of Russian empire and Bolsheviks 1795-1921
That region – Kresy[+] and the superimposed Pale, in the former Polish and Lithuanian territories, had a Jewish population of over five million, and represented the largest community (40%) of the world Jewish population at that time.
Poland got lands[+] from Stalin – after taking back the area of Kresy, which Poland took away from Russia in 1922 (as Russia was going through a long Civil War), not to offend the Poles, Stalin compensated for their losses by giving them the eastern German lands, the Danzig Corridor, and Danzig itself. Even though the lands that Stalin gave to Poland are more valuable than what he took back from them, Poles demonize Stalin, as they are victims of NATO propaganda, which brainwashed them into believing that Stalin teamed up with Hitler in 1939 to occupy Poland, which is of course nonsense, as we all know they were the enemies since the first day Hitler came to power in 1933.
Any truth-seeker and free-thinker who took the time to actually read the whole of The Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact (the type of pact that many countries made with Hitler, incl. Poland, the UK, France, Baltic states…) with its supplementary protocol on “the issue of delimiting the spheres of mutual interest in Eastern Europe” would realize that in it, there is not a single word that insinuates invasion or occupation of Poland! It was about security guarantees for Eastern Europe, whereby the Soviets tried to save those states from Nazi aggression! This supplementary protocol was “discovered” during farcical Nuremberg trials in which the Nazis collaborated with the soon-to-be NATO countries (please see explanation in footnote No.7). In 1939, USSR decided to make a non-aggression pact with Germany not to attack or occupy any further parts of Eastern Europe, including Eastern Poland where intention was to save Eastern Poland (where Ukrainians and Belarussian lived) from Nazi aggression, to acquire security guarantees! Warsaw’s hostile actions undermined the Soviet leadership’s trust toward Poland. The 1939 German-Soviet non-aggression Pact (also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) should always be considered in the context of the previously concluded Polish-German pact and partnership. Just the fact that Hitler and Stalin never ever bothered to meet (like Hitler met with Mussolini and even with British PM Chamberlain) should be enough of an evidence for bright people that they were not partners or colluding to invade and occupy Poland. Further evidence that Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact was insgnificant is the fact that Hitler did not even adhere to it as just 20 days later, on 11 September 1939, Nazis crossed[»] that line of the rivers Narev, Vistula and San, which meant that this pact had no value or meaning at all. But NATO gives guge significance to it as this is the only thing that they can use as some “evidence” proving that Hitler and Stalin had a pact. Imagine a pact between Ukraine and the US in which Zelensky and Biden never met - is this possible? Yet, the NATO spin doctors make it possible for the gullible NATO countries public to believe that Hitler and Stalin had a pact.
The three taboos: don't ask men how much they earn, don't ask women how old they are, and don't ask the Poles how they collaborated with Nazis from 1933-1938 and then provoked them into a war.
In the mid-1980s[+] Gorbachev ruined the Soviet economy[+], which was the second largest in the world. After Mikhail Gorbachev became the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and came to power in 1985, he began a process of economic liberalization by dismantling the command economy and moving towards a mixed economy
Lend-Lease[+] was a policy under which the United States supplied the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, France, China, and other Allied nations with food, oil, military equipment, and weapons between 1941 and 1945
the British main-stream-media outlet[»] accused Putin for allegedly telling no more than three lies as they could not find or come up with any more Putin's "lies"
Unlike the leaders of NATO countries and Ukraine, humanitarian Putin donated 200.000 tons (over $46 million worth) of grain to Africa - $232 per tonne as of 9 October 2023 (click here[+] for proof)
Putin wrote off 90% ($23 billion[+]) of Africa's and Cuba's debt with no strings attached but could have done what NATO countries do all the time - provide aid under certain conditions, such as he could ask them to offically recognize Crimea as part of Russia but he did no such thing!
the New York Times is a mouthpiece for the US Democratic Party, White House, globalists, and neocons. It is the flagship publication for liberal triumphalism; socially progressive. It used to endorse the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan