Global Governance and technocracy

So Google remove's anything that's contrary to globalist narrative and replaces it with propaganda, while "Fact check" is a straight up slander machine, with little to nothing to back up their contra statements. Wikipedia has also evolved into a globalist slander machine, in the same mold as 'Fact check".
They simply throw in the words "discredited", "controversial", "conspiracy theory" "misinformation", disinformation, "false" and "right-wing extremist" to paint a negative picture.

That's quite the report.  Definitely something new to think about.  I'm also thinking probably not too far from the truth.  Unfortunately.

Title of thread should be global governance and idiocracy. Because anywhere we have government, we have idiocy. Either in the people running the government or the people believing in the government. I keep seeing people posting everywhere about incompetence, or corrupt, or complacency in government. The balloon saga is also being pinned on such attributes. Yes, the greatest military on earth can't identify a balloon over its territory and is "news" because people are really, really bad at their jobs.

Once peasants understand that government isn't really bad at their jobs, but actually doing their jobs very well, then the peasants will start to understand. Until then the peasants must beleive the news is real.

As the Ron Paul article points out, Russia didn't suddenly invade. Now this is a bit of a stretch because people need longer than a 6 month memory span. There has been civil war in Ukraine since the western hedgemony overthrow the Ukrainian government in 2014. Some people don't like their governments being overthrown by a foreign power and puppet servants installed, and so that leads to violence.

So to understand if Russia invaded Ukraine the first question for anyone to answer is whether or not there has been civil war in Ukraine. Yes or no?

If yes, then what that means is it is civilians against a military. In this case it would mean Ukrainian government assets were indeed killings its civilians for many years already. So the next question is, as a bystander, which party do you think should be given victory to stop this?

Realism means we just can't appoint a Victor. That's not how it works. So realism says if you have an opportunity to lend aid, which side do you support?

It really comes down to that.

If Russia suddenly invaded in the last 2 years for no reason then I suppose you put your support behind the innocent Ukrainian government assets. However, if a foreign power seized power over your country a decade ago, and civilians are upset over the whole affair and being slaughtered in defense of their beleifs, who do you support.

I do notice our "news" likes to create a narrative as if history started in 2020. History goes back more than 2 years, can even go back 10 years, some say present day events can be tied to past generations. So it is curious our "news" likes to tell you what to think without actually talking about history. Except of course for racism, that goes back centuries and still leads to events of today. Inflation is another thing that suddenly started happening two years ago, funny how that happens.

The Nord stream pipeline 'sabotaged by Russia' claim doesn't make any sense at all.
Why would Russia blow up it's own billion dollar pipeline when they could simply shut off a valve instead?
Why would they do that then spend millions trying to fix it again in an extremely difficult, high-risk working environment?
What possible benefit could it be to them to get offside with the whole of western Europe? Why would they risk that?

Great! Biden and Zelensky (A demented Fool and a Madman) leading us into WW3! God help us!...and why does Biden walk like he has a carrot up his ass! I mean, I knew they were close, but surely not that intimate?

It tracked well south of Ohio as far as I know.