In a recent article, Noah Carl drew attention to the list published by the Ukrainian Government of “speakers who promote narratives consonant with Russian propaganda”, saying that this “will be seen – even by those who fully support Ukraine – as an attack on the free press”. Given that I fully support Ukraine, and am also a co-founder of the Free Speech Union, I have something to say about this.
In helping to set up the Free Speech Union, I took inspiration from the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which through its jurisprudence is the pre-eminent exemplar for the protection of free speech around the world (even possibly going a bit too far in one or two areas). So my first thought was to consider whether the First Amendment would prohibit the U.S. Government from publishing a similar list of individuals whom it believed were promoting misinformation.
I think the answer is no. Essentially the ‘government speech doctrine’ gives the government and its representatives its own speech rights, and there was a recent case in which the Supreme Court unanimously approved the right of a community college board in Texas to censure an individual. It would be rather absurd if – even in an official speech – President Biden were unable to praise or criticise political allies and opponents. And since Ukraine is not sanctioning these individuals in any way, it would not amount to unequal treatment under the Fourteenth Amendment, and nor does such government censure of individuals remotely amount to a “bill of attainder”.
But it’s even simpler than that. It may have escaped most people’s attention, but all of the individuals listed by the Ukrainian Government are foreigners on foreign soil, so if this had been done by President Biden’s administration, the First Amendment wouldn’t apply to them anyway. And I would note that it seems possibly deliberate that the list excludes Ukrainians, since it doesn’t include Ivan Katchanovski, who would certainly meet the criterion for inclusion – although it also doesn’t list Aaron Maté, for instance. But the point is that you might as well accuse the Ukrainian Government of attacking Putin’s free speech rights: it’s absurd to suggest Ukraine has to stay silent because of free speech.
Of course, the U.S. Government can go even further than simply criticising foreigners: it can sanction foreign individuals with actual penalties, and without any kind of trial. Consider the Magnitsky Act. And to give the most extreme example, the U.S. government has even engaged in the extrajudicial assassination of those designated to be terrorists – even U.S. citizens – which definitely affected their free speech rights. I’m not trying to argue that case, but it’s illustrative of where the limits might lie.
However, that’s not what Ukraine is doing. And as noted, the protections afforded under the First Amendment are the best in the world, so if the U.S. Government could do what Zelenskyy has done and easily survive a First Amendment challenge, I don’t think this amounts to “an attack on the free press” – those individuals are not in any way being prevented from speaking, and there is (after all) an overriding state interest in time of war.
Another question posed by Noah is whether it’s good policy for Ukraine to publish such a list, suggesting it amounts to little more than “name-calling”. He suggests instead that they should “upload a document that refutes their arguments”. But it’s naive to think that would have any positive effect.
Having looked into many of the arguments being made “consonant with Russian propaganda”, and having seen how weak they are, I would oppose any of the resources of the Ukrainian Government being expended during a time of war to refute those tired arguments. One might as well have asked the U.K. Government to refute Lord Haw-Haw’s speeches during WWII. That’s not to say such refutations don’t exist: I’ve made criticisms of the arguments made by Jacques Baud (who’s on the Ukrainian ‘blacklist’) and Ivan Katchanovski – among others. But to these, answer came there none. And from Katchanovski, just a snarky tweet.
So it seems a bit much, while Russia is raping and murdering Ukrainian civilians, and while Ukraine is fighting for its very existence, for Noah to demand that Ukraine intellectually engage with its critics. At the end of his article on Katchanovski, he said: “If others believe that Katchanovski is mistaken, they must come forward and present their arguments.” Well, I did. So over to you, Noah.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Um, ‘arguments’ ??
Must have missed those. I’ll read it again.
And what happened to Lord Haw Haw, hmm?
It’s a hit-list, no more, no less.
What absolute complete and total twaddle. Just because you can do something doesn’t make it ok. The argument laid out here is threadbare – a poor grasp of morals and an even poorer understanding of the perilous position that free speech is in.
You obviously don’t understand the underlying principles of free speech, if you did, you would understand the importance of Ian Rons’ article.
At its core, the objective is to foster debate, not to stifle it. Rons is debating Carl and that’s a good thing, that’s what free speech is meant to facilitate.
You appear to be conflating your general opposition to Zelensky by aligning yourself with an argument that, as Rons points out, doesn’t hold water.
“I’ve made criticisms of the arguments made by Jacques Baud (who’s on the Ukrainian ‘blacklist’) and Ivan Katchanovski – among others. But to these, answer came there none. “
Ah what a lie!
There was a post that refuted your weak arguments but someone (you?) took it down.
There was a slew of comments below the line asking what happened…but to these, answer came none.
Your infatuation with the mainstream narratives on the Ukraine are really nauseating.
Someone (an author at ConservativeWoman) wrote a “Letter to the Editor” — mostly ad hom — in response to my Jacques Baud piece, which was duly published. She then wrote back to say that she never intended it to be published, so it was taken down at her request. That you would be so confident to accuse me of stating a lie, without knowledge or evidence, is telling.
But the ad hom is a consistent theme. I can see that and little else in your comment. Of course, it’s quite hard to argue that Ukraine can’t criticise its opponents, or that Ukraine is full of neo-Nazis, I suppose.
I did not address your arguments because I don’t disagree with them. It’s not an issue of free speech. It’s very strawmanny.
The more glaring issues concern the constant disinformation that comes out of Ukraine that is picked up by Western media uncritically.
Additionally, there is the elimination of political opposition parties and the silencing arrests and disappearing of dissenting views in Ukraine, while we laud this bunch of film producers in power led by an egomaniacal actor hellbent on not negotiating but forcing every man over the age of 18 to go into a slaughter that is completely unnecessarily exacerbated by Western cheerleaders deluded by propaganda on the field and off it.
Russia is winning has basically won and it’s far past the time to negotiate a cease fire and terms instead of sending weapons and trainers to keep this bloodbath going.
Oh and yes the military has been guided by Ukrainian Nazis. They aren’t all Nazis but the important ones are…
There are no Nazis in Ukraine for the very simple reason that this term refers to people organisatorically associated with the government of the third Reich or the NSDAP party, both of which ceased to exist 77 years ago. Technically, there may still be some people alive of were Nazis back in the day, but they’re likely in the 90+ – 120 age bracket and close to their deaths. They’re certainly not leading military units in Ukraine.
The reason why this bloodbath is kept going is not that the Ukrainian government is allowed to buy weapons in the hope that it might eventually repeal the Russian invasion onto its territory or at least keep containing it. It’s kept going because they Russian troops are still there and still fighting against Ukrainian troops. They can withdraw at any time. They could have avoided invading to begin with.
‘Ukraine is full of neo-Nazis’
Ukraine doesn’t have to be full of Neo Nazis for them to command disproportionate influence. True for any radical movement in any country and the reason US is happy to use them/radicals as it sees fit. Isn’t that a fact which has been proven many times before? certainly, the daily sceptic would know that?
Going back to Ukraine, there is a video of a far right leader saying on camera that be it not for them, Maidan would have never succeeded as they had done 90% of ‘the work’. that’s how minority commands disproportionate influence. Another example is when you tell your presidents that if they make peace with separatists they’d be hung by the neck on the nearest tree (Hint, also Ukraine).
Whether or not Ukraine is full of people you chose to label neonazis (or Trump supporters or shapeshifting reptiles or whatnot) doesn’t matter in the slightest. You’re not God and you haven’t been called to judge people on alleged merits (or lack thereof) of their innate souls.
you comment is weak. firstly, I didn’t say Ukraine was ‘full’ of neo nazis, but rather that they’re a minority with disproportionate influence. Ian implied in his comment that anyone who disagrees with ‘good peaceful Ukraine and barbaric Russia’ narrative somehow deluded thinking that Ukraine is full of Nazis.
Secondly, take any MSM article about Ukraine Nazi problem prior to Feb 2022 of which there are many, including tweets of US democrats (hardly Trump supporters) and you’ll see that this is the term which is used to describe Ukrainian situation.
You’re not God and you haven’t been called to judge people on alleged merits (or lack thereof) of their innate souls.
Who are you to judge Russians then?
I didn’t write anything about the hidden nature of Russian and this labelling is – as I already wrote – irrelevant regardless of how many people the label is applied to.
nothing about hidden nature of Ukrainians in my post. just that the country is (was prior to Feb 2022) famous for having openly neo nazi people, although minority. If you displayed any of such symbols or views anywhere in Europe or US, you’d be banned, cancelled and/or even arrested that’s for certain. that’s why there were so many articles and videos from pretty much every MSM outlet about this problem in Ukraine.
As for me personally, i’d prefer Russia never invaded even if there is an openly neo nazi movement. What concerns me is that the west made negotiations impossible on the false premise that Putin must be delusional and mad citing nazis because there aren’t any.
I won’t venture a guess on how many Ukrainian citizens enjoyed Bandera marches and intimidating nazi battalions, but something tells me that a lot were against that especially because Soviets suffered from nazism more than any other country.
Here’s another opportunity for posting a comment devoid of any content save repeating ukrainian nazis for a couple of times.
there are a lot of content if you bother to check.
how about playing a game of matching MSM stories about countries’ nazi problem. you go first, post an article about other than Ukraine.
I wouldn’t be holding up US foreign policy as any kind of benchmark. What they have done on occasion is reprehensible but they have gotten away with it because they are the worlds preeminent superpower.
The Lord Haw Haw case is a good example however, the right to free speech does not include giving cheerleaders for you enemies the right to undermine your own cause.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/16/afghanistan-money-biden-white-hosue-us
To take Afghan money to pay grieving Americans in order to punish the Taliban is nothing less than larceny as collective punishment….($7 billion)
https://inf.news/en/world/d8e2546eeacf4fda2fb4d90e9e8c43fb.html
Stealing Syrian wheat and smuggling oil quietly, the US military began to openly plunder the resources of northern Syria
Presumably this is OK, firstly because it MUST be mis-information because it’s not in the Telegraph, secondly because they are the USA and they cannot be accused of wrong-doing..democratic country, white hats and all that, and thirdly, in this instance an occupying force has every right to attack and occupy and then plunder a sovereign nation? (As long as it’s not Russia or China)….because The West…..different rules.
no other than ‘the daily sceptic’ which was set up to challenge all sorts of propaganda and to promote free speech now endorses smear campaign of the people just for daring to think differently. How sad and ironic.
Mearsheimer is a Russian propagandist? Seriously? That’s looking like the beginning of the end of ‘The Daily Sceptic’ for me as tomorrow I expect to see stories about ‘The Ghost of Kiev’ and ‘evacuation’ of Neo Nazis from Mariupol.
I think it’s good for DS to publish differing views on Ukraine. There should be debate.
we don’t need DS to tell us the main view on Ukraine, which is about good and peaceful country attacked unprovokedly by barbaric Russia who’s bombing and raping indiscriminately. For that you go to CNN with their clever ‘unaffiliated’ consultants and experts. Whatever they or saint Zelensky say or do must be true and good and whoever disagrees must be smeared and potentially destroyed.
Also, how does DS promote differing views with their support of all kinds of blacklisting and smear campaigns only god knows
Well while I disagree with Ian Rons on this, he works for DS/FSU and is prepared to engage and I think deserves a voice, and of course people are free to dispute what he says in the comments. I’m no expert on the Ukraine but would like to think his arguments are a cut above the default “Russia bad” stuff you get most of the time.
I will get a few more downvotes for this, but I would also welcome the odd piece from pro-lockdown, pro-vaxx people on the site provided they are prepared to engage and go beyond stupid name-calling. It helps to hone ones arguments. One of the most frustrating things is the near-total refusal of any of my ex-friends, acquaintances and work colleagues to engage.
black listing people with different opinions is non other than name-calling. as well as endorsing such actions.
This is a false dichotomy. Rejecting the Russian propaganda doesn’t imply accepting the American one. It’s a safe bet that Russian troops on Ukrainian territory are indeed committing so-called atrocities because this happens in all wars and on all sides. After a war, the atrocities committed by the winning party end up as sad but necessary (think about the image of the burned out school bus on a bridge in some Balkan town after NATO bombardement) and those committed by the losing side become crimes against humanity.
atrocities happening in all wars and on all sides
this will not buy you the consent required for the prolonged and bloody proxy war, a goldmine for the MIC. For the average Joe to pass his money to Raytheons and become considerably poorer as a result, he needs to be convinced that atrocities are the things which only russians do. You need denisovas making up stories about solders raping children
Mearsheimer is a Russian propagandist?
Considering that he’s spreading (among other things) scare stories about Putin throwing nukes out of his pram when we do anything which might cause him to get a trantrum regardless if this makes any sense or not because Putin’s just mad in his anger and Mearsheimer privy to such secret knowledge, if he isn’t a Russian propagandist, he’s as good a simulation of one as we’ll ever get to know. He’s the American counterpart to this guy from the Russian parliament who’s also mouth-nuking all of the world all of the time, even with weapons which don’t yet exist.
There is nothing hysterical or irrational in what Mearsheimer says about Ukraine. I suggest you watch his famous lecture if you haven’t done yet. And then, if you disagree, rather then smearing, argue your case.
We are all familiar how people were blacklisted when questioning lockdowns, inferior natural immunity, vaccines preventing virus spread, etc, etc.
Paraprhasing the guy himself: The realities of the situation in Ukraine don’t matter, all that matters is what Putin believes about the situation. He must (wrongly) believe it threatens the very existence of Russia hence he’s going to NUKE YOU ALL REAL SOON NOW UNLESS YOU DO HIS BIDDING !!!!
I’m sorry, but there’s nothing to argue with nonsensical threats like this. If Putin’s indeed stark raving mad, he might NUKE US ALL at any time and there’s nothing we can do about it. But I consider him a rational actor trying to achieve something he believes to be benefical for Russia with means suitable to accomplish that. And Mearsheimer is one of these means.
the situation in Ukraine does matter. and the situation is that the US has been using the country to destabilize Russia and to topple Putin (numerous US officials saying exactly that on record before Feb 2022). Toppling Putin might be a good cause, but then US should have done it themselves risking their own lives and destruction of their cities. It’s pathetic that a 3rd country and its citizens are used.
If you’re not toppling Putin yourself, then it’s reasonable to consider doing what Mearsheimer suggests: leaving Ukraine alone, making it neutral, investing in and developing it. it makes total sense. A neutral and developed country on the Russian border, like Finland, has never been invaded by Putin.
‘Russia is raping and murdering Ukrainian civilians’
While civilians dying is a tragedy in any conflict, be it Northern Ireland, Iraq, Palestine, Yemen and numerous other w/o any Russian involvement, do you care to substantiate the claim of systematic rapes by Russian solders? If your source is the Ukrainian ombudsmen Denisova, then I’m afraid she had been fired by the parliament as her fantasies were too much even for Ukraine.
Ukraine is/was murdering its own civilians in the east of the country. Even if they’re Russian separatists, it’s somehow ok?
….yes..I’m convinced no innocent people died during the indiscriminate carpet-bombing in Iraq..there were no deaths or bodies in the MSM so it didn’t happen..right?
Try searching for Ukrainian war crimes…you won’t find any, even though there have been independent reports from unaffiliated reporters….….and we all know those non-gnatzi’s are kind considerate fluffy bunnies, and those video’s of them torturing Russian Soldiers, just mis-information…..whereas anything Ukraine reports, even unverified by any independent evidence must be the whole truth and nothing but!
yes, it looks like the history of military interventions started in Feb 2022 with Russia invading Ukraine. It had never been attempted before by any country. w/o normalizing it, of course, but it’s just what happens sometimes and to know the ‘way out’ you need to know the ‘way in’.
it’s of course become difficult to find anything other than praise and admiration for Ukraine and Zelensky, but not impossible. And surely after 5 months of becoming poorer with each and every day due to the support of this holy war of good against evil ordinary folks would venture past the 3rd page of google search results? surely?
Love it! Exactly….bad men only appeared in February, and they only come from Russia….. the fact that next door, in Syria, the US are occupying part of that sovereign (trade mark!) country, while stealing their oil and harvest elicits nothing from the MSM?….
Hahaha ……where to start….?
Let’s start with the banning of public displays of the letters Z and V, because really that’s not slightly nuts is it…?
Then let’s Segway straight to the banning of all opposition parties, including the largest, For Life, can’t have the pesky electorate having any options, or a platform for any dissent can we? And it’s just so what we do in Democratic countries..right?
Then let’s go to the banning of all media that isn’t (z)‘Elensky’ verified.
In fact when he banned the ‘opposition media’ he did indeed pose SANCTIONS on editor-in-chief, Ihor Huzhva of Strana.ua……Ukrainian Lawyers have criticised these measures for their “lack of legal basis”. This decision comes only six months after closing down three TV channels in early 2021. The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU), also called this extrajudicial action a threat to press freedom and media pluralism in the country.
Ukraine’s Media Legislation has also been under fire in the EU…..
“The coercive regulation envisaged by the bill and in the hands of a regulator totally controlled by the government is worthy of the worst authoritarian regimes. It must be withdrawn. A state that would apply such provisions simply has no place in the European Union,” insisted EFJ General Secretary Ricardo Gutiérrez.
Then let’s go to the recent sacking (banning) of long time friends, Prosecutor General Irena Venediktova, and SBU Head, Ivan Bamako, plus the 651 criminal proceedings that have been registered…
The reason…anti-Ukrainian collaborators…LOL!
Then this weeks pure theatre of the Vogue shoot…Caitlin Johnson says it better than I ever could….
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/the-phoniest-most-pr-intensive-war of all time.
The fact is that even if you think that Ukraine is the victim of Russian aggression it does not mean that it should be given a blank cheque when it comes to assessing its actions…..
Keep up the entertainment Mr Rons it certainly brightens my morning when I see people twisting themselves into knots by turning what is patently undemocratic authoritarian hogwash into a ‘whitewash’…
It
The banning of strana.ua isn’t really defensible from a free speech perspective, but they believed and it’s almost certainly true that it was simply a thinly-veiled Russian disinformation outfit, and so in that sense it’s not much different from Ofcom (eurgh!) banning RT for being a state-controlled actor. As for the proposed law you cite, as far as I’m aware that was never passed, and it won’t be now that Ukraine is an EU candidate.
As for banning of public displays of the letters Z and V, you have to remember the country is under martial law, and those are insignia of the enemy. People are also banned from photographing military equipment and personnel, and there are curfews in place. Both of those are clear restrictions of freedom of expression, freedom of movement, etc. – but necessary. Do you oppose conscription during wartime? That’s a big restriction on personal liberty.
The banning of the For Life political party is also based on martial law, and it’s no different from what the British government did to the BUF in 1940 under Defence Regulations. Things change a lot during wartime. But Russia is a barbarous, totalitarian, terroristic state which you seem to mind as much, and in your previous comments it’s clear you simply accept their propaganda without question — and you don’t criticise Russia. I’d ask you a couple of questions: can you condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine? And: Is it a war, and not a “special military operation”?
Baloney…..and exactly what I said, talking in a rational way but making convoluted irrational points. If we were at war, do you think for a minute the Conservatives would ban all opposition parties…? No they would not, it would not be thought to be acceptable and it would be seen as the authoritarian action it would be if they did…it would be unacceptable in any true democracy.
As for the Z and V..pathetic, I hope no one uses them (with Y) as variables in maths in a public place….OMG!
I would appreciate if you could elucidate why you think Russia is barbarous, totalitarian, and terroristic….is this unlike any other country on earth? How do you think Afghans and Iraqis view the West? Is this a new thing, just invented by Russia?
While of course the US and UK are allied with Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, both of whom have recently taken part in bombing raids ( on sovereign countries…but one’s that don’t count, apparently)…a Yemeni genocide just isn’t as exciting I guess…
I never mention Russia, or very rarely, in my comments, (and which bit do you think is actual propaganda?)….as my comments are usually about the naivety and breathtaking sanctimonious and holier than thou attitude of people like you pretending you are on some righteous moral crusade while in fact you are just as guilty of promoting the lies, propaganda and hypocrisy of ‘the West’….
So you’re not willing to (a) call it a war, or (b) condemn it. Interesting.
Russia is liberating the people in Eastern Ukraine from Kiev persecution.
Yep. In pretty much the same way Russia liberated the peoples of eastern Europe from Nazi persecution in the past. Granted, they ended up being violently suppressed by Russia for almost fifty years, but that was only for their own good! Sort-of anti-nazi corona measures, so to say.
..and you are not willing to admit you believe in free speech but only
with caveats….which isn’t free speech at all…
also I’m not in a ‘I love Russia’ outfit, posting on line…pretending I’m something I’m not while you are defending the oppression of the freedom of the press.!!
as someone famously said on why supporting Ukraine and not Yemen: ‘I just don’t like the colors on their flag.’
We all know how the internet is used to spark conflagrations. First the list gets published and circulated, then protestors go after the listed people’s employers and other sources of revenue, the writers get blacklisted, their home addresses get leaked online and protestors turn up outside their homes and threaten their relatives. Eventually someone gets a gun and tries to kill them and the blacklisted person is forced into hiding.
Ukraine is a corrupt, failed state overrun by Neo-Nazis. That doesn’t justify a Russian invasion in itself, but viewing this is a black-and-white, good-vs-evil conflict is disingenuous. The Ukrainians are simply very good at playing the internet game. We should have left them and Russia to duke it out and not got involved, which would like have avoided much unnecessary loss of civilian lives. We’re simply seeing two corrupt governments at war with each other and we side with either bad guy at our own peril.
The Ukrainians are simply very good at playing the internet game
they are not better than anyone else, just that they have the might of the western MSM and the big tech behind them
I’m a bit alarmed/puzzled that someone who works for the FSU thinks the US First Amendment might go too far. I tend to think that free speech rights tend to get trampled on so the more absolute they are, the better.
As far as it being unreasonable for us to expect Ukraine to engage in debate with its critics, I sort of get your point but equally as a UK taxpayer I am going to be more supportive of spending our blood and treasure in Ukraine if I think they have a good case (though I would agree it’s up to the UK Govt in the first instance to make that case to me, the voter).
I was talking about the jurisprudence, not the amendment: specifically, the evolution of libel law following New York Times v. Sullivan. That case, which was a huge win for the cause of civil rights, has been criticised from the conservative/libertarian end of the political spectrum, not only by Glenn Reynolds but also by Richard Epstein, and in the USSC Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. I don’t take a strong position on it, but I’d note that there’s now an odd distinction between people who are public figures (not necessarily public officials) and those who aren’t. The English law of defamation is arguably preferable, as it doesn’t make such artificial distinctions, it limits damages – gone are the days of wild judgements – and no longer allows “libel tourism”, although it’s still probably way too expensive. Reputation is of course a kind of property right, which can be permanently damaged with severe consequences for the individual – in fact false and defamatory statements can be a form of “cancel culture”. In sum, free speech is not terribly easy to define, especially when you bring in such things as libel, obscenity (e.g., certain types of pornography, or pornography in the wrong place), criminal speech like arranging a murder, etc.
“New York Times v. Sullivan”
Thanks. I was not aware of that case. Having skim-read it, I would agree with Justice Thomas (as usual).
I agree it can be hard to define free speech, but tend to think that the well-established legal limitations on it, some of which you list, are more or less where we should stop, and everything else, including stuff people find “hateful”, has to be allowed.
Yes, I think we’re on the same page there, although there are other areas of speech I could mention (privacy/confidentiality, public nuisance, “fighting words”, etc.) where it can get quite tricky, but the First Amendment and related jurisprudence gets it right in almost all cases, the only other one being that it’s not good on public nuisance/indecency, which has been great for Scientologists harassing ex-members in public or strippers who want to perform in public places, but otherwise the US is a shining city on a hill when it comes to freedom of speech (not to mention the rest of the “Bill of Rights”) – and it’s therefore superficially surprising that groups like FIRE even need to exist there, but that’s unfortunately because whatever the law says, it’s mostly about culture and mores. But in terms of law, the more we can do to get towards 1stA standards, the better. It’s a shame that’s super hard to do with our parliamentary system.
Indeed, and our proposed “bill of rights” is full of weasel caveats to the freedom of speech clause, citing public safety etc.
Oh dear you support Ukraine and quote Russians as murdering and raping? You know nothing about the truth!
…obs he wanted a job at the Telegraph, and ended up here! LOL!
Is Ian Rons going to do a review of Zelensky’s recent photo feature in Vogue? It strikes me that appearing in a photoshoot for Vogue magazine is exactly the kind of thing a serious, embattled war leader would find time for, and I’m sure it’s worked wonders for his credibility at home and abroad. I’m certain his front line troops in the Donbass will have appreciated it too.
LOL! Even better than his appearances at the Oscars and Glastonbury! It’s not as if it’s all theatre is it??
Maybe don’t try and justify censorship via pushing tired lies about rape -even Zelensky had to fire one of his ministers over this
Zelensky and his muse were covered by Vogue and interviewed by Piers Morgan. A total fraud leading his country to oblivion
http://www.ukcolumn.org you should give it a go Ian you might even learn something.