My point is not that it clears all other organizations, but doesn't even mention one other. Which is an editorial choice.
edit: not only that, but also implies that the CIA actions are one-sided, as in other players were not trying to mess and do the same to harm the US in the same actions (let's say, Iran).
> but doesn't even mention one other. Which is an editorial choice.
That's some weird hot take on a 20 min video titled "The CIA is a Terrorist Organization". He's obligated to mention Moussad, KGB/FSB et al, because "both sides"?
Also last I checked, "we only did shady shit cause they did shady shit" isn't much os a defense anyway.
