"There are more than 20,000 Starlink terminals in Ukraine, many of them used by the military. While some of them were donated by SpaceX, many are paid for by the US government, western allies or through crowdfunding"
archive.is

Why was the mainstream media lying about this all along, or is the guy in Poland lying just now?

Your link to supposed FT [archived] article doesn't show the article, but anyway, it's most likely very outdated (early 2022-2023), and you haven't been paying attention.

No one, except Musk, has been lying about this. First he was boasting about its use by Ukraine, trying to promote Starlink, so he claimed that he donated them; then he started complaining about "high costs" and required a payment and sent the bill to Pentagon; he also turned off Ukraine's service in Crimea region on a whim, after talking to "brother Putin" and deciding that he didn't "donate" them for "military/war purposes"... while Russians not only have been illegally using sanctioned terminals and services with impunity (they cannot be sold or activated in Russia due to crude "geofencing"), they also listened in and/or are jamming Ukrainian Starlink unencrypted services, making them a lot less effective.

www.washingtonpost.com - Russia's illicit Starlink terminals help power its advance in Ukraine - October 12, 2024

|------- Russian forces have become deadlier and more agile with the help of illicit Starlink terminals, allowing them to use satellite internet to enhance coordination during assaults... despite U.S. efforts to stop the flow of technology.

The issue has renewed Ukrainian frustrations over Elon Musk, SpaceX's mercurial chief executive. Some of the soldiers criticized Musk by name, saying his company has not done enough to crack down on illicit use and casting doubt on his desire to fix the problem, saying he appears to have favorable views toward Russia.

SpaceX provided free Starlink connection to Ukraine after Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022 but then threatened to cut service following online spats with diplomats, citing the high costs. Musk relented under public pressure and then sent the bill to the Pentagon... Musk was also widely condemned in Ukraine following reports he denied Kyiv's request to allow Starlink access for sea drones in a planned 2022 attack on Russia's Black Sea Fleet. ...
-------|

Starlink terminals and service in Ukraine have been [re-]purchased and paid for by Poland, as part of contribution to NATO's support for Ukraine.

Independently of this, UK and US are buying and using Starlink unencrypted commercial internet (e.g., Coast Guard, FEMA) and DoD is expecting to increase purchases to expand its PLEO satellite constellations as part of "Starshield" and Satcom 2029 programmes.

DoD currently buys Starlink's commercial internet service but by 2029 it plans to acquire more than 100 SpaceX encrypted and "hardened" for military use "Starshield" satellites that would be owned, controlled and operated by US government, as well as Satcom products and services from about 20 other vendors.

It's hard to keep track of who is lying now and who lied before.

Exactly, so don't rush to accuse people of lying, especially when you yourself are working off of very limited information and knowledge about the subject.
__________

www.politico.com - How politics hung up a $42B Biden internet buildout

Scraping the cheap Starlink deal, for a 10X cost solution. You people are idiots.

No one "scraped" the nonexistent "deal" - maybe because "Starlink deal" is not cheap at all, and only serves to enrich Elon, while "giving" people inferior "broadband" speeds at 3x-4x the price of much faster reliable fiber/fixed-wireless broadband they already have.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk approvingly reposted an X user who claimed that "for $42 billion they could have bought Starlink dishes for 140 million people."

How shamelessly nice of Elon to think that the government should enrich him by buying his terminals for 140 million households (which is more than actual households in the US, most of whom don't need it in the first place, since about 90% of population already have, and 95% are expected to have by the mid-2025, real broadband at same or much higher d/u speeds than Starlink), so he could start charging them 3x-4x for his "broadband" service! Look what he's done with eX-Twitter for "only" $44B.

Starlink or similar services are good in emergencies or where only satellite service will do, it's not competitive with HS broadband.

$400 why isn't the government giving it to the people?

Many non-profits have shipped more than 10k terminals and FEMA / local governments are giving them "for free" in affected areas, until internet service is restored.

Actually there was a program, called ACP, that was doing just that, at much cheaper cost and with very little management and bureaucratic waste. It temporarily provided $360/yr subsidy per low-income subscriber, which would help ISPs build out the broadband and/or provide more competitive services in more [rural] areas, where they now may have to buy expensive satellite or cell service.

This year the Republicans in Congress, at Trump's behest, "cancelled" / wouldn't extend ACP at a fraction of the cost of $42B they voted to allocate Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) in first place in 2021

www.forbes.com - this article is from last year, before ACP was "cancelled" in Congress.

"Tell me you don't understand technology financing without telling me you don't understand technology financing."
__________