Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:58 am Post subject:
And it's gold reserves spirited out of the country by the Empire! _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Three years ago this week, dozens of people, protesters and police alike, were gunned down in Kiev by mysterious snipers, leading to intensified pressure against authorities and culminating in the Maidan coup. Three years on, ex-Prime Minister Mykola Azarov has compiled his take on the snipers' identity. But Kiev is trying to destroy the evidence.
This week, tens of thousands have taken to the streets of Kiev to mark the third anniversary of the Maidan protests, which began in November 2013 and culminated in the ouster of unpopular but democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych on February 22, 2014. The 2014 protests erupted after Yanukovych delayed the signing of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and began negotiations on joining the Eurasian Economic Union instead.
In the course of about a month of clashes in central Kiev, which reached their peak between February 18 and February 20, 2014, over 130 people, including 18 police officers, were killed, many of them shot by sniper fire.
After taking power, the new government blamed the deaths on Yanukovych, Berkut riot police, and even Russian intelligence. The former president denied giving any orders to fire on the protesters. Other former government officials and anti-Maidan activists maintained that the snipers were not affiliated with the police or other security forces, pointing to numerous flaws that were found in Kiev's own case against Berkut. Critics of Kiev's version also pointed out that no one was ever charged with killing the police who died on Maidan, including the 13 officers killed at the peak of the violence.
Critics also pointed to the leaked phone call between then EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet during the crisis; Paet told Ashton that snipers had killed both police and protesters, and complained that the new authorities didn't seem particularly keen on investigating what actually happened. Medical personnel speaking to German media in the weeks that followed also said that the wounded from both police and protesters had the same kind of bullet wounds.
On the eve of the third anniversary of Yanukovych's ouster, Mykola Azarov, who served as Ukraine's prime minister until his resignation in January 2014, offered a grim reminder of who he firmly believes to have been responsible for the Maidan massacre.
In a detailed post on his Facebook page on Tuesday, complete with photo and video evidence, Azarov dropped a bombshell, writing that "today we, and investigators in Kiev as well, have reliable information about the fact that the murders on the Maidan were carried out by special groups of snipers from Georgia, the Baltic countries and Poland, under the guidance of instructors from France and Germany."
These groups, Azarov said, "were provided with cover and diversionary actions by shooters from the 'Maidan Self-Defense' group under the direction of [Andriy] Parubiy and [Serhiy] Pashinsky," the former now serving as speaker of Ukraine's parliament, and the latter an MP and former interim head of the presidential administration.
#Parubiy, the #Euromaidan #RightSector sniper unit commander, guilty of killing dozens of people. Also now a #Ukrainian parliament chairman. pic.twitter.com/PVEkSDZ4uS
— Sergey Bobkov (@sbobkov) 15 ноября 2016 г.
Going into more detail, Azarov explained that "the Georgian group, consisting of 10 people, was placed in the Conservatory building [which overlooks Maidan Square]. The identities of three of them have been confirmed by photographs taken by Ukrainian Security Forces staff, and it has been established that they are Georgian nationals. On February 20, [2014] this group divided into two. One of them fired from the Conservatory Building, the other from the Hotel Ukraine Building."
"It is also assumed that a third group of professional shooters was involved in the mass killings, who in the space of only 30 minutes shot over 50 people in cold blood from the building on Gorodetsky street and were immediately moved out of the area," the ex-politician added.
Reminder: Kiev.2014
The Snipers, led by Parubiy. Still no one is punished. pic.twitter.com/Vij77YTVDf
— Марина Саакян 🇷🇺 (@marina_saniram) 1 декабря 2016 г.
Unfortunately, Azarov lamented that Secretary of the National Defense Council Oleksandr Turchynov, Pashinsky, Minister of Internal Affairs Arsen Avakov, Paruby, and ex-Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk, all of whom were appointed to their positions following the coup, "have done everything they could to destroy evidence and people's testimony. An attempt was made to place the blame for the massacre squarely on Yanukovych and the Burkut riot police."
Arsen avakov ordered the maidan sniper attacks https://t.co/6MTEUD8vlZ watch as his henchmen are caught red handed pic.twitter.com/2CYOPJaVoR
— KGB agent B.hamill (@baz2000) 1 июня 2015 г.
"However, after three years, even the biased investigators have proven unable to prove the unprovable. 'The blood of the innocent people who died is on the conscience of the criminals who seized power in Ukraine', and this is an indisputable fact," Azarov added.
Azarov is obviously not the first former Ukrainian official to suggest that opposition-hired snipers were involved in the February 2014 killings. Late last year, Mykola Dulsky, who was a member of the radical nationalist organization 'White Hammer' during the Maidan, accused Pashinsky, Parubiy and Avakov directly of coordinating the Maidan snipers. Revealing that his group of radicals was charged with taking the roof of Hotel Ukraine, Dulsky said that there were unidentified snipers on the roof, including a man who spoke with an accent of one of the Baltic countries.
In December, Pashinsky tried to brush off the footage showing him driving around with a sniper rifle in his trunk in central Kiev in February 2014, saying that he was carrying the weapon for self-defense.
Clip from an independent report showing Pashinsky driving through Maidan with a sniper rifle in the trunk of his car.
This week, opposition figures and radical nationalist fighters have taken to the streets of Kiev again, calling on the government to resign and accusing authorities of corruption and criminal behavior.
If evidence about the snipers being hired guns for the authorities who illegally took power in February 2014 is confirmed, it would be a severe blow to the shaky foundations on which the current government already rests. "Justice," Azarov stressed, "is inevitable, and these crimes have no statute of limitations."
In the three years since the Maidan coup, Ukraine has faced a continual crisis on all fronts, including civil war in the Donbass, a 17% decline in its gross domestic product, a soaring national debt approaching 80% of GDP ($72 billion US), and a dramatic rise in crime. Utility prices have more than doubled over the past two years.
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
In early 2014 I was sent this letter when Maidan was winding down. It was a young Russian woman in Kiev who wrote exactly what was going on. NO ONE would publish it that first year. It wasn't until 2015, a year later, I finally was able to publish it here. It will make a lot more sense now that the threat of fascism and a coup is real and upon you. Her identity had to be scrubbed. It is authentic and compelling on its own. It reads like Anne Frank.
A Simple Letter from a Girl
"Unfortunately, I had to close all posts in my VK(VKontakte) about Maidan (they aren't erased, but now are visible only to me) because after the Maidan "victory" in Kiev the real nightmare began. About that, people prefer not to speak because they are very much afraid. There are militants everywhere.
My co-worker was beat in front of the entrance to her apartment for writing anti-maidan posts in her VK page. How did they find her? No one knows. She is intensive care and at the first mention of that event, you can't appease her tears.
At school the other day, my neighbor's boy called his parents on a break by the mobile phone and spoke with them in Russian. His schoolmates took away his phone and broke it. They broke his bag, tore all his textbooks and note-books, and then beat the child. They demanded he speak only Ukrainian or "for the rest of his life be afraid because they will find and will cripple him". This is the 7th grade class.
From time to time on the streets it is possible to see this picture; As a person is approaching a group of people, the group asks questions: "Were you on Maidan? Do you support Maidan? " If both answers are "no" the group cruelly beats them and kicks them.
In Kiev now the majority of Russians and Russian-speaking people, initially and after Maida that did not support Maidan are compelled to remember the Soviet period when "even walls have ears" and to keep mum. Because we, unlike different regions have no chance of detaching from Ukraine.
In Kiev now, as many as speak in whispers at personal meetings are doomed. Here its already a totalitarian mode and probably will only get worse.
Everything is getting aggravated with that. For some reason a lot Russians, and Russian-speaking people were at Maidan and in every possible way helped Maidan's people.
Kiev is completely split. Here associating with Russians is impossible. They are now enemies in addition to Yanukovych. Its awful that this war( the gun battles that ended Maidan) is here. Such cruelty beating on absolutely peaceful people. Their only crime is that they dared to be against vandals and cheap swindlers of people.
Please, don't mention my nickname in context with this information. If people find and cripple people already for posts in VK, that truth very much frightens us, "especially women and mothers".
I asked for permission to publish the letter without mention of authorship and received the answer:
"If you publish, state objectively that externally Kiev leads a quiet, quiet life". But it is only a matter of visibility. Those who are joyful and complacent are for Maidan. Now it is their time.
All others are guarded and careful even with people they think they know. Russian and Russian-speaking people that haven't faced an atrocity as opponents of the Maidan simply try to be silent in public places. They try to not attract the aggression of madmen.
And those who already suffered from them or at least as much as I know about real cases, try hard to save their families and to be silent, silent, silent.
Therefore the "picture" of Kiev is quite safe, spring comes, and so on. Actually part (and not a small part!) of the city is in silent horror.
You cannot leave everything: Your work, your house, the proof you had a life- you can't throw it all away.
People hang on by the skin of their teeth. After all that has happened, they hope for any miracle. Though it is difficult even to assume now that anything can save the Russians in Kiev.
It is impossible to be silent. But the inhabitants of Kiev, which are Antimaidan, and faced atrocity won't write about it openly. Its the self-preservation instinct.
Those who aren't aware yet are in a kind of dark hope that somehow everything will be fine. I try to be very careful. Only here I decided to write this to you for some reason. Probably, because of trust and you are after all very far away""
Response from another person in Kiev during Maidan
"I read "The letter from Kiev". Everything is true" The author correctly wrote you can't drop everything and leave in one day. You won't get a new house and a new job in one day. It is necessary to simply hide. This is an absolutely awful feeling.
It is necessary not only to remember that the walls have ears, but you have to remind yourself to look like you are in a good mood. Rejoice that the spring sun is shining for example. After Maidan it is unhealthy to do otherwise. People are watching and looking for those that did not support Maidan. Laws no longer work here. The people are absolutely defenseless and left to the mercy of fate.
This was a fascist revolution. The most amazing and simply unreal thing is that people supported radicals and welcomed the created state of affairs. Here it is full of lawlessness. Intolerance to any point of view, intolerance on a racial, national, religious, and political convictions not in line with Maidan is a crime.
They started closing publishing houses such as"Ejenedelnik 2000" weekly, which never sympathized with Maidan, not in 2004(Orange revolution), and not now. There is the whole list of journalists, political scientists, sociologists who became persona non grata in Ukraine's information space.
The most ridiculous organization"stop censorship" first struggled with the dictator Yanukovych. Afterward they wanted every publisher that didn't agree with Maidan closed. No human rights activists or even "the reporters without borders" ever mentioned this, not one. I am feeling that is a dreadful dream the events."
Here openly I put it. It is fascism, ordinary fascism.
I live in Ukraine. For work I write content and optimize web based businesses across the globe for; organic search results, technical issues, and design strategies to grow their business. I used to be a large project construction specialist. (more...)
Related Topic(s): Censorship; Fascist; Militants; Nightmare; Radicals; Revolution, Add Tags
Comments Image Post Article Comment
These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.
OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
Connect with Facebook Connect with Twitter Register with Facebook Register with Twitter
Comment:
You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.
Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
Username
Password
Post Comment & Login
Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name
If registering, enter bio
I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)
Post Comment & Register
7 people are discussing this page, with 12 comments Post Comment
George Eliason
Become a Fan
Author 58313
(Member since Jan 10, 2011), 53 fans, 91 articles, 3 quicklinks, 622 comments, 2 diaries
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon
New Content
This is always what a coup means for somebody. Whether it's the intel community or anyone else behind it, this is what it's like.
America is swinging perilously close to this and the results don't vary much. Look at the Arab spring and name one example where the people won. Just one example?
Living with the fallout in Donbass has been amazingly difficult. Are you willing to do that?
Submitted on Tuesday, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:52:06 AM
Author 0 Add New Comment Share Comment
Reply To This Recommend (3+)
Flag Help
David William Pear
Become a Fan
Author 500873
Senior Editor
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Nov 29, 2014), 30 fans, 38 articles, 146 quicklinks, 1941 comments, 1 diaries
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon
Reply to George Eliason: New Content
George, I predict a lot more blood in the streets of the US before this is over. I better hurry up with my "fictional book" of how the US color revolution unfolds. Here is the plot:
Well organized and financed protests break out in the US and turn violent. Trump orders them repressed using militarized police that crush protesters. Hundreds of police and protesters are killed by professional snipers. The public begs for martial law to restore law and order. The military pulls a coup and Trump is arrested for crimes against humanity. He is either hung or rots away in a dungeon.
The military takes control of the government under Continuity of Government (COG) laws already in place. As soon as practical, new elections are called. The Fascist Party being the best organized, financed and controlling the ballot boxes wins the election by a landslide.
The new leader is Hillary Clinton or her clone. Monopolies get bigger, the US empire spreads to world domination, there is constant warfare and enemies everywhere, domestic and foreign.
The MIC makes record profits. Surveillance, cameras and spies are everywhere. Dissent is dealt with by heavy fines, home demolitions and long prison sentences. Privatized-militarized police, privatized prisons and privatized torture become the fasting growth industry in the world.
The people are told that democracy has been restored and they go back to shopping and eating Cheetos on the couch.
The End.
Submitted on Wednesday, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:05:04 AM[/b] _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
MOSCOW, April 23 (Xinhua) -- Russia is infuriated by the explosion of an OSCE special monitoring mission car in eastern Ukraine which could harm the peace process in the country, Russian Foreign Ministry said Sunday.
An employee of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was killed on Sunday when a vehicle of the OSCE special monitoring mission in Ukraine hit a landmine in eastern Lugansk region, local media reported.
"Deeply outraged by this cynical action...We call for a thorough and impartial investigation and bringing the perpetrators to justice," the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement published on its website, underlining the urgent need to ensure the security of OSCE monitors in the future.
Currently around 700 OSCE observers are deployed in Ukraine, with the majority of them monitoring the cease-fire between government troops and pro-independence insurgents.
The Russian Foreign Ministry warned that the peace process in the country might be at risk, noting that the circumstances of the incident indicates a high probability of "provocation aimed at undermining the settlement process of the conflict" in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine.
"It is obvious that such incidents and overall escalation of tension are beneficial to those who are not interested in implementing political, economic and humanitarian provisions of the Minsk package of measures," the statement read.
Two ceasefire agreements were reached in September 2014 and February 2015 respectively, aiming at ending the conflict in eastern Ukraine, which has been underway since April 2014, claiming some 10,000 lives. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:37 pm Post subject:
Ukraine governor Kolomoisky sacked after oil firm row
25 March 2015
From the section Europe Share this with Facebook Share this with Twitter Share this with Messenger Share this with Email Share Related
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32045990
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko has sacked Ihor Kolomoisky - the billionaire governor of the key industrial region of Dnipropetrovsk.
It comes after armed men suspected of links to Mr Kolomoisky briefly occupied the offices of a state-owned oil firm in the capital Kiev.
Mr Kolomoisky was reportedly unhappy after parliament passed legislation aimed at weakening his influence.
Correspondents say the dispute could affect the conflict in the east.
It triggered fears of a major showdown between the tycoon and the state.
Ultimatum
In a statement released early on Wednesday, Mr Poroshenko's office named Valentyn Reznichenko as the new acting governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region.
It also quoted the president as saying during the talks with Mr Kolomoisky that the region - a centre of heavy industry - should remain "a bastion of Ukraine in the east and protect the peace".
Mr Kolomoisky - who is estimated to be worth more than $2bn (£1.3bn) - has been widely credited with helping bring order in Dnipropetrovsk and halt the advance of pro-Russian rebels further to the east.
He is also financing a number of Ukrainian battalions fighting the separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk region.
His dismissal comes days after armed men suspected of acting on orders from the oligarch briefly seized the headquarters of the Ukrnafta energy company and its subsidiary UkrTransNafta.
The armed men - whom Mr Kolomoisky said were from a private security firm - left the buildings after an ultimatum was issued by the central government.
Mr Kolomoisky claimed the armed men had tried to ward off an illegal takeover of Ukrnafta, in which the tycoon has a 42% stake. The state owns the rest of the oil and gas giant.
This happened after Ukraine's parliament had approved amendments to a law on state-owned companies that experts said effectively removed Mr Kolomoisky's control over Ukrnafta. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:19 am Post subject:
'The accused in the May 2 case are acquitted': (Then two immediately re-arrested!):http://fact.international/
'Today, on September 18, the city court of Illichyovsk announced the verdict in the May 2 case. In the year of 2014 the Kiev regime accused their political opponents of organizing the riots in Odessa accompanied by the death of civilians. 19 people were under investigation for three years. Five of them spent all this time in pre-trial detention.
Today the court announced the verdict. Contrary to forecasts, the verdict was voiced in one day. In content, it became a verdict for the prosecutor’s office and investigators. The court consistently disassembled the prosecution’s arguments and showed its monstrous non-professionalism, political bias and irresponsibility.
First of all, the testimony of witnesses could not confirm the involvement of supporters of federalization in the organization of mass riots. Judges concluded that the key witness of the prosecution was dependent on the investigation. Therefore, he could stipulate the defendants, and his testimony may be unreliable.
Some of the evidence was found inadmissible. For example, it was the recognition of the accused Dolzhenkov on the part of the witness Posmichenko. During the identification, the investigator suggested that Pozmichenko point to the allegedly seen man among four photographs. On one of them was depicted Dolzhenkov, on the other two – famous Hollywood actors, and on the fourth – football player David Beckham. The court found this identification biased.
The court also found doubtful photo and video, shown as evidence. First, despite numerous demands, the prosecutor’s office did not provide the originals of the video, but only their edited versions. Secondly, on many videos one can not distinguish the faces of the persons depicted, and the prosecutor’s office could not prove that they were the accused men.
The protocols for the inspection of the incident scene are also recognized as inadmissible evidence, since they were drawn up by officials who did not have the authority to do so.
Further, the court noted that the examination of the bodies of the deceased was not carried out on the basis of the bodies examination results, but on certain medical documents drawn up by someone incomprehensible and on what grounds. Also, the court did not provide the results of the ballistic examination. No weapons were installed, from which the dead were fatally wounded, representatives of football fans were not questioned in court, law enforcement officers, although many of them were injured, were not represented as witnesses too. According to the judges, the investigation was not careful in the collection of evidence, so some of them could be lost.
Finally, the court found that the pretrial investigation was biased and dependent on the persons involved in the events. In particular, the judges point to the fact that supporter of the Kiev regime Khodiyak, who was accused of murdering supporters of federalization, stayed behind bars for two days, while supporters of federalization have been there for more than three years.
The court decision says of federalists: “There is not a single piece of evidence to support the prosecution. Moreover, the prosecution did not even try to prove the guilt.”
The court acquitted the accused due to lack of evidence of the charges and decided to release them in the courtroom.
However, the triumph of justice lasted no more than three minutes. Immediately after the announcement of the verdict, representatives of the prosecutor’s office and special services entered the courtroom. They expelled journalists and spectators from the courtroom. With closed doors, Dolzhenkov and Mefyodov were accused of separatism. They were again arrested.'
The Judge was very fair, but the State just rode roughshod over the Judgement and re-arrested two of the acquitted group. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'....It seems that Volker immediately flew to Kiev to make anti-Putin and anti-Russian attacks. This means that the earlier Volker - Surkov summit ended in complete failure, its continuation and the necessity itself - is under a big question.
Volker pursues the policy of his former patron John McCain on "global deterrence of Russia" by fomenting a war in the Donbass: this "peacemaker" never tires of repeating the need to supply arms to Ukraine, in parallel with demagoguery about the peacekeeping mission in the Donbass. Contrast once again, that Putin does not mention the role of Europe in this mission at all.
Volker, in the company of McCain, somehow needs a war in the Donbass before the New Year. Is it a strike against the upcoming presidential elections in Russia?
After all, when talking about arms shipments to Ukraine, Volker does not bluff: Washington has already prepared a package of documents for the supply of arms to the Bandera regime, it only remains to receive the signature of President Donald Trump.
For the president to sign it, McCain and Volker need an appropriate pretext, which can be the resumption of the war in the Donbass.
If the Ukrainian army exacerbates the situation in the Donbass, and it can only be done by some serious offensive operation - McCain and Congress will be able to press on Trump, and he will sign a package of documents on arms supplies, "in view of Moscow's resurgent aggression."
World fake media will prove this by their lies, an anti-Russian campaign in the US will accept it as truth without evidence. Trump will find it difficult not to sign this anti-Russian package of documents, considering the pressure he is under......'
'....In fact, the date for the launch of the putsch has already been fixed, it was announced by Saakashvili on November 7 - or Poroshenko will start the war on Donbass by November 7. Then the Saakashvili Maidan by the Rada and the putsch lose their relevance, for a time.
In any case, for Poroshenko there is to be either a war in the Donbass, or in Kiev, and not a mythical peacekeeping operation.....'
'.....Any actual removal of Igor Dodon from power would threaten both the citizens of Moldova, who will be absorbed by Romania and NATO, and the people of Transnistria, for whom the risk of a resumed war only heightens under such circumstances. As things stand, NATO and Ukrainian troops are already holding joint military exercises near Transnistria’s borders, and both NATO and Ukraine are interested in involving Russia in a new war far from its borders.
Russian peacekeepers are, after all, still stationed in the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic. A seizure of Transnistria and the death of Russian peacekeepers is impermissible. To a certain extent, such would mean a repeat of the situation in South Ossetia when, as a result of a Georgian attack, 15 Russian peacekeepers were killed, thus setting the stage for Russia to go to war against Georgia and its Western allies.....' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
By Washington's Blog
Global Research, November 17, 2017
Washington's Blog 16 November 2017
Snipers Fired At BOTH Police and Protesters In Ukraine
Remember the protests in Ukraine which led to the old leader being replaced?
If you’ll recall, the ruthless slaughter of people by snipers was the event which turned world opinion against the Ukrainian President, and resulted in him having to flee the country.
Italy’s 11th largest newspaper – Il Giornale – reported on an admission by several of the snipers (Google translation):
“Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. It went on for fifteen, twenty minutes. We had no choice. We were ordered to shoot both on the police and the demonstrators, without any difference. I was totally outraged.
“So Georgian Alexander Revazishvilli remembers the tragic shootout of 20 February 2014 in Kiev when a group of mysterious snipers opened fire on crowds and cops massacring over 80 people. That massacre has horrified the world and changed the destiny of Ukraine by forcing President Viktor Yanukovich accused of organizing the shootout. But the massacre also changed the fates of Europe and our country, triggering the crisis that will lead to sanctions against Putin’s Russia. Sanctions revealed a boomerang for the Italian economy (Watch the video ).
Revazishvilli’s confessions and two other Georgians – gathered by writers in the documentary “Ukraine, the hidden truths” aired tonight at 23.30 on Matrix, Channel 5 – reveal a different and disconcerting truth. The truth of a massacre and the same opposition that accused Yanukovych and his Russian allies. Revazishvilli and his two companions – met and interviewed in the documentary – are a former member of the security services of former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and two former militants of his party. Hired in Tbilisi by Mamuka Mamulashvili, Saakashvili’s military adviser, are tasked with supporting – along with other Georgian and Lithuanian volunteers – ongoing demonstrations in Kiev in return for a $5,000 final fee.
***
The following day, Mamulashvili and the leaders of the protest explain to volunteers who will face a police assault at the Conservatory building and at the Ukraine hotel. In that case – he says – we must shoot at the square and sow the chaos. But one of the protagonists confesses to having received another explanation, much more comprehensive. “When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. Things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting – he replied that we can not go to the pre-election presidential elections. But who should shoot? “I asked. He replied that who and where it did not matter, you had to shoot somewhere so much to sow chaos. “
“It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or the molotov. confirms another volunteer – what counts was sowing confusion.
BBC interviewed the head of the opposition’s security forces at the time, who confirms that snipers were killing both sides … protesters and police:
And the former Ukranian government security boss said the same thing. Specifically, he said:
Former chief of Ukraine’s Security Service has confirmed allegations that snipers who killed dozens of people during the violent unrest in Kiev operated from a building controlled by the opposition on Maidan square.
Shots that killed both civilians and police officers were fired from the Philharmonic Hall building in Ukraine’s capital, former head of the Security Service of Ukraine Aleksandr Yakimenko told Russia 1 channel. The building was under full control of the opposition and particularly the so-called Commandant of Maidan self-defense Andrey Parubiy who after the coup was appointed as the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Yakimenko added.
So the chief of the government’s security forces, the head of the opposition’s security forces, and the snipers themselves all admit the snipers were killing both protesters and police.
Similarly:
[Ukrainian Health Minister Oleh] Musiy, who spent more than two months organizing medical units on Maidan, said that on Feb. 20 roughly 40 civilians and protesters were brought with fatal bullet wounds to the makeshift hospital set up near the square. But he said medics also treated three police officers whose wounds were identical.
Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the bullet wounds, led him and others to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.
And the Estonian foreign minister – after visiting Ukraine – told the EU foreign affairs minister that the Maidan opposition deployed the snipers – and fired on both the protesters and the police – to discredit the former government of Ukraine.
The Snipers Were Associated with the Maidan Protesters
While the mainstream media has proclaimed that the sniper fire was definitely from government forces, some of the above-cited sources dispute that claim.
Additionally, BBC reported at the time:
Reporting for Newsnight, Gabriel Gatehouse said he saw what looked like a protestershooting out of a window at the BBC’s Kiev base, the Ukraine Hotel.
BBC interviewed a Maidan protester who admitted that he fired a sniper rifle at police from the Conservatory, and that he was guided by a military veteran within the Maidan resistance. Here are actual pictures a reporter took of Maidan snipers, recently published by BBC:
gunmen at Kiev Conservatory 20 February
(There were reportedly at least 10 Maidan snipers firing from the Conservatory.)
The Frankfurther Allgemein reported that Maidan commander Volodymyr Parasjuk controlled the Conservatory at the time:
Volodymyr Parasjuk – the leader in “self-defense units” of the revolution who had called the night of Yanukovich’s escape, on the stage of Maidan to storm the presidential residence one year ago.
On the day of the massacre Parasjuk was staying with his unit in the colonnaded building of the Kiev Conservatory right at the Maidan. In the days before the death toll had risen, and the fighters grew the conviction alone with limited power as before will not be able to overthrow Yanukovych. “There were at that time many guys who said you have to take the weapon and attack,” said Parasjuk recalls. “Many,” he himself had since long ago it had firearms, often their officially registered hunting rifles.
Tagesschau – a German national and international television news service produced by state-run Norddeutscher Rundfunk on behalf of the German public-service television network ARD – also reportedin 2014 that at least some of the sniper fire came from protesters.
And remember, the snipers who admitted firing at both sides were associated with Mikhail Saakashvili and his party. Saakashvili was a huge supporter of the Maidan protesters from the very beginning. As Newsweek reports:
Saakashvili was a supporter of the Ukrainian revolution since the beginning of Euromaidan ….
Indeed, the Maidan protesters who deposed the old Ukrainian prime minister were so pleased with events that they rewarded Saakashvili by appointing him leader of Ukraine’s largest region.
Former AP and Newsweek reporter Robert Parry summarizes what kind of guy Saakashvili is:
The latest political move by the … regime in Ukraine was to foist on the people of Odessa the autocratic Georgian ex-President Mikheil Saakashvili, a neoconservative favorite and currently a fugitive from his own country which is seeking him on charges of human rights violations and embezzlement.
***
According to a New York Times profile last September, Saakashvili was there “writing a memoir, delivering ‘very well-paid’ speeches, helping start up a Washington-based think tank and visiting old boosters like Senator John McCain and Victoria Nuland, the assistant secretary of state.”
McCain and Nuland were key neocon backers of the coup that ousted Yanukovych and touched off the bloody civil war that has killed thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, while also reviving Cold War tensions between the West and Russia. Before the coup, McCain urged on right-wing protesters with promises of U.S. support and Nuland was overheard hand-picking Ukraine’s new leadership, saying “Yats is the guy,” a reference to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who became prime minister after the coup.
***
The Georgian prosecutors also have charged Saakashvili with human rights violations for his violent crackdown on political protesters in 2007.
Context: Sniper Attacks As False Flag Terror
Random shootings are a type of false flag terror. For example, in 1985 – as part of the “Gladio” false flag terror campaign (see number 12) – snipers attacked and shot shoppers in supermarkets randomlyin Belgium, killing twenty-eight and leaving many wounded.
Shooting both sides is an especially big red flag for a false flag …
Specifically, when authoritarian regimes want to break up protests, they might shoot protesters. On the other hand, when violent protesters shoot government employees, they might be trying to overthrow the government.
But when secretive snipers kill both protesters and the police, it is an indication of a “false flag” attackmeant to sow chaos, anger, disgust and a lack of legitimacy.
This has happened many times over the years. For example:
Remember the protests in Ukraine which led to the old leader being replaced?
If you’ll recall, the ruthless slaughter of people by snipers was the event which turned world opinion against the Ukrainian Prime Minister, and resulted in him having to flee the country.
Italy’s 11th largest newspaper – Il Giornale – reported on an admission by several of the snipers (Google translation) :
“Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. It went on for fifteen, twenty minutes. We had no choice. We were ordered to shoot both on the police and the demonstrators, without any difference. I was totally outraged.
“So Georgian Alexander Revazishvilli remembers the tragic shootout of 20 February 2014 in Kiev when a group of mysterious snipers opened fire on crowds and cops massacring over 80 people. That massacre has horrified the world and changed the destiny of Ukraine by forcing President Viktor Yanukovich accused of organizing the shootout. But the massacre also changed the fates of Europe and our country, triggering the crisis that will lead to sanctions against Putin’s Russia. Sanctions revealed a boomerang for the Italian economy ( Watch the video ).
Revazishvilli’s confessions and two other Georgians – gathered by writers in the documentary “Ukraine, the hidden truths” aired tonight at 23.30 on Matrix, Channel 5 – reveal a different and disconcerting truth. The truth of a massacre and the same opposition that accused Yanukovych and his Russian allies. Revazishvilli and his two companions – met and interviewed in the documentary – are a former member of the security services of former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and two former militants of his party. Hired in Tbilisi by Mamuka Mamulashvili, Saakashvili’s military adviser, are tasked with supporting – along with other Georgian and Lithuanian volunteers – ongoing demonstrations in Kiev in return for a $5,000 final fee.
***
The following day, Mamulashvili and the leaders of the protest explain to volunteers who will face a police assault at the Conservatory building and at the Ukraine hotel. In that case – he says – we must shoot at the square and sow the chaos. But one of the protagonists confesses to having received another explanation, much more comprehensive. “When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. Things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting – he replied that we can not go to the pre-election presidential elections. But who should shoot? “I asked. He replied that who and where it did not matter, you had to shoot somewhere so much to sow chaos. “
“It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or the molotov. confirms another volunteer – what counts was sowing confusion.
BBC interviewed the head of the opposition’s security forces at the time, who confirms that snipers were killing both sides … protesters and police:
And the former Ukranian government security boss said the same thing. Specifically, he said:
Former chief of Ukraine’s Security Service has confirmed allegations that snipers who killed dozens of people during the violent unrest in Kiev operated from a building controlled by the opposition on Maidan square.
Shots that killed both civilians and police officers were fired from the Philharmonic Hall building in Ukraine’s capital, former head of the Security Service of Ukraine Aleksandr Yakimenko told Russia 1 channel. The building was under full control of the opposition and particularly the so-called Commandant of Maidan self-defense Andrey Parubiy who after the coup was appointed as the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Yakimenko added.
So the chief of the government’s security forces, the head of the opposition’s security forces, and the snipers themselves all admit the snipers were killing both protesters and police.
Similarly:
[Ukrainian Health Minister Oleh] Musiy, who spent more than two months organizing medical units on Maidan, said that on Feb. 20 roughly 40 civilians and protesters were brought with fatal bullet wounds to the makeshift hospital set up near the square. But he said medics also treated three police officers whose wounds were identical.
Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the bullet wounds, led him and others to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.
And the Estonian foreign minister – after visiting Ukraine – told the EU foreign affairs minister that the Maidan opposition deployed the snipers – and fired on both the protesters and the police – to discredit the former government of Ukraine.
The Snipers Were Associated with the Maidan Protesters
While the mainstream media has proclaimed that the sniper fire was definitely from government forces, some of the above-cited sources dispute that claim.
Additionally, BBC reported at the time:
Reporting for Newsnight, Gabriel Gatehouse said he saw what looked like a protester shooting out of a window at the BBC’s Kiev base, the Ukraine Hotel.
BBC interviewed a Maidan protester who admitted that he fired a sniper rifle at police from the Conservatory, and that he was guided by a military veteran within the Maidan resistance. Here are actual pictures a reporter took of Maidan snipers, recently published by BBC:
gunmen at Kiev Conservatory 20 February
(There were reportedly at least 10 Maidan snipers firing from the Conservatory.)
The Frankfurther Allgemein reported that Maidan commander Volodymyr Parasjuk controlled the Conservatory at the time:
Volodymyr Parasjuk – the leader in “self-defense units” of the revolution who had called the night of Yanukovich’s escape, on the stage of Maidan to storm the presidential residence one year ago.
On the day of the massacre Parasjuk was staying with his unit in the colonnaded building of the Kiev Conservatory right at the Maidan. In the days before the death toll had risen, and the fighters grew the conviction alone with limited power as before will not be able to overthrow Yanukovych. “There were at that time many guys who said you have to take the weapon and attack,” said Parasjuk recalls. “Many,” he himself had since long ago it had firearms, often their officially registered hunting rifles.
Tagesschau – a German national and international television news service produced by state-run Norddeutscher Rundfunk on behalf of the German public-service television network ARD – also reported in 2014 that at least some of the sniper fire came from protesters.
And remember, the snipers who admitted firing at both sides were associated with Mikhail Saakashvili and his party. Saakashvili was a huge supporter of the Maidan protesters from the very beginning. As Newsweek reports:
Saakashvili was a supporter of the Ukrainian revolution since the beginning of Euromaidan ….
Indeed, the Maidan protesters who deposed the old Ukrainian prime minister were so pleased with events that they rewarded Saakashvili by appointing him leader of Ukraine’s largest region.
Former AP and Newsweek reporter Robert Parry summarizes what kind of guy Saakashvili is:
The latest political move by the … regime in Ukraine was to foist on the people of Odessa the autocratic Georgian ex-President Mikheil Saakashvili, a neoconservative favorite and currently a fugitive from his own country which is seeking him on charges of human rights violations and embezzlement.
***
According to a New York Times profile last September, Saakashvili was there “writing a memoir, delivering ‘very well-paid’ speeches, helping start up a Washington-based think tank and visiting old boosters like Senator John McCain and Victoria Nuland, the assistant secretary of state.”
McCain and Nuland were key neocon backers of the coup that ousted Yanukovych and touched off the bloody civil war that has killed thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, while also reviving Cold War tensions between the West and Russia. Before the coup, McCain urged on right-wing protesters with promises of U.S. support and Nuland was overheard hand-picking Ukraine’s new leadership, saying “Yats is the guy,” a reference to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who became prime minister after the coup.
***
The Georgian prosecutors also have charged Saakashvili with human rights violations for his violent crackdown on political protesters in 2007.
Context: Sniper Attacks As False Flag Terror
Random shootings are a type of false flag terror. For example, in 1985 – as part of the “Gladio” false flag terror campaign (see number 12) – snipers attacked and shot shoppers in supermarkets randomly in Belgium, killing twenty-eight and leaving many wounded.
Shooting both sides is an especially big red flag for a false flag …
Specifically, when authoritarian regimes want to break up protests, they might shoot protesters. On the other hand, when violent protesters shoot government employees, they might be trying to overthrow the government.
But when secretive snipers kill both protesters and the police, it is an indication of a “false flag” attack meant to sow chaos, anger, disgust and a lack of legitimacy.
This has happened many times over the years. For example:
Now come out on Italy's most watched TV station, Canale 5.
It wont surprise old timers in Italy, who remember the 'Years of Lead' (Gladio). _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
“Gunfire aimed at protesters on Kiev’s Independence Square, also known as the Maidan, was delivered in winter 2014 by the mercenaries who had arrived in Kiev for the purpose of organizing disorders,” lawyer Alexander Goroshinsky told 112. Ukraina channel on Tuesday, as reported in Tass on December 13th.
In a dramatic development in the trial in Kiev of several Berkut police officers accused of shooting civilians in the Maidan demonstrations in February 2014, the defence has produced two Georgians who confirm that the murders were committed by foreign snipers, at least 50 of them, operating in teams. The two Georgians, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze have agreed to testify by video from Tbilisi, if permitted, as they feared for their lives if brought to Kiev.
The defence lawyer stated,
“The eyewitnesses said they had seen with their own eyes a group of people who had received weapons and cartridges and who would deliver fire afterwards from the building of the Conservatoire. Nergadze also saw snipers at the roof of Hotel Ukraine. They know the individuals personally. Besides, they know the organizers and clients and are ready to give their names, as well as the names of the perpetrators.”
“In all, about fifty mercenaries arrived in Kiev then and they were involved in the events on the Maidan afterwards and fired at the protesters on February 20,” Goroshinsky went on. “The mercenaries split into groups of ten men each and were dispatched to different spots where from they delivered fire.”
“Each of them [the mercenaries] received $5,000 for the job done,” he said. “In other words, these people had been brought [to Kiev] with a well-specified task to create a conflict.”
This dramatic and explosive evidence was first brought to light by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin on November 16 in an article in the Italian journal Il Giornale and is again brought to the world’s attention by a lawyer with some courage picking up on that report and speaking with the witnesses himself. These witnesses stated to Gian Micalessin, even more explosively, that the American Army was directly involved in the murders.
The clear objective of the Maidan massacre in Kiev on February 20, 2014 was to sow chaos and reap the fall of the democratically elected, pro-Russian Yanukovych government. People were slaughtered for no other reason than to destroy a government the NATO powers, especially the United States and Germany, wanted removed because of its opposition to NATO, the EU, and their hegemonic drive to open Ukraine and Russia to American and German economic expansion. In other words, it was about money and the making of money.
The western media and leaders quickly blamed the Yanukovych government for the killings during the Maidan demonstrations, but more evidence has become available indicating that the massacre in Kiev of police and civilians – which led to the escalation of protests, leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovych government – was the work of snipers working on orders of government opponents and their NATO controllers using the protests as a cover for a coup.
One of the snipers already admitted to this in February 2015, thereby confirming what had become common knowledge just a few days after the massacre in Kiev and in a secretly recorded telephone call, the Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet reported to the EU head of Foreign Policy, Catherine Ashton, in early March 2014, that there was widespread suspicion that “someone from the new coalition” in the Kiev government may have ordered the sniper murders. In February 2016, Maidan activist Ivan Bubenchik confessed that in the course of the massacre, he had shot Ukrainian police officers. Bubenchik confirmed this in a film that gained wide attention.
In the September 2015 issue of Oriental Review, Dr. Ivan Katchanovski, at the University of Ottawa, published a devastating paper on the Maidan killings setting out in extensive detail the conclusive evidence that it was a false flag operation and that members of the present Kiev regime, including Poroshenko himself were involved in the murders, not the government forces. His paper contains all you need to know and I highly recommend it. Here is a summary of his findings:
“The paper analyzes a large amount of evidence from different publicly available sources concerning this massacre and killings of specific protestors…“This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. The various evidence that the protesters were killed from these locations include some 70 testimonies, primarily by Maidan protesters, several videos of “snipers” targeting protesters from these buildings, comparisons of positions of the specific protesters at the time of their killing and their entry wounds, and bullet impact signs. The study uncovered various videos and photos of armed Maidan “snipers” and spotters in many of these buildings.
Dr. Katchanovski makes a very pertinent point in his conclusion;
No reliable evidence about “third force” foreign snipers or organizers of the massacre has been found… Because of various evidence of US government backing of the Maidan opposition, its involvement in the Maidan government selection and policy decisions, and its past record of supporting or organizing regime change in other countries, additional research is needed to examine if there was any involvement of the US government in the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government. “
Well, now we have that evidence.
In the November 16 article in the Italian journal Il Giornale, and repeated on Italian TV Canale 5, journalist Gian Micalessin revealed that 3 Georgians, all trained army snipers, and with links to Mikheil Saakashvili and Georgian security forces were ordered to travel to Kiev from Tbilisi during the Maidan events. It is two of these men that are now being called to testify in Kiev.
On the 18th of February they were given weapons and two of them took up positions at the Hotel Ukraina overlooking Maidan Square while the third was positioned in the Conservatory. Other snipers were positioned in other buildings to fire into the square. Prior to that they met with, among other people, an American soldier in uniform, a claimed “former” member of the US Army’s 101st Airborne Division, who gave them orders on what to do, which it turned out to be was to shoot into Maidan Square randomly targeting people, protestors and police alike, to create fear and confusion, to implicate the government forces as the shooters, to create the chaos necessary in order to undermine the government of President Yanukovych, who fled shortly after the event realising his own life was in danger. The name of the American soldier, or the alias he used, was Brian Christopher Boyenger. He showed up later as an adviser to the Ukrainian Georgian Legion. One of the snipers stated,
“Once, I guess around February 15, Mamulashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy with him wearing a uniform. Mamulashvili introduced him to us and told us he was an American military guy and will be our instructor.”
Another stated,
“This American was Brian Christopher Boyenger, a “former” soldier, a sniper, from the 101st Airborne Division.”
“He was the one who gave us orders.”
Questions naturally arise on how this “former” American soldier entered the country and took command of a murderous sniper unit and it is highly probable that the word “former” was used to give the Americans plausible deniability if their men were found out, as has now occurred. No one can seriously doubt that his presence was known to the US ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, who, according to then Vice President Joe Biden, was in hourly contact with Andriy Parubiy, the Ukrainian fascist who was in charge of “self defence units” made of heavily armed fascist thugs at Maidan. According to the Italian report, Parubiy was going in and out of the Hotel Ukraina from where many shots were fired and was aware of the presence of the American soldier so the American ambassador must have been aware and his government. The Americans have yet to explain Boyenger’s presence or what rank he held in the US Army. Parubiy’s role in the events has never been explained either but Poroshenko appointed this mass murderer as head of Ukraine security and intelligence forces after the coup and he now sits as President of Ukraine’s parliament since April 14, 2016, in which position he can use to give the Germans and Americans the cooperation they want.
The massacre at Maidan, therefore, is revealed to be a carefully planned military operation organised in detail, with teams of snipers brought in from various NATO allied countries, unknown to each other, but organised on arrival, given orders and assignments and each sniper team being assigned spotters to help in their deadly work. This is the tactic military sniper teams use so it has to be assumed that each of the sniper teams was controlled by the same people as the team the Italians talked to, that is by American soldiers trained in these techniques and who themselves operate in teams. This operation therefore had to be planned and organised on a high level by the American forces and allied NATO governments.
It is an extraordinary video to watch, as these men matter of factly talk about what they did, for whom they did it; to watch them pull back the veil so that we can see what callous brutality the NATO alliance is capable of. We have seen this of course in all their wars. They are deliberately brutal and always ruthless. But in the interviews with these men we are shown the capacity of US military machine-and here I mean the entire NATO alliance and all its allies and agents-to randomly murder ordinary people, to murder them as if they were stepping on ants, and with the same feeling of sadistic satisfaction.
The western media has so far ignored the Italian interviews, as they have Dr. Katachanovski’s detailed paper and all the other evidence that exists; as it must or face the prospect of the entire anti-Russian propaganda campaign from unravelling. For now it is clear that the entire justification of the Kiev regime for its existence, that it got rid of Yanukovych to get rid of killers, is now proved to be a cover for the fact that it is the very members of the present Kiev regime who were complicit in the killings and directed them.
But as these developments further evolve the international mafia known as NATO that is responsible for the Maidan Square massacre have not stopped slaughtering civilians. In Ukraine to this day the fascist riddled, NATO -backed Kiev regime continues it siege of the Donbass republics in violation of the laws of war and custom, in violation of all humanity, while the British and American intelligence services put out false stories about the shooting down of Flight MH17, using NATO connected websites like Bellingcat, which only serves to add to evidence that it is NATO and its Kiev allies that are responsible for that slaughter as well. For why make up stories except to cover yourself? The more they shift the blame the more it falls on them.
But the reality is that the new evidence reported by the Italian press will change nothing in the narrative of the general western media which will conspire to suppress or better, ignore this evidence. In fact no other media, anywhere, has included the crucial information of the presence of American soldiers in Maidan in their coverage of the Italian report, a fact which itself is more than curious.
The International Criminal Court should investigate this new evidence, lead where it may. They have jurisdiction. But we can expect nothing from the ICC even if a countervailing pressure is put on the prosecutor by the world public demanding that she act on this information. We know whose interests the ICC serves. No, justice for those murdered in Ukraine will have to wait for the return of true democracy in Ukraine, a Ukraine no longer under the control of the US, Germany and their allies, a Ukraine that is no longer a puppet state of the west, and no longer used as a pawn in the long war against Russia. For that is the ultimate objective, Russia.
Hybrid warfare, war without limits, is accelerating against her. Last week Russia was banished from the Olympics to damage her prestige, and the bizarre allegations about rigging the US elections continue. To add to the insults, the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly voted a few days ago on a resolution condemning “violations of human rights in Crimea;” a resolution demanded by Petro Poroshenko, one of those implicated in the murders in Maidan Square. You have to give it to them. They’ve got a lot of nerve.
But Russia is not alone. She has allies. When the Poroshenko resolution came up for a vote the EU and NATO allied countries obeyed orders and supported the resolution but 77 countries abstained and 25 voted against it including the BRICs and Iran, Syria, North Korea, Armenia, Belarus, Philippines, Venezuela, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Cuba, Eritrea, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Uganda, Sudan, Serbia, Uzbekistan, and Bolivia.
Russia is going to need these allies because the evidence, now coming in a flood, about what the NATO forces did in Kiev on February 20, 2014 show us that they are capable of anything, and will stop at nothing.
Péter Szijjártó OSCE
Transcarpathia And The “Western Front”
18/12/2017
Heavenly Hundred Ukraine
Cheap dignity of the Ukrainian revolution
23/11/2017
Get ready for a new Chernobyl in Ukraine (updated Nov 1, 2017)
16/10/2017
Today’s Ukraine is painfully reminiscent of Germany in the 1920s: poor governance on the heels of a lost war, which – added to the sense of betrayed hopes and the sharp decline in average incomes coupled with rising prices – is all driving a critical mass of the Ukrainian population toward an overwhelming feeling of desperation. A demand from the public for a “strong hand” – a new, authoritarian ruler – is rapidly coalescing, due to their dissatisfaction with President Poroshenko and all the other jokers they’ve been dealt from that shabby deck of political cards.
And a man like that already exists in this destitute and disintegrating country. Andriy Biletsky, the commander of the Azov Battalion who is known to his comrades-in-arms as the “White Führer,” is making an ever-bigger name for himself in the Ukrainian parliament.
He makes no secret of his views – in his 2014 program declaration “Ukrainian racial social nationalism is the core of ideology of ‘Patriot of Ukraine’ organization” he expressed himself quite bluntly: “Our nation’s historical mission at this critical juncture is to lead the global White Race in its final crusade for its survival. A crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen.”
He was drawn to Nazi ideology while still a university student. In the early 2000s, while studying in the history department of the National University of Kharkov, he wrote a paper on the activities of the collaborationist Ukrainian Insurgent Army during World War II. Later, as this student of history and amateur boxer put it, “preference was given to the creation, rather than the study of history, and to fighting in the streets instead of in boxing rings.” In the 1990’s and 2000’s, as he moved toward the formation of his own nationalist organizations, such as Patriot of Ukraine (founded jointly with the current chairman of the Ukrainian parliament, Andriy Parubiy) and later the Azov Battalion, Biletsky managed to have a hand in almost every far-right group in Ukraine: the Stepan Bandera Tryzub, the Social-National Party of Ukraine, and Svoboda (Freedom) party. Now he also leads the Social-National Assembly, an umbrella group for a number of racist and neo-Nazi Ukrainian organizations. He himself has claimed to have had first-hand involvement in what are known as direct actions, i.e., military and terrorist operations.
In 1999, together with a group of nationalist “sports fans” from Kharkiv, Biletsky tried to travel to Kosovo to help fight Muslims. In 2001 he participated in the riots in Kiev during the “Ukraine without Kuchma” protest campaign. In 2008 he was involved in clashes with the police during a march to honor the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Between 2008 and 2009 activists from the Patriot of Ukraine organization that was under his direction repeatedly attacked individuals of non-Slavic appearance.
Wounded anti-fascist journalist Sergey Kolesnik, a snapshot of Ukrainian TV report about the incident.
Wounded anti-fascist journalist Sergey Kolesnik, a snapshot of Ukrainian TV report about the incident.
In 2011, Biletsky, along with two other members of Patriot of Ukraine, was arrested and charged with armed assault: on Aug. 23 of that year there was an altercation in that organization’s office with journalist Sergei Kolesnik who was doing a story on their activities. As a result, the reporter ended up in the emergency room with a head injury and lacerations to his chest. The organization claimed the charges had been trumped up and that the detained activists had been the victims of a political witch hunt. They were released in February 2014 after the victory of the Revolution of Dignity, when the Verkhovna Rada adopted resolution No. 4202, On the Release of Political Prisoners. There were 23 people on the list of detainees to be freed, primarily members of Patriot of Ukraine. The author of the bill was the head of the Radical Party, Deputy Oleh Lyashko, who later worked closely with the Azov Battalion.
Immediately after his release, Biletsky was put in charge of the “special operations” of the neo-Nazi organization Right Sector and proceeded with reprisals against “undesirables” – the Ukrainians who objected to the illegal seizure of power in their country. In March 2014 he was responsible for an explosion that blew up a monument and then some attacks on local residents in Kharkov, resulting in the deaths of two people and serious injuries to a law-enforcement officer. In May 2014 he and some of his underlings were involved in the execution of policemen in Mariupol who had refused to use their weapons against civilians.
At that time Biletsky created the Azoz Battalion, an armed, retaliatory unit of activists from racist and neo-Nazi organizations. Its ideology is based on neo-Nazism, aggressive militarism, and flagrant racism. The group employs the Nazi Wolfsangel and Black Sun symbols (“die Schwarze Sonne” – a type of swastika with multiple rays).
Andriy Biletski Azov Ukraine Nazi
In the article “Language and Race: The Primacy of the Question,” found on pg. 28 of his book The Words of the White Führer (in Ukrainian), Biletsky insists on requirements for the racial purity of the “Ukrainian nation” and on the impropriety of “accepting a person of a different bloodline, mentality, or culture into one’s family and nation and allowing one’s own genes to mix with those of a different, inferior breed of people.” “Ukrainian social-nationalism considers the Ukrainian nation to be a society based on a common bloodline and race.” “Race is paramount for the genesis of a nation,” the leader of the organization asserts. “People are naturally born with different abilities and opportunities, and therefore a person’s happiness comes from finding his place in the national hierarchy and in conscientiously carrying out the task that life has assigned him.”
"Ukraine, you are the light of Europe! Our nation has sufficient strength to stand up to pressure from outsiders, to purify our land, and to fan the flames of purification throughout Europe!” (Biletsky, The Words of the White Führer, pg. 23)
“Ukraine, you are the light of Europe! Our nation has sufficient strength to stand up to pressure from outsiders, to purify our land, and to fan the flames of purification throughout Europe!” (Biletsky, The Words of the White Führer, pg. 23)
Shortly before the 2014 Verkhovna Rada (parliamentary) elections, when asked whether his views had changed, Biletsky replied: “We remain true to ourselves. Azov’s very soul consists of the right-wing ideology it received as its legacy from Patriot of Ukraine.”
Refusing to have his name listed on the ticket of the People’s Front party (led by Arseniy “Yats” Yatsenyuk) during the 2014 parliamentary elections, Biletsky strengthened his position as the leader of Ukraine’s Nazis and won a seat in parliament as an independent candidate from one of Kiev’s single-seat districts. In the Verkhovna Rada he is the deputy head of the Committee on National Security and Defense and is ironically a member of a group on inter-parliamentary relations with Georgia, Great Britain, Israel, the US, Poland, and Lithuania.
His alliance with the new government in Kiev has made it possible for the White Führer to “legitimize” his militants and get the state to pay for their upkeep. The Azov Battalion was incorporated into the National Guard of Ukraine, which is under the control of the minister of internal affairs and former governor of the Kharkov region, Arsen Avakov. Back in November 2014, Avakov posted the following on his Facebook page: “The work has begun to bring this regiment up to the combat standards of the National Guard brigades. That also means in terms of weapons and technology. Currently dozens of kids from the Azov Battalion are already being trained at an artillery school, getting the hang of new armored vehicles on the practice ranges, and learning how to coordinate operations with the tank squadron assigned to their regiment.”
Andriy Biletsky (C) and Arsen Avakov (R in front) announcing incorporation of Azov battalion into the National Guard of Ukraine, Oct 2014
Andriy Biletsky (C) and Arsen Avakov (R in front) announcing incorporation of Azov battalion into the National Guard of Ukraine, Oct 2014
That was approximately the same time that Azov introduced its youth squad – the Biletsky Youth, also sometimes called Youth of Great Ukraine. It draws teenagers aged 14-18. Members are required to develop themselves physically and mentally, to study the foundations of social-nationalism, and to recognize Andriy Biletsky as their Führer…
Despite the fact that in June 2015 the US House of Representatives blocked the transfer of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, known as MANPADS, to Ukraine for fear that they might fall into the hands of neo-Nazis from Azov, some European politicians certainly don’t seem to consider him a political “untouchable” – soon after the US bill was approved, Czech MEP Jaromír Štětina invited Biletskiy to visit the European Parliament and share his views (the invitation apparently wasn’t accepted).
In October 2016 Biletsky created his own political party, the National Corps, and announced his readiness to assume responsibility for what was happening in the country. On Feb. 22, 2017, this party, along with Svoboda and Right Sector, held a March of National Dignity in Kiev, which resulted in an ultimatum being issued to the government, as part of which, the nationalists announced the coordination of efforts “to resist the country’s surrender to armed invaders from the East and financial bloodsuckers from the West.” On March 16, these forces, in addition to the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, and the neo-Nazi group C14, signed their National Manifesto. Once you take away the clauses of social-populist demagoguery, that statement mostly boils down to the following:
– looking not to the West nor to the East, but to the formation of a kind of “new European alliance – a Baltic-Black Sea Union
– unleashing an economic, propaganda, and guerrilla war against Russian Crimea
– returning Ukraine to the status of a nuclear power “due to the violation of the Budapest Memorandum”
– nationalizing mineral resources and industry, a total ban on the free sale of agricultural land, and a prohibition on pulling capital out of the country to stash offshore
In this manner, far-right forces in Ukraine have now consolidated and are ready to take action. For the past three years, Biletsky has carefully avoided making any racist statements and has been busy trying to burnish a positive image of himself for his Ukrainian and international audiences. He and his patrons expect the deepening crisis of power in Ukraine and the imminent fall of the Poroshenko regime to provide them with a unique window of opportunity for seizing power. His maniacal hatred of Russia and desire to escalate the armed conflict in the eastern part of the country will likely win him the “benevolent neutrality” of the major Western powers, just as Hitler enjoyed on the eve of his attack on the USSR. And to any impartial observer it is clear that “Weimar Republics” always eventually metamorphose into Reichs.
Rarely does the world get a true look inside the corrupt world of Western oligarchs and the brazen manipulations they use to enhance their fortunes at the expense of the public good. The following comes from correspondence of the Hungarian-born billionaire, now naturalized American speculator, George Soros. The hacker group CyberBerkut has published online letters allegedly written by Soros that reveal him not only as puppet master of the US-backed Ukraine regime. They also reveal his machinations with the US Government and the officials of the European Union in a scheme where, if he succeeds, he could win billions in the plunder of Ukraine assets. All, of course, would be at the expense of Ukrainian citizens and of EU taxpayers.
What the three hacked documents reveal is a degree of behind-the-scene manipulation of the most minute details of the Kiev regime by the New York billionaire.
In the longest memo, dated March 15, 2015 and marked “Confidential” Soros outlines a detailed map of actions for the Ukraine regime. Titled, “A short and medium term comprehensive strategy for the new Ukraine,” the memo from Soros calls for steps to “restore the fighting capacity of Ukraine without violating the Minsk agreement.” To do the restoring, Soros blithely notes that “General Wesley Clark, Polish General Skrzypczak and a few specialists under the auspices of the Atlantic Council [emphasis added—f.w.e.] will advise President Poroshenko how to restore the fighting capacity of Ukraine without violating the Minsk agreement.”
Soros also calls for supplying lethal arms to Ukraine and secretly training Ukrainian army personnel in Romania to avoid direct NATO presence in Ukraine. The Atlantic Council is a leading Washington pro-NATO think tank.
Notably, Wesley Clark is also a business associate of Soros in BNK Petroleum which does business in Poland.
Clark, some might recall, was the mentally-unstable NATO General in charge of the 1999 bombing of Serbia who ordered NATO soldiers to fire on Russian soldiers guarding the Pristina International Airport. The Russians were there as a part of an agreed joint NATO–Russia peacekeeping operation supposed to police Kosovo. The British Commander, General Mike Jackson refused Clark, retorting, “I’m not going to start the Third World War for you.” Now Clark apparently decided to come out of retirement for the chance to go at Russia directly.
Naked asset grab
In his March 2015 memo Soros further writes that Ukrainian President Poroshenko’s “first priority must be to regain control of financial markets,” which he assures Poroshenko that Soros would be ready to assist in: “I am ready to call Jack Lew of the US Treasury to sound him out about the swap agreement.”
He also calls on the EU to give Ukraine an annual aid sum of €11 billion via a special EU borrowing facility. Soros proposes in effect using the EU’s “AAA” top credit rating to provide a risk insurance for investment into Ukraine.
Whose risk would the EU insure?
Soros details, “I am prepared to invest up to €1 billion in Ukrainian businesses. This is likely to attract the interest of the investment community. As stated above, Ukraine must become an attractive investment destination.” Not to leave any doubt, Soros continues, “The investments will be for-profit but I will pledge to contribute the profits to my foundations. This should allay suspicions that I am advocating policies in search of personal gain. “
For anyone familiar with the history of the Soros Open Society Foundations in Eastern Europe and around the world since the late 1980’s, will know that his supposedly philanthropic “democracy-building” projects in Poland, Russia, or Ukraine in the 1990’s allowed Soros the businessman to literally plunder the former communist countries using Harvard University’s “shock therapy” messiah, and Soros associate, Jeffrey Sachs, to convince the post-Soviet governments to privatize and open to a “free market” at once, rather than gradually.
The example of Soros in Liberia is instructive for understanding the seemingly seamless interplay between Soros the shrewd businessman and Soros the philanthropist. In West Africa George Soros backed a former Open Society employee of his, Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, giving her international publicity and through his influence, even arranging a Nobel Peace Prize for her in 2011, insuring her election as president. Before her presidency she had been well-indoctrinated into the Western free market game, studying economics at Harvard and working for the US-controlled World Bank in Washington and the Rockefeller Citibank in Nairobi. Before becoming Liberia’s President, she worked for Soros directly as chair of his Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA).
Once in office, President Sirleaf opened the doors for Soros to take over major Liberian gold and base metals assets along with his partner, Nathaniel Rothschild. One of her first acts as President was to also invite the Pentagon’s new Africa Command, AFRICOM, into Liberia whose purpose as a Liberian investigation revealed, was to “protect George Soros and Rothschild mining operations in West Africa rather than champion stability and human rights.”
Naftogaz the target
The Soros memo makes clear he has his eyes on the Ukrainian state gas and energy monopoly, Naftogaz. He writes, “The centerpiece of economic reforms will be the reorganization of Naftogaz and the introduction of market pricing for all forms of energy, replacing hidden subsidies…”
In an earlier letter Soros wrote in December 2014 to both President Poroshenko and Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, Soros openly called for his Shock Therapy: “I want to appeal to you to unite behind the reformers in your government and give your wholehearted support to a radical, ‘big bang’ type of approach. That is to say, administrative controls would be removed and the economy would move to market prices rapidly rather than gradually…Naftogaz needs to be reorganized with a big bang replacing the hidden subsidies…”
Splitting Naftogaz into separate companies could allow Soros to take control of one of the new branches and essentially privatize its profits. He already suggested that he indirectly brought in US consulting company, McKinsey, to advise Naftogaz on the privatization “big bang.”
The Puppet-Master?
The totality of what is revealed in the three hacked documents show that Soros is effectively the puppet-master pulling most of the strings in Kiev. Soros Foundation’s Ukraine branch, International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) has been involved in Ukraine since 1989. His IRF doled out more than $100 million to Ukrainian NGOs two years before the fall of the Soviet Union, creating the preconditions for Ukraine’s independence from Russia in 1991. Soros also admitted to financing the 2013-2014 Maidan Square protests that brought the current government into power.
Soros’ foundations were also deeply involved in the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought the corrupt but pro-NATO Viktor Yushchenko into power with his American wife who had been in the US State Department. In 2004 just weeks after Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation had succeeded in getting Viktor Yushchenko as President of Ukraine, Michael McFaul wrote an OpEd for the Washington Post. McFaul, a specialist in organizing color revolutions, who later became US Ambassador to Russia, revealed:
Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine? Yes. The American agents of influence would prefer different language to describe their activities — democratic assistance, democracy promotion, civil society support, etc. — but their work, however labeled, seeks to influence political change in Ukraine. The U.S. Agency for International Development, the National Endowment for Democracy and a few other foundations sponsored certain U.S. organizations, including Freedom House, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the Solidarity Center, the Eurasia Foundation, Internews and several others to provide small grants and technical assistance to Ukrainian civil society. The European Union, individual European countries and the Soros-funded International Renaissance Foundation did the same.
Soros shapes ‘New Ukraine’
Today the CyberBerkut hacked papers show that Soros’ IRF money is behind creation of a National Reform Council, a body organized by presidential decree from Poroshenko which allows the Ukrainian president to push bills through Ukraine’s legislature. Soros writes, “The framework for bringing the various branches of government together has also emerged. The National Reform Council (NRC) brings together the presidential administration, the cabinet of ministers, the Rada and its committees and civil society. The International Renaissance Foundation which is the Ukrainian branch of the Soros Foundations was the sole financial supporter of the NRC until now…”
Soros’ NRC in effect is the vehicle to allow the President to override parliamentary debate to push through “reforms,” with the declared first priority being privatization of Naftogaz and raising gas prices drastically to Ukrainian industry and households, something the bankrupt country can hardly afford.
In his letter to Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk, Soros hints that he played a key role in selection of three key non-Ukrainian ministers—Natalia Jaresko, an American ex- State Department official as Finance Minister; Aivras Abromavicius of Lithuania as Economics Minister, and a health minister from Georgia. Soros in his December 2014 letter, referring to his proposal for a “big bank” privatization of Naftogaz and price rise, states, “You are fortunate to have appointed three ‘new Ukrainian’ ministers and several natives (sic) who are committed to this approach.”
Elsewhere Soros speaks about de facto creating the impression within the EU that the current government of Yatsenyuk is finally cleaning out the notorious corruption that has dominated every Kiev regime since 1991. Creating that temporary reform illusion, he remarks, will convince the EU to cough up the €11 billion annual investment insurance fund. His March 2015 paper says that, “It is essential for the government to produce a visible demonstration (sic) during the next three months in order to change the widely prevailing image of Ukraine as an utterly corrupt country.” That he states will open the EU to make the €11 billion insurance guarantee investment fund.
While saying that it is important to show Ukraine as a country that is not corrupt, Soros reveals he has little concern when transparency and proper procedures block his agenda. Talking about his proposals to reform Ukraine’s constitution to enable privatizations and other Soros-friendly moves, he complains, “The process has been slowed down by the insistence of the newly elected Rada on proper procedures and total transparency.”
Soros suggests that he intends to create this “visible demonstration” through his initiatives, such as using the Soros-funded National Reform Council, a body organized by presidential decree which allows the Ukrainian president to push bills through Ukraine’s legislature.
George Soros is also using his new European Council on Foreign Relations think-tank to lobby his Ukraine strategy, with his council members such as Alexander Graf Lambsdorff or Joschka Fischer or Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, not to mention former ECB head, Jean-Claude Trichet no doubt laying a subtle role.
George Soros, now 84, was born in Hungary as a Jew, George Sorosz. Soros once boasted in a TV interview that he posed during the war as a gentile with forged papers, assisting the Horthy government to seize property of other Hungarian Jews who were being shipped to the Nazi death camps. Soros told the TV moderator, “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was–well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets–that if I weren’t there–of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would.”
This is the same morality apparently behind Soros’ activities in Ukraine today. It seems again to matter not to him that the Ukrainian government he helped bring to power in February 2014 US coup d’etat is riddled with explicit anti-semites and self-proclaimed neo-Nazis from the Svoboda Party and Pravy Sektor. George Soros is clearly a devotee of “public-private-partnership.” Only here the public gets fleeced to enrich private investors like Mr. Soros and friends. Cynically, Soros signs his Ukraine strategy memo, “George Soros–A self-appointed advocate of the new Ukraine, March 12, 2015
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Published on 17 Jun 2016
OLIVER STONE accuses the CIA for UKRAINE'S COUP and the KIEV MASSACRE. He believes the Western Media is NOT reporting the TRUTH about the developments of the Ukraine Crisis and is PRODUCING a NEW DOCUMENTARY on the UKRAINE CRISIS based on the Truth.
He claims the "CIA'S Fingerprints are all over the KIEV MASSACRE. "American film director and Pentagon critic Oliver Stone has announced he is shooting a documentary on Ukraine’s revolution arguing the CIA
:
Here is the full film:
'Ukraine on Fire: The Real Story - Full Documentary by Oliver Stone' (Original English version): https://vimeo.com/252426896 _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
'In 2014, reports surfaced of the Kiev military allegedly using chemical weapons in its operations against the Donbass militia.
In a video message to US President Donald Trump, posted on the Open Ukraine YouTube channel, former Ukrainian army serviceman Alexander Medinsky claimed that Kiev used chemical weapons during its military operation in Donbass.
Addressing Trump as “an irreconcilable fighter against the spread of poisonous agents and the use of chemical weapons of mass destruction,”
Medinskly, who took part in combat operations in Ukraine’s southeast, said that in the summer of 2015, Kiev’s Special Operations Forces (SOF) confiscated a chemicals lab used by the pro-Kiev volunteer Donbass Battalion and took it out to Kiev where it worked until the end of 2016 and was later moved to a SOF base.
According to Medinsky, people working at the lab had been ordered to develop chemical agents for use against enemy manpower and which he claims were later put to use in Donbass.
"I’m ready to testify in US courts, to the FBI, NSA and CIA about chemical weapons use by the Kiev military,” Medinsky said, adding, that he was ready to make more detailed information available to representatives of the US intelligence community.
He also mentioned an SOF doctrine, which allows the use of poisonous agents and explosives not only against members of the Donbass militia, but also against journalists, politicians and public activists “opposed the Poroshenko’s regime.”.......' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Washington is upping the ante in Ukraine. Kurt Volker, US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, said in an interview with the Guardian published on September 1 that “Washington is ready to expand arms supplies to Ukraine in order to build up the country’s naval and air defense forces in the face of continuing Russian support for eastern separatists.” According to him, the Trump administration was “absolutely” prepared to go further in supplying lethal weaponry to Ukrainian forces than the anti-tank missiles it delivered in April. “They need lethal assistance,” he emphasized. Mr. Volker explained that “[t]hey need to rebuild a navy and they have very limited air capability as well. I think we’ll have to look at air defense.” The diplomat believes Ukraine needs unmanned aerial vehicles, counter-battery radar systems, and anti-sniper systems. The issue of lethal arms purchases has been discussed at the highest level.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 allocated $250m in military assistance to Ukraine, including lethal arms. The US has delivered Javelin anti-tank missile systems to Kiev but this time the ambassador talked about an incomparably larger deal. Former President Barack Obama had been unconvinced that granting Ukraine lethal defensive weapons would be the right decision, in view of the widespread corruption there. This policy has changed under President Trump, who — among other things — approved deliveries of anti-tank missiles to Kiev last December.
Ukraine has officially requested US air-defense systems. According to Valeriy Chaly, Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States, the Ukrainian military wants to purchase at least three air-defense systems. The cost of the deal is expected to exceed $2 billion, or about $750 million apiece. The system in question was not specified, but it’s generally believed to be the Patriot.
Volker’s statement was made at a time of rising tensions in the Sea of Azov, which is legally shared by Ukraine and Russia. It is connected to the Black Sea through the Kerch Strait. The rhetoric has heated up and ships have been placed under arrest as this territorial dispute turns the area into a flashpoint. Russia has slammed the US for backing Ukraine’s violations of international law in the area. According to a 2003 treaty, the Sea of Azov is a jointly controlled territory that both countries are allowed to use freely.
The US military already runs a maritime operations center located within Ukraine’s Ochakov naval base. The facility is an operational-level warfare command-and-control organization that is designed to deliver flexible maritime support throughout the full range of military operations. Hundreds of US and Canadian military instructors are training Ukrainian personnel at the Yavorov firing range.
NATO has granted Ukraine the status of an aspirant country — a step that is openly provocative toward Russia. Macedonia, Georgia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina are also aspirant nations. Last year, Ukraine’s parliament adopted a resolution recognizing full membership in NATO as a foreign policy goal. In 2008, NATO agreed that Ukraine along with Georgia should become a full-fledged member. In March, Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia announced the formation of an alliance to oppose Russia.
The US is to render substantial military assistance to a country with an economy in the doldrums, reforms that have foundered, a democracy that is in question, and corruption that is widespread. It will be no surprise if those weapons fall into the wrong hands and are used against the US military somewhere outside of Europe. lIt was the US State Department itself that issued a report this year slamming Ukraine’s human-rights record. The UN human-rights commissioner tells the same story. So do human-rights monitors all over the world.
By supplying the weapons that Special Representative Volker talked about in his interview, the US will become an accomplice to a conflict that has nothing to do with its national security or interests. The situation in the Donbas is being used by Kiev to distract public attention from the country’s worsening domestic problems. But to Washington Ukraine’s government is the apple of its eye, “a b****** but it’s our b******” that is ready to do what it’s told.
The move is provocative and it may have consequences. For instance, Russia could supply the self-proclaimed republics in eastern Ukraine with up-to-date weapons systems in quantities sufficient to deter any military action on the part of Kiev. Once the Minsk accords are no longer functional and cannot command obediance, Moscow could recognize those republics as independent states that are eligible for military cooperation agreements, which would include stationing military bases on their soil. If their governments invited the Russian armed forces to be deployed inside their borders, it would be quite natural to agree to those requests. No international law would be breached. In a nutshell, if the US crosses that red line, Russia will act accordingly. Nobody seems to want a war raging in Ukraine, but that’s what the US weapons supplies would promote, egging the Ukrainian government on to seek a military solution. And what if it loses? Washington would be to blame for such a scenario. By the way, is it a coincidence that Mr. Volker’s interview appeared just as Alexander Zakharchenko, the leader of the Donetsk self-proclaimed republic, was assassinated? Just asking. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
The two Georgian snipers who took part in the false flag Maidan massacre claim they took orders from an American.
What was the American role in the slaughter of 100 protesters and police?
“Gunfire aimed at protesters on Kiev’s Independence Square, also known as the Maidan, was delivered in winter 2014 by the mercenaries who had arrived in Kiev for the purpose of organizing disorder,” lawyer Alexander Goroshinsky told 112.Ukraina channel on Tuesday, as reported in Tass on December 13th.
In a dramatic development in the trial in Kiev of several Berkut police officers accused of shooting civilians in the Maidan demonstrations in February 2014, the defense has produced two Georgians who confirm that the murders were committed by foreign snipers, at least 50 of them, operating in teams. The two Georgians, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze, have agreed to testify by video from Tbilisi, if permitted, as they feared for their lives if brought to Kiev.
The defense lawyer stated:
“The eyewitnesses said they had seen with their own eyes a group of people who had received weapons and cartridges and who would deliver fire afterwards from the building of the Conservatoire. Nergadze also saw snipers at the roof of Hotel Ukraine. They know the individuals personally. Besides, they know the organizers and clients and are ready to give their names, as well as the names of the perpetrators.”
“In all, about fifty mercenaries arrived in Kiev then and they were involved in the events on the Maidan afterwards and fired at the protesters on February 20,” Goroshinsky went on. “The mercenaries split into groups of ten men each and were dispatched to different spots from where they delivered fire.”
“Each of them [the mercenaries] received $5,000 for the job done,” he said. “In other words, these people had been brought [to Kiev] with a well-specified task to create a conflict.”
This dramatic and explosive evidence was first brought to light by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin on November 16 in an article in the Italian journal Il Giornaleand is again brought to the world’s attention by a lawyer with some courage picking up on that report and speaking with the witnesses himself. These witnesses stated to Gian Micalessin, even more explosively, that the American Army was directly involved in the murders.
The clear objective of the Maidan massacre in Kiev on February 20, 2014, was to sow chaos and reap the fall of the democratically elected, pro-Russian Yanukovych government. People were slaughtered for no other reason than to destroy a government the NATO powers, especially the United States and Germany, wanted removed because of its opposition to NATO, the EU, and their hegemonic drive to open Ukraine and Russia to American and German economic expansion. In other words, it was about money and the making of money.
The Western media and leaders quickly blamed the Yanukovych government for the killings during the Maidan demonstrations, but more evidence has become available indicating that the massacre in Kiev of police and civilians – which led to the escalation of protests, leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovych government – was the work of snipers working on orders of government opponents and their NATO controllers using the protests as a cover for a coup.
One of the snipers already admitted to this in February 2015, thereby confirming what had become common knowledge just a few days after the massacre in Kiev and in a secretly recorded telephone call, the Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet reported to the EU head of Foreign Policy, Catherine Ashton, in early March 2014, that there was widespread suspicion that “someone from the new coalition” in the Kiev government may have ordered the sniper murders. In February 2016, Maidan activist Ivan Bubenchik confessed that in the course of the massacre, he had shot Ukrainian police officers. Bubenchik confirmed this in a film that gained wide attention.
Map of the Maidan square in Kiev and surrounding buildings
In the September 2015 issue of Oriental Review, Dr. Ivan Katchanovski, at the University of Ottawa, published a devastating paper on the Maidan killings setting out in extensive detail the conclusive evidence that it was a false flag operation and that members of the present Kiev regime, including Poroshenko himself, were involved in the murders, not the government forces. His paper contains all you need to know and I highly recommend it. Here is a summary of his findings:
“The paper analyzes a large amount of evidence from different publicly available sources concerning this massacre and killings of specific protestors…“This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. The various evidence that the protesters were killed from these locations include some 70 testimonies, primarily by Maidan protesters, several videos of “snipers” targeting protesters from these buildings, comparisons of positions of the specific protesters at the time of their killing and their entry wounds, and bullet impact signs. The study uncovered various videos and photos of armed Maidan “snipers” and spotters in many of these buildings.
Dr. Katchanovski makes a very pertinent point in his conclusion:
No reliable evidence about “third force” foreign snipers or organizers of the massacre has been found… Because of various evidence of US government backing of the Maidan opposition, its involvement in the Maidan government selection and policy decisions, and its past record of supporting or organizing regime change in other countries, additional research is needed to examine if there was any involvement of the US government in the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government."
Well, now we have that evidence.
In the November 16 article in the Italian journal Il Giornale, and repeated on Italian TV Canale 5, journalist Gian Micalessin revealed that 3 Georgians, all trained army snipers, and with links to Mikheil Saakashvili and Georgian security forces were ordered to travel to Kiev from Tbilisi during the Maidan events. It is two of these men that are now being called to testify in Kiev.
On the 18th of February, they were given weapons and two of them took up positions at the Hotel Ukraina overlooking Maidan Square while the third was positioned in the Conservatory. Other snipers were positioned in other buildings to fire into the square.
Prior to that, they met with, among other people, an American soldier in uniform, a claimed “former” member of the US Army’s 101st Airborne Division, who gave them orders on what to do, which it turned out to be was to shoot into Maidan Square randomly targeting people, protestors and police alike, to create fear and confusion, to implicate the government forces as the shooters, to create the chaos necessary in order to undermine the government of President Yanukovych, who fled shortly after the event, realizing his own life was in danger.
The name of the American soldier, or the alias he used, was Brian Christopher Boyenger. He showed up later as an adviser to the Ukrainian Georgian Legion. One of the snipers stated,
“Once, I guess around February 15, Mamulashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy with him wearing a uniform. Mamulashvili introduced him to us and told us he was an American military guy and will be our instructor.”
Another stated,
“This American was Brian Christopher Boyenger, a 'former' soldier, a sniper, from the 101st Airborne Division.”
“He was the one who gave us orders.”
Questions naturally arise on how this “former” American soldier entered the country and took command of a murderous sniper unit, and it is highly probable that the word “former” was used to give the Americans plausible deniability if their men were found out, as has now occurred.
No one can seriously doubt that his presence was known to the US ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, who, according to then Vice President Joe Biden, was in hourly contact with Andriy Parubiy, the Ukrainian fascist who was in charge of “self-defense units” made of heavily armed fascist thugs at Maidan. According to the Italian report, Parubiy was going in and out of the Hotel Ukraina from where many shots were fired and was aware of the presence of the American soldier so the American ambassador must have been aware, as well as his government.
The Americans have yet to explain Boyenger’s presence or what rank he held in the US Army. Parubiy’s role in the events has never been explained either but Poroshenko appointed this mass murderer as head of Ukraine security and intelligence forces after the coup and he now sits as President of Ukraine’s parliament since April 14, 2016, in which position he can use to give the Germans and Americans the cooperation they want.
The massacre at Maidan, therefore, is revealed to be a carefully planned military operation organized in detail, with teams of snipers brought in from various NATO allied countries, unknown to each other, but organized on arrival, given orders and assignments and each sniper team being assigned spotters to help in their deadly work. This is the tactic military sniper teams use, so it has to be assumed that each of the sniper teams was controlled by the same people as the team the Italians talked to, that is, by American soldiers trained in these techniques and who themselves operate in teams. This operation, therefore, had to be planned and organized on a high level by the American forces and allied NATO governments.
It is an extraordinary video to watch, as these men matter-of-factly talk about what they did, for whom they did it; to watch them pull back the veil so that we can see what callous brutality the NATO alliance is capable of. We have seen this of course in all their wars. They are deliberately brutal and always ruthless. But in the interviews with these men, we are shown the capacity of US military machine — and here I mean the entire NATO alliance and all its allies and agents — to randomly murder ordinary people, to murder them as if they were stepping on ants, and with the same feeling of sadistic satisfaction.
The Western media has so far ignored the Italian interviews, as they have Dr. Katachanovski’s detailed paper and all the other evidence that exists; as it must or face the prospect of the entire anti-Russian propaganda campaign from unraveling. For now, it is clear that the entire justification of the Kiev regime for its existence, that it got rid of Yanukovych to get rid of killers, is now proved to be a cover for the fact that it is the very members of the present Kiev regime who were complicit in the killings and directed them.
But as these developments further evolve, the international mafia known as NATO that is responsible for the Maidan Square massacre have not stopped slaughtering civilians. In Ukraine to this day the fascist-riddled, NATO-backed Kiev regime continues it siege of the Donbass republics in violation of the laws of war and custom, in violation of all humanity, while the British and American intelligence services put out false stories about the shooting down of Flight MH17, using NATO connected websites like Bellingcat, which only serves to add to evidence that it is NATO and its Kiev allies that are responsible for that slaughter as well. For why make up stories except to cover yourself? The more they shift the blame the more it falls on them.
But the reality is that the new evidence reported by the Italian press will change nothing in the narrative of the general Western media which will conspire to suppress or better, ignore this evidence. In fact, no other media, anywhere, has included the crucial information of the presence of American soldiers in Maidan in their coverage of the Italian report, a fact which itself is more than curious.
The International Criminal Court should investigate this new evidence, lead where it may. They have jurisdiction. But we can expect nothing from the ICC even if a countervailing pressure is put on the prosecutor by the world public demanding that she act on this information. We know whose interests the ICC serves. No, justice for those murdered in Ukraine will have to wait for the return of true democracy in Ukraine, a Ukraine no longer under the control of the US, Germany and their allies, a Ukraine that is no longer a puppet state of the West, and no longer used as a pawn in the long war against Russia. For that is the ultimate objective — Russia.
Poroshenko at Heavenly Hundred memorial in 2014
Hybrid warfare, war without limits, is accelerating against her. Last week Russia was banished from the Olympics to damage her prestige, and the bizarre allegations about rigging the US elections continue. To add to the insults, the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly voted a few days ago on a resolution condemning “violations of human rights in Crimea,” a resolution demanded by Petro Poroshenko, one of those implicated in the murders in Maidan Square. You have to give it to them. They’ve got a lot of nerve.
But Russia is not alone. She has allies. When the Poroshenko resolution came up for a vote the EU and NATO allied countries obeyed orders and supported the resolution but 77 countries abstained and 25 voted against it including the BRICs and Iran, Syria, North Korea, Armenia, Belarus, Philippines, Venezuela, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Cuba, Eritrea, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Uganda, Sudan, Serbia, Uzbekistan, and Bolivia.
Russia is going to need these allies, because the evidence, now coming in a flood, about what the NATO forces did in Kiev on February 20, 2014, show us that they are capable of anything, and will stop at nothing.
RUSSIAFEED NEWS POLITICSREVEALED: The price of Ukraine’s ‘dignity’ – $5,000
An Italian documentary reveals three Georgians who say they were the snipers on Kiev’s Maidan in 2014
http://russiafeed.com/revealed-price-ukraines-dignity-5000/
Published 10 months ago on November 24, 2017 By RussiaFeed 0 Views
(Oriental Review) – The interviews with three snipers of Georgian nationality, conducted by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin and aired as a breathtaking documentary on Milan-based Canale 5 (Matrix program) last week, still have not paved its way to the international mainstream media. That is hardly surprising taking into account the bombshell evidence against the real perpetrators and organizers of the 2014 coup d’etat in Kiev, generally known as the “revolution of dignity“.
The documentary features Alexander Revazishvili, Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia, Georgian military officers who were recruited to carry out a “special mission” in Kiev by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a close aid of Mikhail Saakashvili’s former defense minister Bacho Akhalaia. They claim that on Jan 15, 2014 they landed in Kiev equipped with fake documents and were transfered to Maidan. Having received 1000 USD each one and being promised to be paid 5000 USD after the “job is done”, they were tasked to prepare sniper positions inside the buildings of Hotel Ukraine and Conservatory, dominant over the Maidan Square.
Map of the Maidan square in Kiev and surrounding buildings
Map of the Maidan square in Kiev and surrounding buildings
The facts they exposed afterwards, were shocking. Along with other snipers (some of them were Lithuanians) they were put under command of an American military operative Brian Christopher Boyenger (his Facebook page is here). The coordinating team also included Mamulashvili and infamous Segrey Pashinsky, who was detained by protesters on Feb 18, 2017 with a sniper rifle in the boot of his car and later headed the first post-Maidan interim president administration of Ukraine. The weapons came on stage on February 18 and were distributed to the various Georgian and Lithuanian groups. “There were three or four weapons in each bag, there were Makarov guns, AKM guns, rifles, and a lot of cartridges.” – witnesses Nergadze.
The following day, Mamulashvili and Pashinsky explained to snipers that they should shoot at the square and sow chaos. “When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. Things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting – he replied that we cannot go to presidential elections. “But who to shoot?“ I asked. He replied thatwho and where it did not matter, you had to shoot somewhere so much to sow chaos.”
“It did not matter if we fired at a tree, barricade, or those who tossed a Molotov, what counted was making panics.”
“I listened to the screams,” recalls Revazishvili. “There were many dead and injured downstairs. My first and only thought was to leave in a hurry before they caught up with me. Otherwise, they would tear me apart.”
Four years later, Revazishvili and his two companions report they have not yet received the promised 5000 USD bills as a payment and have decided to tell the truth about those who “used and abandoned” them.
The full documentary with English subtitles is available below (in two parts):
[Two days later a Macedonian news agency Infomax organized a 52-minutes long night talk with Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia (in Macedonian) in which they provided more details about their backgrounds and mission to Kiev.]
These three men are presenting themselves as repented military officers who were simply “obeying orders” and did not know that they “had to kill people“. A naive attempt for professional death squads operatives, to put it mildly. Meanwhile the fact and time of these confessions and revelations are absolutely synchronized with the ongoing agony of the incumbent regime in Kiev.
Bacho Alakhaia
Bacho Alakhaia
Since the very beginning the talking Georgians explicitly claim that the operation was initiated by the former president of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili. Mamulashvili’s chief Bacho Akhalaia was a very close associate and trusted person of the Georgian leader who lost parliamentary elections in October 2012 following the prison abuse scandal (the Human Rights Watch dedicated a special report to the “Georgian Abu-Ghraib”, Gldani Prison, same month). At the time when the Georgian sniper trio was hired for dirty job in Kiev, Akhalaia was under criminal trial on charges of abusing the power while heading the penitentiary branch of the Ministry of Justice, illegal detention and tortures of inmates (in October 2014 he was pleaded guilty by the Tbilisi City Court and sentenced to 7,5 years in prison). One month earlier, in November 2013, Mikhail Saakashvili, facing multiple criminal charges in Georgia, left the country for the United States, and officially settled at the Tufts University. He and his stooges, having suffered a painful defeat at the homeland, would hardly initiated a risky and adventurous project in a neighboring country if only they were not forced to do so by their masters to make up for failing to comply with their mission in Georgia.
Anyway, on the early days of the Ukrainian crisis the vast Soros-financed network in Georgia (Bacho Alakhaia, a bright offspring of the notorious Mengrel criminal clan, was got on Soros money at the Georgia Liberty Institute since his studentship in early 2000s) was activated to conduct special operations in Kiev.
Four years later the situation has drastically changed. A showcase democratic alliance of Poroshenko & Saakashvili was broken into shatters. Saakashvili again proved to a be a psychopath unable to build any stable political relationship (since September 2017 Ukraine is considering extradiction of Saakashvili to the Georgian authorities meeting their request). Meanwhile on Nov 1 one of the closest aides of Bacho Alakhaia and Saakashvili, former chief of the military police at the Georgian defense ministry, Megis Kardava, wanted to face the same criminal charges in Georgia, was detained with false passport on the Ukrainian border. The Ukrainian security service has already announced that he would be extradited to Tbilisi within 40 days. Several other Georgians from Saakashvili personal protection team were arrested in Ukraine and expelled to their homeland earlier in late October.
All these factors could make the Georgian sniper trio to preventively appear on the Italian TV as “voluntary whistle-blowers exposing the truth” about Euromaidan before they are captured and punished as the scape-goats.
Prudently enough they named a number of iconic personalities of the incumbent regime in Kiev – Andriy Parybiy (currently the Chairman of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine), Segrey Pashinsky (member of parliament representing pro-government People’s Front) and Vladimir Parasyuk (another charismatic parliament member) – as organizers and coordinators of the massacre on the Maidan square on Feb 20, 2014.
Their claims are confirmed by other evidence. The most comprehensive collection of such facts so far was carried out by Professor of the University of Ottawa Ivan Katchanovsky (he also commented on the Italian documentary last week).
Whatever we feel towards the repented snipers, their public confessions does not exonerate them from responsibility for deliberately killing people. They were not soldiers at the battlefield during the declared war. They could not be ordered by their commanders. They were hired for money to do a dirty job and they were aware that what they were going to do was a dirty job. Their jabbering in attempt to prove the opposite is ridiculous. So this trio, Alexander Revazishvili, Koba Nergadze and Zalogi Kvaratskhelia, as well as those who hired and ordered them – Mamuka Mamulashvili (currently he is the commander of the Geogian Legion in Donbass), Brian Boyenger (he fought on the Ukrainian side in Donbass in 2015-2016) – and other snipers from Georgia, Lithuania and Ukraine have to face trial in Ukraine or any other country whose citizens perished during the Euromaidan. Next should come the turn of the Ukrainian politicians, principal beneficiaries of that massacre – those named (Andriy Parybiy, Segrey Pashinsky and Vladimir Parasyuk) and still unknown to the public.
The Heavenly Hundred, perished on Maidan square in 2014
The “Heavenly Hundred”, perished on Maidan square in 2014
As a matter of fact, this still underreported story totally undermines the legitimacy of Poroshenko’s regime. The crocodile tears of the incumbent rulers of that long-suffering nation over the graves of the victims of “revolution of dignity” since now onwards will every time only emphasise and highlight the former’s role in mass killing of their own supporters. Having paid a puny 1000 USD to every foreign sniper, they came to power to abuse dreams and trust of the millions of citizens of Ukraine. That was the real price of the Ukrainian “dignity” for the masterminds of their national catastrophe.
KIEV – An American former paratrooper has joined the Ukrainian army’s Georgian National Legion and will take part in active combat missions in the country’s war torn Donbass Region, the group’s commander Mamuka Mamulashvili announced at a press conference Wednesday.
Brian Christopher Boyenger, a retired officer and former sniper from the US Army’s elite 101st Airborne Division, is the first US citizen to formally join the Ukrainian military in an official combat role since hostilities broke out against Russian forces and their separatist proxies in April 2014.
“This is the first incident, that I know of, when a US citizen will be involved in the fighting and represent one of the Ukrainian battalions as a member of the Georgian Legion. We expect more American volunteers to join us. The first group will consist of 10 people and they will take a direct part in the fighting in east Ukraine. They previously served as instructors, but now they will take part in the hostilities,” Mamulashvili said.
Boyenger, a native of South Carolina whose active military service spanned four years from 2006-2010, said he made the decision to join the current conflict out of solidarity with Ukraine, which he cited as a key US ally.
Prior to officially joining the legion, Boyenger spent five months in 2015 as a volunteer instructor for the Ukrainian army, teaching Kiev’s underfunded military essential combat skills.
Boyenger is, in fact, not the first US citizen to take an active combat role in the war. Mark Paslawsky, a 55 year-old West Point graduate and former investment banker from Manhattan, was killed in fighting during the Battle of Ilovaisk in August 2014 while serving as a volunteer in Ukraine’s Donbass Battalion.
Formed shortly after war broke out in Ukraine’s mainly Russian-speaking east, the Georgian National Legion is a unit mainly made up of battle hardened former combat veterans from Georgia’s three post-Soviet wars with Moscow.
“Gunfire aimed at protesters on Kiev’s Independence Square, also known as the Maidan, was delivered in winter 2014 by the mercenaries who had arrived in Kiev for the purpose of organizing disorders,” lawyer Alexander Goroshinsky told 112. Ukraina channel on Tuesday, as reported in Tass on December 13th.
In a dramatic development in the trial in Kiev of several Berkut police officers accused of shooting civilians in the Maidan demonstrations in February 2014, the defence has produced two Georgians who confirm that the murders were committed by foreign snipers, at least 50 of them, operating in teams. The two Georgians, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze have agreed to testify by video from Tbilisi, if permitted, as they feared for their lives if brought to Kiev.
The defence lawyer stated,
“The eyewitnesses said they had seen with their own eyes a group of people who had received weapons and cartridges and who would deliver fire afterwards from the building of the Conservatoire. Nergadze also saw snipers at the roof of Hotel Ukraine. They know the individuals personally. Besides, they know the organizers and clients and are ready to give their names, as well as the names of the perpetrators.”
“In all, about fifty mercenaries arrived in Kiev then and they were involved in the events on the Maidan afterwards and fired at the protesters on February 20,” Goroshinsky went on. “The mercenaries split into groups of ten men each and were dispatched to different spots where from they delivered fire.”
“Each of them [the mercenaries] received $5,000 for the job done,” he said. “In other words, these people had been brought [to Kiev] with a well-specified task to create a conflict.”
This dramatic and explosive evidence was first brought to light by the Italian journalist Gian Micalessin on November 16 in an article in the Italian journal Il Giornale and is again brought to the world’s attention by a lawyer with some courage picking up on that report and speaking with the witnesses himself. These witnesses stated to Gian Micalessin, even more explosively, that the American Army was directly involved in the murders.
The clear objective of the Maidan massacre in Kiev on February 20, 2014 was to sow chaos and reap the fall of the democratically elected, pro-Russian Yanukovych government. People were slaughtered for no other reason than to destroy a government the NATO powers, especially the United States and Germany, wanted removed because of its opposition to NATO, the EU, and their hegemonic drive to open Ukraine and Russia to American and German economic expansion. In other words, it was about money and the making of money.
The western media and leaders quickly blamed the Yanukovych government for the killings during the Maidan demonstrations, but more evidence has become available indicating that the massacre in Kiev of police and civilians – which led to the escalation of protests, leading to the overthrow of the Yanukovych government – was the work of snipers working on orders of government opponents and their NATO controllers using the protests as a cover for a coup.
One of the snipers already admitted to this in February 2015, thereby confirming what had become common knowledge just a few days after the massacre in Kiev and in a secretly recorded telephone call, the Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet reported to the EU head of Foreign Policy, Catherine Ashton, in early March 2014, that there was widespread suspicion that “someone from the new coalition” in the Kiev government may have ordered the sniper murders. In February 2016, Maidan activist Ivan Bubenchik confessed that in the course of the massacre, he had shot Ukrainian police officers. Bubenchik confirmed this in a film that gained wide attention.
In the September 2015 issue of Oriental Review, Dr. Ivan Katchanovski, at the University of Ottawa, published a devastating paper on the Maidan killings setting out in extensive detail the conclusive evidence that it was a false flag operation and that members of the present Kiev regime, including Poroshenko himself were involved in the murders, not the government forces. His paper contains all you need to know and I highly recommend it. Here is a summary of his findings:
“The paper analyzes a large amount of evidence from different publicly available sources concerning this massacre and killings of specific protestors…“This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. The various evidence that the protesters were killed from these locations include some 70 testimonies, primarily by Maidan protesters, several videos of “snipers” targeting protesters from these buildings, comparisons of positions of the specific protesters at the time of their killing and their entry wounds, and bullet impact signs. The study uncovered various videos and photos of armed Maidan “snipers” and spotters in many of these buildings.
Dr. Katchanovski makes a very pertinent point in his conclusion;
No reliable evidence about “third force” foreign snipers or organizers of the massacre has been found… Because of various evidence of US government backing of the Maidan opposition, its involvement in the Maidan government selection and policy decisions, and its past record of supporting or organizing regime change in other countries, additional research is needed to examine if there was any involvement of the US government in the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government. “
Well, now we have that evidence.
In the November 16 article in the Italian journal Il Giornale, and repeated on Italian TV Canale 5, journalist Gian Micalessin revealed that 3 Georgians, all trained army snipers, and with links to Mikheil Saakashvili and Georgian security forces were ordered to travel to Kiev from Tbilisi during the Maidan events. It is two of these men that are now being called to testify in Kiev.
On the 18th of February they were given weapons and two of them took up positions at the Hotel Ukraina overlooking Maidan Square while the third was positioned in the Conservatory. Other snipers were positioned in other buildings to fire into the square. Prior to that they met with, among other people, an American soldier in uniform, a claimed “former” member of the US Army’s 101st Airborne Division, who gave them orders on what to do, which it turned out to be was to shoot into Maidan Square randomly targeting people, protestors and police alike, to create fear and confusion, to implicate the government forces as the shooters, to create the chaos necessary in order to undermine the government of President Yanukovych, who fled shortly after the event realising his own life was in danger. The name of the American soldier, or the alias he used, was Brian Christopher Boyenger. He showed up later as an adviser to the Ukrainian Georgian Legion. One of the snipers stated,
“Once, I guess around February 15, Mamulashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy with him wearing a uniform. Mamulashvili introduced him to us and told us he was an American military guy and will be our instructor.”
Another stated,
“This American was Brian Christopher Boyenger, a “former” soldier, a sniper, from the 101st Airborne Division.”
“He was the one who gave us orders.”
Questions naturally arise on how this “former” American soldier entered the country and took command of a murderous sniper unit and it is highly probable that the word “former” was used to give the Americans plausible deniability if their men were found out, as has now occurred. No one can seriously doubt that his presence was known to the US ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, who, according to then Vice President Joe Biden, was in hourly contact with Andriy Parubiy, the Ukrainian fascist who was in charge of “self defence units” made of heavily armed fascist thugs at Maidan. According to the Italian report, Parubiy was going in and out of the Hotel Ukraina from where many shots were fired and was aware of the presence of the American soldier so the American ambassador must have been aware and his government. The Americans have yet to explain Boyenger’s presence or what rank he held in the US Army. Parubiy’s role in the events has never been explained either but Poroshenko appointed this mass murderer as head of Ukraine security and intelligence forces after the coup and he now sits as President of Ukraine’s parliament since April 14, 2016, in which position he can use to give the Germans and Americans the cooperation they want.
The massacre at Maidan, therefore, is revealed to be a carefully planned military operation organised in detail, with teams of snipers brought in from various NATO allied countries, unknown to each other, but organised on arrival, given orders and assignments and each sniper team being assigned spotters to help in their deadly work. This is the tactic military sniper teams use so it has to be assumed that each of the sniper teams was controlled by the same people as the team the Italians talked to, that is by American soldiers trained in these techniques and who themselves operate in teams. This operation therefore had to be planned and organised on a high level by the American forces and allied NATO governments.
It is an extraordinary video to watch, as these men matter of factly talk about what they did, for whom they did it; to watch them pull back the veil so that we can see what callous brutality the NATO alliance is capable of. We have seen this of course in all their wars. They are deliberately brutal and always ruthless. But in the interviews with these men we are shown the capacity of US military machine-and here I mean the entire NATO alliance and all its allies and agents-to randomly murder ordinary people, to murder them as if they were stepping on ants, and with the same feeling of sadistic satisfaction.
The western media has so far ignored the Italian interviews, as they have Dr. Katachanovski’s detailed paper and all the other evidence that exists; as it must or face the prospect of the entire anti-Russian propaganda campaign from unravelling. For now it is clear that the entire justification of the Kiev regime for its existence, that it got rid of Yanukovych to get rid of killers, is now proved to be a cover for the fact that it is the very members of the present Kiev regime who were complicit in the killings and directed them.
But as these developments further evolve the international mafia known as NATO that is responsible for the Maidan Square massacre have not stopped slaughtering civilians. In Ukraine to this day the fascist riddled, NATO -backed Kiev regime continues it siege of the Donbass republics in violation of the laws of war and custom, in violation of all humanity, while the British and American intelligence services put out false stories about the shooting down of Flight MH17, using NATO connected websites like Bellingcat, which only serves to add to evidence that it is NATO and its Kiev allies that are responsible for that slaughter as well. For why make up stories except to cover yourself? The more they shift the blame the more it falls on them.
But the reality is that the new evidence reported by the Italian press will change nothing in the narrative of the general western media which will conspire to suppress or better, ignore this evidence. In fact no other media, anywhere, has included the crucial information of the presence of American soldiers in Maidan in their coverage of the Italian report, a fact which itself is more than curious.
The International Criminal Court should investigate this new evidence, lead where it may. They have jurisdiction. But we can expect nothing from the ICC even if a countervailing pressure is put on the prosecutor by the world public demanding that she act on this information. We know whose interests the ICC serves. No, justice for those murdered in Ukraine will have to wait for the return of true democracy in Ukraine, a Ukraine no longer under the control of the US, Germany and their allies, a Ukraine that is no longer a puppet state of the west, and no longer used as a pawn in the long war against Russia. For that is the ultimate objective, Russia.
Hybrid warfare, war without limits, is accelerating against her. Last week Russia was banished from the Olympics to damage her prestige, and the bizarre allegations about rigging the US elections continue. To add to the insults, the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly voted a few days ago on a resolution condemning “violations of human rights in Crimea;” a resolution demanded by Petro Poroshenko, one of those implicated in the murders in Maidan Square. You have to give it to them. They’ve got a lot of nerve.
But Russia is not alone. She has allies. When the Poroshenko resolution came up for a vote the EU and NATO allied countries obeyed orders and supported the resolution but 77 countries abstained and 25 voted against it including the BRICs and Iran, Syria, North Korea, Armenia, Belarus, Philippines, Venezuela, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Cuba, Eritrea, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Uganda, Sudan, Serbia, Uzbekistan, and Bolivia.
Russia is going to need these allies because the evidence, now coming in a flood, about what the NATO forces did in Kiev on February 20, 2014 show us that they are capable of anything, and will stop at nothing.
November 10, 2018 10:44 GMT
RFE/RL
A woman walks past an election campaign billboard on a street in Donetsk on November 7.
A woman walks past an election campaign billboard on a street in Donetsk on November 7.
The European Union has issued a statement rejecting "elections" scheduled for November 11 in the separatist-controlled parts of eastern Ukraine, saying that they are a breach of international law and undermine the Minsk agreements aimed at resolving the conflict in Ukraine.
"The EU considers the 'elections' planned for November 11, 2018, in the nongovernment-controlled territories of the so-called 'Luhansk People's Republic' and 'Donetsk People's Republic' as illegal and illegitimate and will not recognize them," the November 10 EU statement said.
It also called on Russia "to make full use of its considerable influence over the separatists it backs" to ensure the speedy and complete implementation of the Minsk agreements "starting with a comprehensive cease-fire and the withdrawal of heavy weaponry."
The European Union, the United States, and UN Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo have previously rejected the planned votes.
Ukraine has also denounced the polls, which according to the 2015 Minsk agreements should be held under Ukrainian law.
"I expect that the fake elections that Russia decided to hold on November 11 will prompt the imposition of new sanctions and show that the West's patience is not unlimited," said Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on November 7. "It is time now to talk not about easing the sanctions on Russia but about tightening them."
Russia provides military, political, and economic support to the separatist-controlled areas of eastern Ukraine.
In November 2016, the International Criminal Court (ICC) determined the conflict to be "an international armed conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation."
More than 10,300 people have been killed since the violence erupted in April 2014, as Russia was fomenting separatism in eastern Ukraine after pro-European protests drove Moscow-friendly Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych from power.
You Might Also Like _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2018 11:37 pm Post subject:
‘AN INSIDE LOOK AT HOW US-FUNDED FASCISTS IN UKRAINE MENTOR US WHITE SUPREMACISTS’:
https://southfront.org/an-inside-look-at-how-us-funded-fascists-in-ukr aine-mentor-us-white-supremacists/
‘..Meanwhile, groups like the Anti-Defamation League — which supposedly exist to battle anti-Semitism — refused to support a congressional effort to ban arms to groups affiliated with Right Sector, because “the focus should be on Russia.”…’
‘…Behind the scenes, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt were carefully stage managing the opposition, positioning the pliable Arseniy Yatsenyuk as the future leader of a U.S. client-state. Meanwhile, billionaire-backed U.S. soft-power entities like the Omidyar Network and Open Society Foundation plowed money into the opposition, providing it with high-tech organizing capacity and establishing new media outlet Hromadske overnight….’
The ‘Open Society Foundations’ are Soros Foundations – he is up to his neck in promoting the Fascist revival, as well as the US’s ‘Regime Change’ agenda.
That the US promoted the Fascist takeover in Ukraine shouldn’t be a surprise; they integrated Nazis into the ‘Stay Behind Armies’ (Gladio) shortly after the war, protecting them from prosecution in various European countries.
And Soros, of course, had no qualms working for the Nazis during the war.
Israel also remains remarkably mute re the Ukraine Fascists (ex-IDF groups were involved in the Maidan alongside the Fascists).
And as I quoted above, ‘..the Anti-Defamation League — which supposedly exist to battle anti-Semitism — refused to support a congressional effort to ban arms to groups affiliated with Right Sector, because “the focus should be on Russia.”
Despite the obvious Fascist nature of the US-installed regime, the UK is going to ‘…increase its military support to the Kiev government. This effort will include the deployment of British troops in Ukraine and sending a British Navy ship to the country….’
‘WESTERN WEAPONS, EQUIPMENT AND INSTRUCTORS FLOOD UKRAINE IN SIGN OF FURTHER TENSIONS WITH RUSSIA’:
https://southfront.org/western-weapons-equipment-and-instructors-flood -ukraine-in-sign-of-further-tensions-with-russia/ _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
We have confirmed from our sources that the data obtained by the intelligence of the RPD, in which a group of experts, British military came to Artyomovsk, they are probably correct. Of particular concern is that this operation, carried out in concert with Kiev, is being conducted to carry out a chemical attack in the north of the people's Republic of Donbass. While this was revealed initially at a briefing in Donetsk on Wednesday 21 November, the head of the press service of the Office of the people's Militia, captain Daniel Bezsonov, circulated speculation that the announcement of the DPR contained a mistake or a statement in excess.
On the basis of our conversations of people in the DPR associated with a group of Cossack independent of Russia and Donetsk, on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the arrival of staff British.
British Special Forces in Ukraine Preparing Chemical Weapons and Black Ops Against Donbass
We are at the remains of Panticapaeum, the capital of the Kingdom of Bosphorus, founded in the second quarter of the 6th century BC on both sides of the Kerch Strait.
We start our walk on the hilltop of Mithridates, in the heart of modern Kerch, where "terrible" king Mithridates of Pontus (134 - 64 BC) was killed. Greek geographer Strabo (63 BC - 23 AD) said Panticapaeum was the mother country of "all the Milesian cities of Bosphorus". It was a big city that boasted a convenient harbor and a shipyard.
As we climb higher, we come across an obelisk celebrating victory in the Great Patriotic War. This is one of the last ridges in eastern Crimea. To the left is Kerch harbor with no warships, only coastguard patrol boats. To the right, the dark blue Sea of Azov, the Kerch strait - now one of the geopolitical hot spots of the young 21st century - and far in the distance is Krimsky Most, the Crimea bridge.
Crossing the bridge - a 19km-long engineering marvel, built in only two years - is as smooth as it gets and takes less than 15 minutes. On the right, work proceeds on the rail bridge, which will be ready next year.
Washington officially insists all Crimea-related sanctions will remain until Moscow returns the peninsula to Ukraine. This will never happen. For Moscow, Crimea is already back to where it belongs. After all, Nikita Khrushchev, a sentimental Ukrainian, had transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 in a fit of proletarian brotherhood, while blatantly violating the Constitution of the USSR.
US neocons and assorted Russophobes insist that Washington should further weaponize Kiev's land, sea and air forces to counter "Russian aggression", but Crimeans treat this as a bad joke.
Everyone knows Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko needs a diversion from his dismal, corrupt government. Thus the illegal - according to the Minsk agreements - bombing of cities in Donbass and the recent Kerch "incident".
Poroshenko is polling at a meager 8%. He used the Kerch incident to declare martial law. He wanted three months, but Kiev's legislature gave him just one. He is bound to lose the next elections. Meanwhile, over two million Ukrainians have already voted with their feet and sought refuge in Russia. Poroshenko can't afford to launch a full-scale war on Donbass with no weapons, funds and little support from the EU.
For four years, Poroshenko has used a propaganda tsunami to manipulate the Ukrainian far right, which always abhorred Russians, Poles and Jews, to direct their blind hate towards Russians, the country's largest minority. But that was not enough to "solve" any of the myriad problems of a de facto failed state.
After Washington destroyed any possible detente with Moscow, President Putin's position remains very clear, as expressed during the 15th anniversary of the Valdai International Discussion Club in Sochi last October:
"Crimea is our land. We are still not going anywhere. Why is it our land? Not because we went there and took it... People came to a referendum in Crimea and voted for independence, first, and then for being part of Russia. Let me remind you for the hundredth time that there was no referendum in Kosovo, only the parliament voted for independence, that was all. Everyone who wanted to support and destroy the former Yugoslavia said: well, thank God, we are fine with that. Here, however, they disagree. Ok then, let's have a discussion, go over the UN documents, see what the UN Charter is all about, and where it talks about the right of nations to self-determination. This will be an endless discussion. However, we proceed based on the will expressed by the people who live on that territory."
Traveling from Simferopol to Kerch via Sevastopol, everyone I talked to confirmed they voted to re-join Russia, with no regrets.
For Russia-loving Crimeans, and Russians as a whole, Crimea back with the Motherland is a geopolitical, national security and national pride fait accompli. It also helps that Russia has done more for Crimea in four years than Ukraine did in six decades.
Airport making waves
My first impression, arriving at the brand new Simferopol International Airport, with its elegant design featuring 146 waves, is that any mid-sized city across the West would kill for it.
There's a road-building boom as well. The coastal road from Sevastopol to Kerch is being upgraded, but the jewel in the crown is the 240km-long east-to-west Taurida highway, to be completed next year, linking to the Crimea bridge.
Sevastopol - where Christianity, according to a complex mix of legend and fact, entered Russia - was built entirely by Russia along beautiful blue creeks always jammed with ships. It's indelible in the Russian national psyche especially because of its spirited two-year defense during the Crimean war, as well as repelling the 10-month siege by the Nazis during World War II.
The delicious old-world Hotel Sevastopol still reigns supreme, complete with an attached French brasserie and faint echoes of 19th century Paris that influenced Tsarist times.
Military officers parading their families by the famous promenade embellished with Christmas decorations dismiss the potential for more confrontation in the Sea of Azov. It and the Black Sea are de facto "Russian lakes".
When the Mongol Tatars of the Golden Horde first arrived in Crimea, they saw a tower and called it Kerim ("fort"), thus Crimea. Then the Tatars moved inland, to Bakhchisaray, where they built the gracious palace of the independent khanate in a green valley protected by stone hills. That was the apex of the Crimean Tatar khanate; Krym Tartary.
Crimea was the site of a groundbreaking historical encounter. Imagine Greek colonists, essentially urban, who had reached Crimea after navigating at least one month from the Bosphorus to southern Russia, finding themselves face to face with nomads from Central Asia who had crossed a sea of grass; the Scythians - an Indo-Iranian speaking confederation who were already deploying their nomadic skills around the Crimean steppes when the Greeks arrived in the 8th century BC.
Then came Sarmatians, Goths, Huns, Khazars - Turkic-speaking pastoral nomads from Central Asia, the Cuman (other Turkic-speaking nomads), Mongol-Tatars of the Golden Horde, before Byzantium, and the Ottoman empire. Crimean Tatars converted to Islam in the 14th century. The khanate went on until Catherine the Great conquered Crimea in 1783.
This shows how Crimea has always been an unparalleled crossroads intertwining "civilization" with what Athenian Greeks might describe as "barbarism". The clashes forever permeate the Western self-perception of superiority in relation to an alleged inferior, usually nomad, Other.
The fabled Golden Horde - actually the western arm of the Tatar-Mongol empire - controlled the steppes north of the Black Sea as well as Crimea from the mid-13th Century until at least the mid-15th Century.
This is crucial because they were actually the first unifiers of Eurasia, assuring stability across the steppes from China to Hungary. And that led to trade connectivity; the Ancient Silk Roads, stretching from China all the way to the Black Sea, then sailing towards the Mediterranean. This is impregnated in the collective memory of all Eurasian peoples.
Byzantium was what Russian scholar Mikhail Rostovtzeff, in his fabulous book Iranians and Greeks in South Russia, described as a "very interesting" mixed civilization. So was the Black Sea, and Crimea.
The Ancient Silk Road brought silk, spices, porcelain, bronze and gold from China, Persia and India, while the Greeks exported wine, pottery, jewelry and ornaments first made in Greece and then in the Bosphorus kingdom in Kerch.
Peace in the steppes translated into free passage between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. The Mongol Tatars arrived in the Black Sea when the Byzantine empire was nearly dead. Behind the land armies of the Crusaders were the powerhouses of Venice and Genoa, eager to enhance trade connectivity with the markets of the Black Sea.
After the Crusaders had stormed Constantinople in 1204, they slipped through the Bosphorus to finally reach Crimea. For a while merchants in Tana, an important Venetian colony in the Sea of Azov, were able to monopolize through Venice virtually all the trade with China.
The Europeans could not help but see an opening. Sudak, in southeast Crimea, was a Greek, Byzantine and then Genoese colony. Yet as we know, this all ended when the Turks captured Constantinople in 1453 - and there was no more Byzantine empire around the Black Sea.
Empires falling
The Nazis had designs on Crimea. Two months before Germany invaded the USSR, it was decided that Crimea would be separated from Russia and handed to a puppet Ukraine; that was the Gotland project.
Most of the Nazi collaborators in Crimea during WWII were not Tatars. Still, under Stalin, the Tatars were the first ethnic minority to be entirely deported. When Soviet power was back in Crimea, those who remained were expelled en masse to Central Asia because of "treason to the Fatherland". Now their sons and grandsons are coming back in droves.
When the USSR dissolved, the 19th-Century Tsarist Russian empire, plus Catherine the Great's 18th century Novorossiya, across the northern shore of the Black Sea, also dissolved.
Crossing parts of the Crimean steppe, it's easy to be reminded of Chekhov, who grew up in Taganrog on the Sea of Azov and loved the scent of herbs in the summer steppe.
It's also fitting terrain to reflect on the collapse of empires. The Russian drive to reach the warm waters of the Mediterranean always clashed with the Turkish drive to hold on to the Ottoman conquests around the Black Sea. This history reverberated through the Crimean War in the 1850s and also through WWI, with Turkey allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary and Russia invading Anatolia. Yet even before WWI was over, both the Tsarist and Ottoman empires were gone.
There's a lot of talking about a war between Russia and the US-led West, but I fortunately don't see it happening. A Soviet-American conflict was an actual threat, but the thing is that now, Russia, Europe and the USA do profit a lot from each other. Well, maybe the everyday person doesn't, but the leadership of these countries does.
I mean, there's a big name in the real estate business that says that Russians invest A LOT in luxurious houses and commercial projects in the UK, Spain, Germany...
It means that Russian and Western elites are on excellent terms and make big money out of their cooperation. As long as there will be American and European companies in Russia and Russian-owned villas in Cannes, there will be no war... or at least, I hope so.
John Helmer Dances with Bears Sun, 26 Jan 2020 19:07 UTC
irony steam irons The truth is that Consortium News trusted a Russian entity named the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Ukrainian reporter called Arina Tsukanova for a story published on February 27, 2017, about Chrystia Freeland's grandfather Mikhail Chomiak, a propagandist and spy for the German Army who advocated and assisted in the murder of the Jews, Poles and Russians during World War II, and took his reward by stealing Jewish property - publishing company, office, apartment, antique furniture, and limousine.
The story about Freeland and the ethnic cleansing of Ukraine on which Freeland agrees, still, with Chomiak, was the truth. It's also a truth she tries to escape by blaming the Russian state or Kremlin propaganda for repeating. Repeating doesn't turn the truth into a lie, though as Joseph Goebbels advised, repeating the lie helps.
The point isn't that Freeland is culpable in her grandfather's sins. Her sin is hiding them, and her reason for doing so. She agrees with Chomiak on turning Ukraine into the Greater Galicia it was Adolf Hitler's objective to achieve between 1939 to 1945: that's to say, cleanse the territory of Jews, Poles and Russians by killing them all. Chomiak succeeded with the first two; he was then employed by the US Army on the third. Freeland is keeping the plan in the family; they now have the Canadian government behind them. Demonizing Russians is part of the same plan as it was in Chomiak's day.
There's another truth wrapped in an irony. Arina Tsukanova, the byline writer of the Strategic Culture Foundation story and the Consortium News story, cannot be found; isn't known at the media of Kiev and Crimea where her published pieces claim she works; and doesn't reply to emails and Facebook communications. She is a ghost — a byline invented by the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow.
The Galician state plan, the genocide which went with it, and the current campaign of lies against Russia didn't start with Chomiak or end with Freeland. In Canada they have been continued by many officials; among them Lieutenant-General Paul Wynnyk, commander of the Canadian Army, then Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, 2016-2019, and now a deputy minister in the Alberta provincial government; and Roman Waschuk, Canada's ambassador to Kiev, 2014-2019; for their details, click here.
In an announcement last week, Joe Lauria, the editor of CN since founder Robert Parry died in 2018, said he had instructed Toronto lawyers to send libel notices to the Canadian signals intelligence agency, Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and to a local broadcaster called Global News. The notices asked for retractions and apologies.
Lauria said CN had been defamed for a publication in February 27, 2017, when Chomiak's wartime record was reported for the first time. Except it wasn't for the first time and the original CN article wasn't quite what it purported to be.
The CSE had produced a secret analysis, Global News reported, on Russian info-war against Freeland. "Cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage" was the technical Canadian spy agency term quoted. "The Grandfather Nazi narrative" was another of the terms. The secret Canadian intelligence was:
"In early spring 2017 and spring 2018, sources linked to Russia popularized MFA Freeland's family history, very likely intended to cause personal reputational damage in order to discredit the Government of Canada's ongoing diplomatic and military support of Ukraine, to delegitimize Canada's decision to enact the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Offices Act, and the expulsion of several Russian diplomats."
The Global News report can be read here.
Sources linked to Russia were reportedly tracked down by CSE. "The first attack," claimed Global News, citing the CSE report, "was a February 2017 report in the 'online Consortium News' followed 'in quick succession' by pro-Russian English language and Russian-language online media, the CSE report says."
Lauria charged last week that this was libellous. Aside, he didn't dispute Parry's claims at the time that he had been first or that Freeland's counter-attack with her Russia lie was aimed at Parry and CN. Here is Parry's original publication, bylined Arina Tsukanova, and tagged "exclusive".
According to CN's original publication, Tsukanova "is a Russian Ukrainian journalist from Kiev currently living in Crimea. Before the Euromaidan she used to work for several Ukrainian newspapers, now closed."
In the English language, Tsukanova's stories started to appear in mid-2016 and then stopped in April 2017. When her story on the Freeland-Chomiak case appeared in CN, she had reported nothing on the idea, the topic, or the subject details before; there was no sequel or related report by her afterwards.
In the Russian language Tsukanova's reporting record began on January 18, 2016, and is still current. Her two outlets are the Strategic Culture Foundation (FSK in Russian) and KM.ru, both in Moscow. The reports specialize on Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. She has reported only once on Freeland and Chomiak. The story which appeared in Russian on March 2, 2017, is not the same story as had appeared under her byline in CN three days earlier. The Russian version of the story has 23 paragraphs. The first 11 paragraphs of the CN story, a third of the publication, weren't written by Tsukanova and do not appear in the Russian version. They were written by Parry; "I personally edited and fact-checked [it]", Parry wrote later. It was Parry's English version which was reprinted by Strategic Culture Foundation on March 2, 2017, and then Parry's lone bylined story which ran in the same place on March 12, 2017.
Lauria now says:
"I carefully went through your two stories and compared it to Consortium News of Feb. 27, 2017. There is no doubt that it is based on your earlier story. That should have been mentioned in the Consortium article. I did not find whole sentences or paragraphs that were taken directly from your article. The fact remains that the story of Freeland's grandfather is true and that cannot be disputed. I have updated the article I wrote on Tuesday to include this line in the body of the text: The story was first reported by John Helmer a month earlier...In her version, Tuskanova reported; and I put a note at the end of the story saying: This article has been updated to show that the story of Freeland's grandfather was first reported by John Helmer."
The revised version of the CN report looks like this. Lauria is making amends.
Parry, who can't, made a habit of lifting material without giving credit and then promoting himself as the originator. In March 2015, for example, he produced a piece on Igor Kolomoisky, the Ukrainian oligarch; the Burisma scandal involving the Biden family, and Natalie Jaresko, the State Department official who became the Ukrainian minister of finance. Here's Parry's story.
This material started with two stories of mine which had appeared a month earlier. Parry helped himself to the topic and the material, but omitted to mention their origin. He also forgot that he had written to me to say: "John, thanks. Good piece." Here is where Parry started and also here.
As for Parry's reporting on Jaresko, which appeared on February 19, 2015 — — that started with a story I had published on Jaresko on December 3, 2014. After reworking the material and sources, Parry gave a mention of the origin in my work. He placed that at the 43rd paragraph of his 52-paragraph piece.
Lauria was asked to verify Parry's source, Tsukanova. He says he wrote Tsukanova by email, but she hasn't replied. Independently, checks of the Crimea and Kiev media last week reveal that she is not known to the press in either place where she claims to have worked for years. I attempted to contact her at her Facebook page; she did not reply. In the Facebook gallery of her photographs, there are none of Tsukanova on location acting as a journalist.
strategic culture foundation russian version
The Strategic Culture Foundation's Russian masthead
Above: the header for Arina Tsukanova's story archive published by the Strategic Culture Foundation; source -- https://www.fondsk.ru/authors/
Below center: the only photograph of Tsukanova found on the Russian internet. This identifies Tsukanova, not only as journalist, but also as a "publicist". Source: https://www.infox.ru/blog/168
Lauria also says that
"not being able to reach her only proves that she's not reachable... I do not think there is any evidence to say she is a ghost for someone else. It seems pure speculation at this point...In the end of the day, the story is true so does it really matter? A source or a sources' [sic] motives become irrelevant if the information they provide is true."
The problem for Lauria and CN is that if Tsukanova was an invention of the Strategic Culture Foundation in 2017 when Parry picked up the Freeland-Chomiak story, and if the Moscow entity was receiving money from Russian state media agencies, then the link between Parry and the Russian side was one which is an embarrassment now for CN in its claims against CSE and Global News.
Tsukanova may be a ghost; the Strategic Culture Foundation is not. It may be suspected in Ottawa of taking money from state organs; in Moscow it is suspected of taking money from the Russian Orthodox Church. But there is no evidence of either. What there is is a record of the foundation's registration on February 21, 2005, at a room in the Polyanka district of Moscow. The president was listed as Yury Prokofiev; the general director, Vladimir Maksimenko. The "main activity" on the registration forms is "research and development in the field of social sciences and humanities". Tax inspection is also confirmed, but no details of income or expenditures.
Yury Prokofiev Vladimir Maksimenko strategic culture foundation
Left, Yury Prokofiev, founding president of the Strategic Culture Foundation in Moscow; right, Vladimir Maksimenko, the general director.
About Prokofiev, now about 81 years of age, there is a detailed history of his evolution from Communist Party apparatchik in 1990-91 to Orthodox Christian monarchist a decade later. The profile, with extensive quotes and references, was published by Valery Lebedev in March 2007; read the Russian here. Lebedev titles his story after the Russian story of the puppeteer Karabas Barabas, the villain in a Russian fairy tale. According to Lebedev's account, the Strategic Culture Foundation was designed as a platform for the promotion of Russian nationalism. He doesn't know where Prokofiev got his money to publish.
About Maksimenko, the Russian record indicates that he studied history to doctoral level at MGIMO and was (may still be) an employee of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. His earlier academic publications were on the Maghreb (Arab North Africa); his later ones on Orthodox monarchism appear here. About both Prokofiev and Maksimenko, Lebedev says they have been shopping from one cause to another for years; he implies they have never managed to draw much money or audience.
Maksimenko does not reply to emails at the contact address given for the Strategic Culture Foundation. The foundation has published only one article by Maksimenko under his byline in English; it is about French politics. There is no article in English by Prokofiev in the archive.
With them Freeland shares the same combination of ethnic nationalism and God - in Freeland's case, she told the FT, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
"I'm very patriotic," Freeland told the FT. "'Be good Ukrainians, and by being good Ukrainians, you will be even better Canadians'," Freeland recounts. 'I happen to be Ukrainian-Canadian. When I moved to Toronto I had an instant community of Canadian-Ukrainians. There's a culture there that my kids can immediately experience in Edmonton or Saskatoon...She then embarks on a passionate disquisition about the robustness of Ukraine's democracy. An aide halts her to say they are late for another meeting a few blocks away.'"
Pricking Freeland's vanity is a bigger job than the FT can handle; or Parry's vanity for Lauria. The vanity of the Canadian espionage establishment will be safe in a Toronto court. But pricked the CSE file most certainly it is. That's because the record of Canadian spying for influence over Russian journalism long precedes this affair.
victor louis janice cown spy russia canada cold war
The Canadian couple who spied on Russia under diplomatic cover during the Cold war. Victor Louis (L) and Janice Cowan (R)
It started, in fact, with a woman called Janice Cowan, a Canadian of English origin who was the wife of the Canadian military attaché in the Moscow embassy in the early 1990s. Cowan was trained to penetrate Russian media circles and report back to Ottawa. "It was a good time to be a spy", Cowan wrote in a memoir she published called A Spy's Wife; it was issued in 2006 by a Toronto publisher called James Lorimer with a grant from the Canadian Government. "Quality Canadian books you'll want to read" is Lorimer's motto - except that without cash from Ottawa, Lorimer might have judged that no one would have wanted to read about Cowan's espionage. In Moscow she took diplomatic immunity from her husband; her spy cover was as an editor at the English language paper, The Moscow Tribune. (The competing English-language paper, The Moscow Times, had Cowan's counterparts from the CIA.) Cowan's targets for espionage included the son-in-law of Marshal Georgy Zhukov and me.
In its review of Cowan's book, the Toronto Globe & Mail said:
"Her account of her pre-assignment operational training, and of her various intelligence-gathering tours to Soviet hot spots is convincing. But what threatens to drop this otherwise charming little book into the trivia basket is Cowan's incurable and self-confessed romanticism about intelligence."
The files of the Communications Security Establishment must include Cowan's reports; they remain classified even after she broke cover with her book. They can't be mentioned now because that would reveal the topmost secret of all - that when it comes to info-war between Russia and Canada, penetration of the media, and what the CSE calls "cyber influence activity to cause reputational damage", it was the Canadians who started against the Russians first.
It's been catch-up, tit-for-tat, not to mention plagiarism, ever since.
John Helmer is the longest continuously serving foreign correspondent in Russia, and the only western journalist to direct his own bureau independent of single national or commercial ties. He first set up his bureau in 1989, making him today the doyen of the foreign press corps in Russia.
Before Russia, Helmer published several books in the US on military and political topics. Essays on the American presidency and on urban policy in the US followed in book compilations in 1981 and 1982; essays on Greek and Middle Eastern politics between 1986 and 1989. Since 1989 he has published almost exclusively on Russian topics. He is the accredited correspondent of Business Day and The Weekender of South Africa, and the sole reporter to Africa of Russian news. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Wendy Sherman thinks her aim in talks with Russian officials starting Monday is to lecture them on the cost of hubris. Instead she’s set to lead the U.S., NATO, and Europe down a path of ruin, warns Scott Ritter.
Ahead of the formal talks, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov on Sunday in Geneva and told him Washington “would welcome genuine progress through diplomacy.” (Russian Mission in Geneva)
By Scott Ritter
Special to Consortium News
If ever a critical diplomatic negotiation was doomed to fail from the start, the discussions between the U.S. and Russia over Ukraine and Russian security guarantees is it.
The two sides can’t even agree on an agenda.
From the Russian perspective, the situation is clear: “The Russian side came here [to Geneva] with a clear position that contains a number of elements that, to my mind, are understandable and have been so clearly formulated—including at a high level—that deviating from our approaches simply is not possible,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told the press after a pre-meeting dinner on Sunday hosted by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who is leading the U.S. delegation.
Ryabkov was referring Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demands to U.S. President Joe Biden in early December regarding Russian security guarantees, which were then laid out by Moscow in detail in the form of two draft treaties, one a Russian-U.S. security treaty, the other a security agreement between Russia and NATO.
The latter would bar Ukraine from joining NATO and rule out any eastward expansion by the trans-Atlantic military alliance. At the time, Ryabkov tersely noted that the U.S. should immediately begin to address the proposed drafts with an eye to finalizing something when the two sides meet. Now, with the meeting beginning on Monday, it doesn’t appear as if the U.S. has done any such thing.
“[T]he talks are going to be difficult,” Ryabkov told reporters after the dinner meeting. “They cannot be easy. They will be business-like. I think we won’t waste our time tomorrow.” When asked if Russia was ready to compromise, Ryabkov tersely responded, “The Americans should get ready to reach a compromise.”
All the U.S. has been willing to do, it seems, is to remind Russia of so-called “serious consequences” should Russia invade Ukraine, something the U.S. and NATO fear is imminent, given the scope and scale of recent Russian military exercises in the region involving tens of thousands of troops. This threat was made by Biden to Putin on several occasions, including a phone call initiated by Putin last week to help frame the upcoming talks.
Yet on the eve of the Ryabkov-Sherman meeting, U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken simply reiterated these threats, declaring that Russia would face “massive consequences” if it invaded Ukraine.
“It’s clear that we’ve offered him two paths forward,” Blinken said, speaking of Putin. “One is through diplomacy and dialogue; the other is through deterrence and massive consequences for Russia if it renews its aggression against Ukraine. And we’re about to test the proposition of which path President Putin wants to take this week.”
Lessons of History
Moscow, June 23, 1941: Soviet soldiers on their way to the front. The sign reads: “Our cause is just. The enemy will be crushed. The victory will be ours! ” (Anatoliy Garanin .License: CC BY SA 3.0.)
It is as if both Biden and Blinken are deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to reading Russia.
Ryabkov has alluded to a fact already made clear by the Russians—there will be no compromise when it comes to Russia’s legitimate national security interests. And if the U.S. cannot understand how the accumulation of military power encompassed in a military alliance which views Russia as a singular, existential threat to its members’ security is seen by Russia as threatening, then there is no comprehension of how the events of June 22, 1941 have shaped the present -day Russian psyche, why Russia will never again allow such a situation to occur, and why the talks are doomed before they even begin.
As for the American threats, Russia has given its response—any effort to sanction Russia would result, as Putin told Biden last month, in a “complete rupture of relations” between Russia and those countries attempting sanctions. One need not be a student of history to comprehend that the next logical step following a “complete rupture of relations” between two parties that are at loggerheads over matters pertaining to existential threats to the national security of one or both is not the peaceful resumption of relations, but war.
Support CN’s Winter Fund Drive!
There is no mealy-mouthed posturing by Foggy Bottom peacocks taking place in Moscow, but rather a cold, hard, statement of fact—ignore Russia’s demands at you own peril. The U.S., it seems, believes that the worst-case scenario is one where Russia invades Ukraine, only to wilt under the sustained pressure of economic sanctions and military threats.
Russia’s worse-case scenario is one where it engages in armed conflict with NATO.
Generally speaking, the side that is most prepared for the reality of armed conflict will prevail.
Russia has been preparing for this possibility for more than a year. It has repeatedly shown a capability to rapidly mobilize 100,000-plus combat-ready forces in short order. NATO has shown an ability to mobilize 30,000 after six-to-nine-months of extensive preparations.
The Shape of War
Russian Air Force Sukhoi Su-24. (mil.ru/Wikimedia Commons)
What would a conflict between Russia and NATO look like? In short, not like anything NATO has prepared for. Time is the friend of NATO in any such conflict—time to let sanctions weaken the Russian economy, and time to allow NATO to build up sufficient military power to be able to match Russia’s conventional military strength.
Russia knows this, and as such, any Russian move will be designed to be both swift and decisive.
First and foremost, if it comes to it, when Russia decides to move on Ukraine, it will do so with a plan of action that has been well-thought out and which sufficient resources have been allocated for its successful completion. Russia will not get involved in a military misadventure in Ukraine that has the potential of dragging on and on, like the U.S. experience in Afghanistan and Iraq. Russia has studied an earlier U.S. military campaign—Operation Desert Storm, of Gulf War I—and has taken to heart the lessons of that conflict.
One does not need to occupy the territory of a foe in order to destroy it. A strategic air campaign designed to nullify specific aspects of a nations’ capability, whether it be economic, political, military, or all the above, coupled with a focused ground campaign designed to destroy an enemy’s army as opposed to occupy its territory, is the likely course of action.
Given the overwhelming supremacy Russia has both in terms of the ability to project air power backed by precision missile attacks, a strategic air campaign against Ukraine would accomplish in days what the U.S. took more than a month to do against Iraq in 1991.
On the ground, the destruction of Ukraine’s Army is all but guaranteed. Simply put, the Ukrainian military is neither equipped nor trained to engage in large-scale ground combat. It would be destroyed piecemeal, and the Russians would more than likely spend more time processing Ukrainian prisoners of war than killing Ukrainian defenders.
For any Russian military campaign against Ukraine to be effective in a larger conflict with NATO, however, two things must occur—Ukraine must cease to exist as a modern nation state, and the defeat of the Ukrainian military must be massively one-sided and quick. If Russia is able to accomplish these two objectives, then it is well positioned to move on to the next phase of its overall strategic posturing vis-à-vis NATO—intimidation.
While the U.S., NATO, the EU, and the G7 have all promised “unprecedented sanctions,” sanctions only matter if the other side cares. Russia, by rupturing relations with the West, no longer would care about sanctions. Moreover, it is a simple acknowledgement of reality that Russia can survive being blocked from SWIFT transactions longer than Europe can survive without Russian energy. Any rupturing of relations between Russia and the West will result in the complete embargoing of Russian gas and oil to European customers.
There is no European Plan B. Europe will suffer, and because Europe is composed of erstwhile democracies, politicians will pay the price. All those politicians who followed the U.S. blindly into a confrontation with Russia will now have to answer to their respective constituents why they committed economic suicide on behalf of a Nazi-worshipping, thoroughly corrupt nation (Ukraine) which has nothing in common with the rest of Europe. It will be a short conversation.
NATO’s Fix
NATO exercise in Germany. (Spc. Ashley Webster/Wikimedia Commons)
If the U.S. tries to build up NATO forces on Russia’s western frontiers in the aftermath of any Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia will then present Europe with a fait accompli in the form of what would now be known as the “Ukrainian model.” In short, Russia will guarantee that the Ukrainian treatment will be applied to the Baltics, Poland, and even Finland, should it be foolish enough to pursue NATO membership.
Russia won’t wait until the U.S. has had time to accumulate sufficient military power, either. Russia will simply destroy the offending party through the combination of an air campaign designed to degrade the economic function of the targeted nation, and a ground campaign designed to annihilate the ability to wage war. Russia does not need to occupy the territory of NATO for any lengthy period—just enough to destroy whatever military power has been accumulated by NATO near its borders.
And—here’s the kicker—short of employing nuclear weapons, there’s nothing NATO can do to prevent this outcome. Militarily, NATO is but a shadow of its former self. The once great armies of Europe have had to cannibalize their combat formations to assemble battalion-sized “combat groups” in the Baltics and Poland. Russia, on the other hand, has reconstituted two army-size formations—the 1st Guards Tank Army and the 20th Combined Arms Army—from the Cold War-era which specialize in deep offensive military action.
Even Vegas wouldn’t offer odds on this one.
Sherman will face off against Ryabkov in Geneva, with the fate of Europe in her hands. The sad thing is, she doesn’t see it that way. Thanks to Biden, Blinken and the host of Russophobes who populate the U.S. national security state today, Sherman thinks she is there to simply communicate the consequences of diplomatic failure to Russia. To threaten. With mere words.
What Sherman, Biden, Blinken, and the others have yet to comprehend is that Russia has already weighed the consequences and is apparently willing to accept them. And respond. With action.
One wonders if Sherman, Biden, Blinken, and the others have thought this through. Odds are, they have not, and the consequences for Europe will be dire.
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
“The primordial interest of the United States, over which for centuries we have fought wars– the First, the Second and Cold Wars– has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there, they’re the only force that could threaten us. And to make sure that that doesn’t happen.” George Friedman, STRATFOR CEO at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs
The Ukrainian crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It’s about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia called Nord Stream 2. Washington sees the pipeline as a threat to its primacy in Europe and has tried to sabotage the project at every turn. Even so, Nord Stream has pushed ahead and is now fully-operational and ready-to-go. Once German regulators provide the final certification, the gas deliveries will begin. German homeowners and businesses will have a reliable source of clean and inexpensive energy while Russia will see a significant boost to their gas revenues. It’s a win-win situation for both parties.
The US Foreign Policy establishment is not happy about these developments. They don’t want Germany to become more dependent on Russian gas because commerce builds trust and trust leads to the expansion of trade. As relations grow warmer, more trade barriers are lifted, regulations are eased, travel and tourism increase, and a new security architecture evolves. In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power. This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in. Warmer relations between Germany and Russia signal an end to the “unipolar” world order the US has overseen for the last 75 years. A German-Russo alliance threatens to hasten the decline of the Superpower that is presently inching closer to the abyss. This is why Washington is determined to do everything it can to sabotage Nord Stream and keep Germany within its orbit. It’s a matter of survival.
That’s where Ukraine comes into the picture. Ukraine is Washington’s ‘weapon of choice’ for torpedoing Nord Stream and putting a wedge between Germany and Russia. The strategy is taken from page one of the US Foreign Policy Handbook under the rubric: Divide and Rule. Washington needs to create the perception that Russia poses a security threat to Europe. That’s the goal. They need to show that Putin is a bloodthirsty aggressor with a hair-trigger temper who cannot be trusted. To that end, the media has been given the assignment of reiterating over and over again, “Russia is planning to invade Ukraine.” What’s left unsaid is that Russia has not invaded any country since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and that the US has invaded or toppled regimes in more than 50 countries in the same period of time, and that the US maintains over 800 military bases in countries around the world. None of this is reported by the media, instead the focus is on “evil Putin” who has amassed an estimated 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border threatening to plunge all of Europe into another bloody war.
All of the hysterical war propaganda is created with the intention of manufacturing a crisis that can be used to isolate, demonize and, ultimately, splinter Russia into smaller units. The real target, however, is not Russia, but Germany. Check out this excerpt from an article by Michael Hudson at The Unz Review:
“The only way left for U.S. diplomats to block European purchases is to goad Russia into a military response and then claim that avenging this response outweighs any purely national economic interest. As hawkish Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland, explained in a State Department press briefing on January 27: “If Russia invades Ukraine one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.” (“America’s Real Adversaries Are Its European and Other Allies”, The Unz Review)
There it is in black and white. The Biden team wants to “goad Russia into a military response” in order to sabotage NordStream. That implies there will be some kind of provocation designed to induce Putin to send his troops across the border to defend the ethnic Russians in the eastern part of the country. If Putin takes the bait, the response would be swift and harsh. The media will excoriate the action as a threat to all of Europe while leaders around the world will denounce Putin as the “new Hitler”. This is Washington’s strategy in a nutshell, and the whole production is being orchestrated with one goal in mind; to make it politically impossible for the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to wave NordStream through the final approval process.
Given what we know about Washington’s opposition to Nord Stream, readers may wonder why earlier in the year the Biden administration lobbied Congress NOT to impose more sanctions on the project. The answer to that question is simple: Domestic politics. Germany is currently decommissioning its nuclear power plants and needs natural gas to make up for the energy shortfall. Also, the threat of economic sanctions is a “turn-off” for Germans who see them as a sign of foreign meddling. “Why is the United States interfering in our energy decisions,” asks the average German. “Washington should mind its own business and stay out of ours.” This is precisely the response one would expect from any reasonable person.
Then, there’s this from Al Jazeera:
“Germans in the majority support the project, it is only parts of the elite and media who are against the pipeline…
“The more the US talks about sanctioning or criticizes the project, the more it becomes popular in German society,” said Stefan Meister, a Russia and eastern Europe expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations.” (“Nord Stream 2: Why Russia’s pipeline to Europe divides the West”, AlJazeera)
So, public opinion is solidly behind Nord Stream which helps to explain why Washington settled on a new approach. Sanctions are not going to work, so Uncle Sam has flipped to Plan B: Create a big enough external threat that Germany will be forced to block the opening of the pipeline. Frankly, the strategy smacks of desperation, but you have to be impressed by Washington’s perseverance. They might be down by 5 runs in the bottom of the 9th, but they haven’t thrown in the towel just yet. They’re going to give it one last shot and see if they can make some headway.
On Monday, President Biden held his first joint-press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the White House. The ballyhoo surrounding the event was simply unprecedented. Everything was orchestrated to manufacture a “crisis atmosphere” that Biden used to pressure the chancellor in the direction of US policy. Earlier in the week, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki repeatedly said that a “Russian invasion was imminent.” Her comments were followed by State Department flak Nick Price opining that the Intel agencies had provided him with details of an alleged Russian-backed “false flag” operation they expected to take place in the near future in east Ukraine. Price’s warning was followed on Sunday morning by national security advisor Jake Sullivan claiming that a Russian invasion could happen at any time maybe “even tomorrow.” This was just days after Bloomberg News agency had published its sensational and utterly-false headline that “Russia Invades Ukraine”.
Can you see the pattern here? Can you see how these baseless claims were all used to apply pressure to the unsuspecting German chancellor who seemed oblivious to the campaign that was aimed at him?
As one might expect, the final blow was delivered by the American president himself. During the press conference Biden stated emphatically that,
“If Russia invades … there will no longer [be] a Nord Stream 2.. We will bring an end to it.”
So, now Washington sets policy for Germany???
What insufferable arrogance!
The German chancellor was taken aback by Biden’s comments which clearly were not part of the original script. Even so, Scholz never agreed to cancel Nord Stream and refused to even mention the pipeline by name. If Biden thought he could sandbag the leader of the world’s third biggest economy by cornering him in a public forum, he guessed wrong. Germany remains committed to launching Nord Stream regardless of potential flare-ups in far-flung Ukraine. But that could change at any time. After all, who knows what incitements Washington might be planning in the near future? Who knows how many lives they are prepared to sacrifice in order to put a wedge between Germany and Russia? Who knows what risks Biden is willing to take to slow America’s decline and prevent a new “polycentric” world order from emerging? Anything could happen in the weeks ahead. Anything.
For now, Germany is in the catbird seat. It’s up to Scholz to decide how the matter will be settled. Will he implement the policy that best serves the interests of the German people or will he cave in to Biden’s relentless arm twisting? Will he chart a new course that strengthens new alliances in the bustling Eurasian corridor or will he throw his support behind Washington’s crazed geopolitical ambitions? Will he accept Germany’s pivotal role in a new world order— in which many emerging centers of power share equally in global governance and where the leadership remains unflinchingly committed to multilateralism, peaceful development and security for all– or will he try to prop up the tattered post-War system that has clearly outlived its shelf-life?
One thing is certain; whatever Germany decides is bound to affect us all.
← What Putin WantsWill Washington Launch a Mass-Casualty ... →
Subscribe to New Columns
Tweet
Reddit25
Share
Share127
Email
Print
More
152 Shares
• Category: Economics, Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Germany, NATO, Nord Stream 2, Russia, Ukraine
Recently from Author
History Points to the US as Perpetrator of Crisis in Ukraine
Will Washington Launch a Mass-Casualty "False Flag" to Sabotage Nord Stream?
What Putin Wants
Biden Spits on Putin's Request for Security
Moscow to Washington: "Remove the Nukes on Our Doorstep and Stop the Eastward Push"
Related Pieces by Author
Will Washington Launch a Mass-Casualty "False Flag" to Sabotage Nord Stream?
Biden Spits on Putin's Request for Security
Moscow to Washington: "Remove the Nukes on Our Doorstep and Stop the Eastward Push"
What Putin Wants
Flashpoint Ukraine: Don't Poke the Bear
Of Related Interest
Ukraine Implementing Minsk Accords & Ending Conflict 'Very Last' Thing US, UK Want, Ex-MEP Says
Nick Griffin
Will Washington Launch a Mass-Casualty "False Flag" to Sabotage Nord Stream?
Mike Whitney
The Ukraine Crisis: Facts Versus Lies
An American Christian Perspective
Thomas Ertl
← What Putin WantsWill Washington Launch a Mass-Casualty ... →
Hide 549 CommentsLeave a Comment
"The Crisis in Ukraine Is Not About Ukraine. It's About Germany"
• 549 Comments • 549 Comments
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
Thomasina says:
February 12, 2022 at 3:08 am GMT • 8.8 days ago • 200 Words ↑
Excellent report.
“White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki repeatedly said that a ‘Russian invasion was imminent.’ Her comments were followed by State Department flak Nick Price opining that the Intel agencies had provided him with details of an alleged Russian-backed ‘false flag’ operation they expected to take place in the near future in east Ukraine.”
Yes, these guys are employing the narcissist tactic of projection: whatever they accuse you of is exactly what they are planning, namely a U.S.-backed false flag operation. Look for it. They essentially broadcast what they’re about to do, except you’ll get blamed for it.
They are trying to bait and goad Russia into making the first move. If they do, then out will come the blaming, shaming, smearing, sanctions.
About all Russia can do is keep her head down and her eyes peeled for any signs of a false flag, and then get evidence of it.
A much larger war that could dangerously escalate into World War III was averted by Russia’s preemptive special operation in Ukraine aimed at neutralizing the US and NATO’s latent, imminent, and hot threats emanating from that country. This makes Moscow’s military mission truly a peacemaking one since the Eurasian Great Power responsibly sought to prevent World War III, not spark it. Russia truly had no choice but to act now.
The US-led Western Mainstream Media’s latest information warfare narrative against Russia is that President Putin just sparked World War III, but the reality is that he just averted it. The Russian leader’s address to his people on early Thursday morning made that abundantly clear and should be in full by those who truly want to know the truth about what just happened. As the author explained in his latest analyses about how “Russia’s ‘Shock & Awe’ Campaign In Ukraine Aims To Resolve The European Missile Crisis” and “Russia’s Special Operation In Ukraine Will Restore Global Strategic Stability”, as well as his piece “Tracing The Geostrategic Sequence Of The US’ Attempted Containment Of Russia”, the Eurasian Great Power is simply waging a preemptive war before the US’ planned World War III can begin.
In short, the US and its anti-Russian NATO allies were secretly establishing military facilities in Ukraine for launching their own impending war against that neighboring nuclear power. First, however, Washington wanted to neutralize Moscow’s nuclear second-strike capabilities through the regional deployment of “anti-missile systems” and strike weapons, including one day hypersonic missiles and even eventually to Ukraine itself too. This coincided with the US’ withdrawal from strategic arms pacts such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and the Open Skies Treaty, all of which destabilized European security by making America’s military intentions all the more ambiguous to Russia.
President Putin’s speech from Monday evening when he announced his country’s recognition of the Donbass Republics saw him meticulously detail the existential nature of the threat that the US and NATO’s secret military infrastructure in Ukraine poses to Russia. He described their airfields, bases, and ports in the country that he warned will soon be used to strike his own, albeit after first presumably neutralizing its nuclear second-strike capabilities. Thursday morning’s speech compared post-Soviet Russia’s three-decade-long appeasement of US-led NATO to Stalin’s pre-World War II appeasement of Nazi Germany, declaring that “We will not make this mistake the second time. We have no right to do so. Those who aspire to global dominance have publicly designated Russia as their enemy.”
According to Russian intelligence, “If we look at the sequence of events and the incoming reports, the showdown between Russia and these forces cannot be avoided. It is only a matter of time. They are getting ready and waiting for the right moment.” “They did not leave us any other option for defending Russia and our people, other than the one we are forced to use today”, President Putin revealed, which is why “In these circumstances, we have to take bold and immediate action.” He then issued what’s widely interpreted as a nuclear warning to NATO: “No matter who tries to stand in our way or all the more so create threats for our country and our people, they must know that Russia will respond immediately, and the consequences will be such as you have never seen in your entire history.”
It’s for all of these reasons that Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova clarified that “It’s not a beginning of war, it is prevention of a situation that could lead to global military confrontation.” What she meant was exactly what President Putin himself had said, namely that a much larger war that could dangerously escalate into World War III was averted by Russia’s preemptive special operation in Ukraine aimed at neutralizing the US and NATO’s latent, imminent, and hot threats emanating from that country. This makes Moscow’s military mission truly a peacemaking one since the Eurasian Great Power responsibly sought to prevent World War III, not spark it. Russia truly had no choice but to act now.
That’s because President Putin also revealed on Thursday morning that “Even now, with NATO’s eastward expansion the situation for Russia has been becoming worse and more dangerous by the year.” As he put it, “It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and, as I said, is approaching our very border.” It’s therefore understandable why Russia finally had to act.
After all, President Putin already made his back-up plan known on 21 December when speaking at an “Expanded Meeting Of The Defense Ministry Board”. At that time, he said that “what they are doing, or trying or planning to do in Ukraine, is not happening thousands of kilometres away from our national border. It is on the doorstep of our house. They must understand that we simply have nowhere further to retreat to.” That event coincided with Russia’s publication of its security guarantee requests to the US and NATO for ensuring the integrity of its national security red lines. Moscow asked for legal guarantees halting the bloc’s continual eastward expansion, the removal of strike weapons from Russia’s borders, and a return to the continental military status quo enshrined in the now-defunct 1997 Russian-NATO Founding Act. Regrettably, the US-led West rebuffed the last chance for a diplomatic solution.
Debunking The Top Ten Infowar Narratives About Russia’s Special Operation In Ukraine
The purpose of this piece is to debunk the top ten infowar narratives about this conflict in order to enlighten readers about the truth of what’s really happening and why. What comes next is a list of false narratives followed by the motivation behind them and then their concise debunking.
Russia’s special operation to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as to bring to justice those who’ve committed crimes against civilians, is continuing into its second day but has predictably become the target of a major US-led Western Mainstream Media information warfare campaign. The purpose of this piece is to debunk the top ten infowar narratives about this conflict in order to enlighten readers about the truth of what’s really happening and why. For background context, those who are interested are encouraged to read the author’s six prior analyses below, which should bring everyone up to speed:
What comes next is a list of false narratives followed by the motivation behind them and then their concise debunking. It’ll recycle the insight shared in the above six analyses so those who don’t have the time to read them in full will still become aware of their main points. In short, this isn’t a Russian-Ukrainian conflict, but a Russian-NATO proxy war that Moscow was compelled to fight for preemptive reasons in order to avert a much larger, direct, and dangerous conflict between itself and that anti-Russian bloc that its intelligence services concluded was unavoidable as revealed by President Putin.
1. Lie: “Russia Invaded Ukraine!”
Motive: Misportray Russia as an aggressor state that blatantly violated international law.
Truth: Kiev’s US-encouraged initiation of a third round of civil war hostilities against Donbass prompted Russia’s intervention on humanitarian grounds as requested by the Donbass Republics that it recognized as independent earlier this week.
President Putin cited Article 51 of the UN Charter enshrining the right to self-defense for all nations as the international legal basis for his decision. In such circumstances, Russia’s ongoing special operation in Ukraine cannot accurately be described as an “invasion” but as a humanitarian intervention.
2. Lie: “Russia Wants To Restore The Soviet Union!”
Motive: Trigger memories of the Old Cold War in order to turn the targeted audience against Russia.
Truth: President Putin is fiercely anti-communist and never tires of slamming the former Communist Party for its many economic and political mistakes during Soviet times. As the world’s largest country, Russia has absolutely no interest in absorbing more territory just for the sake of it.
In fact, Ukraine was ignominiously designated by the IMF a few years ago as Europe’s poorest country. Reincorporating it back into Russia would therefore be a severe drain on the federal budget at the expense of that Eurasian Great Power’s urgent socio-economic development priorities at home.
3. Lie: “Putin Is A Radical Ethno-Nationalist Who Believes In The Supremacy Of The Russian People!”
Motive: Prompt comparisons with Hitler in order to misportray President Putin as the world’s worst evil.
Truth: The Russian leader is far from a radical ethno-nationalist, let alone some sort of supremacist. In fact, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett praised him last October as “a very close and true friend of the State of Israel”, which he wouldn’t have done if he had any concerns about President Putin’s views.
President Putin even joined Israel’s global campaign against anti-Semitism in January 2020 when he was invited as its guest of honor during a conference on this issue. Furthermore, the author’s detailed thread from early February documents dozens of instances where he praised Islam and Russian Muslims.
4. Lie: “Putin Is Nuts To Think That Ukraine Is Run By Neo-Nazis When Its Own President Is Jewish!”
Motive: Manipulate the targeted audience into thinking that Putin is either lying or insane.
Truth: The US-backed coup in Ukraine back in early 2014 that followed the months-long spree of urban terrorism popularly known in the West as “EuroMaidan” did indeed result in the rise to power of those who glorify their former compatriots that collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II.
Ukrainian President Zelensky is practically held hostage to the radical socio-political vision imposed upon the country by these influential forces. They regularly hold torchlit marches in the capital honoring literal fascists and war criminals such as Stepan Bandera, who was responsible for genocidal crimes.
5. Lie: “Russia Lied By Claiming That It Wouldn’t Invade All The While Secretly Preparing To Do So!”
Motive: Reduce trust in Russia and discredit all of its statements going forward.
Truth: Russia published its security guarantee requests in late December asking for legal assurances that NATO won’t expand eastward, that strike weapons be removed from Russia’s borders, and for a return to the continental military status quo enshrined in the now-defunct 1997 Russian-NATO Founding Act.
President Putin warned on 21 December during an “Expanded Meeting Of The Defense Ministry Board” that Russia “will take appropriate reciprocal military-technical measures” if its requests aren’t met. The West didn’t negotiate in good faith or sincerity so Russia was forced to defend its red lines.
6. Lie: “Russia Has No National Interests In Ukraine Except For Imperialist Ones!”
Motive: Artificially manufacture the pretext for dividing the world into “democracies” and “autocracies”.
Truth: The US’ expansion of NATO, deployment of “anti-missile systems” and strike weapons to Russia’s border, and withdrawal from arms control pacts like the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and Open Skies Treaty destabilized Europe.
These moves threatened to eventually neutralize Russia’s nuclear second-strike capabilities, which would have then placed the country in a perpetual position of nuclear blackmail vis-à-vis the US. Russian intelligence confirmed that Ukraine was planned to be the launching pad for such future NATO attacks.
7. Lie: “Russia’s Killing Civilians In Ukraine!”
Motive: Set the stage for accusing Russia of war crimes and therefore discrediting its military aims.
Truth: Russia’s precision weapons are solely targeting Ukraine’s military infrastructure, having already destroyed at least 74 such targets, including facilities that President Putin earlier warned were planned to be used by the US and NATO for a forthcoming attack against his country.
There’s unfortunately no war without civilian casualties, which always regrettably happen, but Russia is doing its best to minimize this. Since President Putin declared that “the showdown…is unavoidable”, it’s actually humane to wage a preemptive war now than to wait for a much larger and deadlier one later.
8. Lie: “Russia Wants To Restore Its Historical Sphere Of Influence Over Ukraine!”
Motive: Reaffirm the false narrative dividing the world into “democracies” and “autocracies”.
Truth: As the author explained in his analysis about “Spheres Of Influence, State Sovereignty, And The European Missile Crisis” from late January, it’s actually the US that carved out a regional sphere of influence at Russia’s expense and not Russia vis-à-vis anyone else.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) principles of indivisible security and prohibiting the advancement of one’s own at anyone else’s expense were blatantly violated by NATO’s eastward expansion. All Russia requests to do is for the bloc to respect its national security red lines.
9. Lie: “Russia Plans To Invade And Annex Other Countries After Ukraine!”
Motive: Scare Western societies into blindly supporting their governments’ anti-Russian policies.
Truth: British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss was among the highest-profile Western officials to spew this fake news narrative earlier in the month when she claimed that Russia might invade the Baltics and Balkans after Ukraine.
Moscow, however, would never do such a thing because it knows that this would result in the activation of NATO’s Article 5 for mutual defense and thus likely prompt a nuclear reaction from the bloc’s American leaders. Moreover, Russia has no interest in obtaining new territories and hostile populations.
10. Lie: “Putin Just Started World War III!”
Motive: Establish the false pretext for assembling a World War II-like anti-Russian coalition.
Truth: President Putin actually averted World War III by preemptively neutralizing the US and NATO’s secret military infrastructure in Ukraine that Russian intelligence confirmed was planned to be used in a forthcoming attack against their country upon the neutralization of its nuclear second-strike capabilities.
By decisively acting when he did, the Russian leader prevented a much larger and deadlier war in the future, one that could have spelled the end of the world. President Putin basically did what Stalin should have done, which was launch a preemptive strike against Hitler long before his military power matured.
The above debunking comprehensively discredits the top ten information warfare narratives being propagated against Russia’s special operation in Ukraine. It confirms that Moscow’s military moves are predicated on peaceful intentions designed to avert World War III by preemptively neutralizing the US and NATO’s secret military infrastructure in Ukraine before it could be used to attack Russia. Furthermore, observers shouldn’t forget the immediate trigger for this intervention, which was to protect the indigenous Russian people of Donbass from Kiev’s ongoing genocidal attacks.
Today, I again consider it necessary to return to the tragic events taking place in the Donbass and the key issues of ensuring the security of Russia itself.
Let me start with what I said in my address of 21 February this year. We are talking about what causes us particular concern and anxiety, about those fundamental threats that year after year, step by step, are rudely and unceremoniously created by irresponsible politicians in the West in relation to our country. I mean the expansion of the Nato bloc to the east, bringing its military infrastructure closer to Russian borders.
It is well known that for 30 years we have persistently and patiently tried to reach an agreement with the leading Nato countries on the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we constantly faced either cynical deception and lies, or attempts to pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic Alliance, in the meantime, despite all our protests and concerns, is steadily expanding. The military machine is moving and, I repeat, is coming close to our borders.
Why is all this happening? Where does this impudent manner of speaking from the position of one's own exclusivity, infallibility and permissiveness come from? Where does the disdainful, disdainful attitude towards our interests and absolutely legitimate demands come from?
The answer is clear, everything is clear and obvious. The Soviet Union in the late 80s of the last century weakened, and then completely collapsed. The whole course of events that took place then is a good lesson for us today as well; it convincingly showed that the paralysis of power and will is the first step towards complete degradation and oblivion. As soon as we lost confidence in ourselves for some time, and that’s it, the balance of power in the world turned out to be disturbed.
This has led to the fact that the previous treaties and agreements are no longer in effect. Persuasion and requests do not help. Everything that does not suit the hegemon, those in power, is declared archaic, obsolete, unnecessary. And vice versa: everything that seems beneficial to them is presented as the ultimate truth, pushed through at any cost, boorishly, by all means. Dissenters are broken through the knee.
What I am talking about now concerns not only Russia and not only us. This applies to the entire system of international relations, and sometimes even to the US allies themselves. After the collapse of the USSR, the redivision of the world actually began, and the norms of international law that had developed by that time – and the key, basic ones were adopted at the end of the Second World War and largely consolidated its results – began to interfere with those who declared themselves the winner in the Cold War .
Of course, in practical life, in international relations, in the rules for their regulation, it was necessary to take into account changes in the situation in the world and the balance of power itself. However, this should have been done professionally, smoothly, patiently, taking into account and respecting the interests of all countries and understanding our responsibility. But no: a state of euphoria from absolute superiority, a kind of modern form of absolutism, and even against the background of a low level of general culture and arrogance of those who prepared, adopted and pushed through decisions that were beneficial only for themselves. The situation began to develop according to a different scenario.
You don't have to look far for examples. First, without any sanction from the UN Security Council, they carried out a bloody military operation against Belgrade, using aircraft and missiles right in the very centre of Europe. Several weeks of continuous bombing of civilian cities, on life-supporting infrastructure. We have to remind these facts, otherwise some Western colleagues do not like to remember those events, and when we talk about it, they prefer to point not to the norms of international law, but to the circumstances that they interpret as they see fit.
Then came the turn of Iraq, Libya, Syria. The illegitimate use of military force against Libya, the perversion of all decisions of the UN Security Council on the Libyan issue led to the complete destruction of the state, to the emergence of a huge hotbed of international terrorism, to the fact that the country plunged into a humanitarian catastrophe that has not stopped for many years. civil war. The tragedy, which doomed hundreds of thousands, millions of people not only in Libya, but throughout this region, gave rise to a massive migration exodus from North Africa and the Middle East to Europe.
A similar fate was prepared for Syria. The fighting of the Western coalition on the territory of this country without the consent of the Syrian government and the sanction of the UN Security Council is nothing but aggression, intervention.
However, a special place in this series is occupied, of course, by the invasion of Iraq, also without any legal grounds. As a pretext, they chose reliable information allegedly available to the United States about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. As proof of this, publicly, in front of the eyes of the whole world, the US Secretary of State shook some kind of test tube with white powder, assuring everyone that this is the chemical weapon being developed in Iraq. And then it turned out that all this was a hoax, a bluff: there are no chemical weapons in Iraq. Unbelievable, surprising, but the fact remains. There were lies at the highest state level and from the high rostrum of the UN. And as a result: huge casualties, destruction, an incredible surge of terrorism.
In general, one gets the impression that practically everywhere, in many regions of the world, where the West comes to establish its own order, the result is bloody, unhealed wounds, ulcers of international terrorism and extremism. All that I have said is the most egregious, but by no means the only examples of disregard for international law.
In this series, and promises to our country not to expand Nato by one inch to the east. I repeat: they deceived me, but in popular terms, they simply threw it away. Yes, you can often hear that politics is a dirty business. Perhaps, but not to the same extent, not to the same extent. After all, such cheating behaviour contradicts not only the principles of international relations, but above all the generally recognised norms of morality and morality. Where is justice and truth here? Just a bunch of lies and hypocrisy.
By the way, American politicians, political scientists and journalists themselves write and talk about the fact that a real 'empire of lies' has been created inside the United States in recent years. It's hard to disagree with that; it's true. But do not be modest: the United States is still a great country, a system-forming power. All her satellites not only resignedly and dutifully assent, sing along to her for any reason, but also copy her behaviour, enthusiastically accept the rules he proposes. Therefore, with good reason, we can confidently say that the entire so-called Western bloc, formed by the United States in its own image and likeness, all of it is the very 'empire of lies'.
As for our country, after the collapse of the USSR, with all the unprecedented openness of the new modern Russia, the readiness to work honestly with the United States and other Western partners, and in the conditions of virtually unilateral disarmament, they immediately tried to squeeze us, finish off and destroy us completely. This is exactly what happened in the 90s, in the early 2000s, when the so-called collective West most actively supported separatism and mercenary gangs in southern Russia. What sacrifices, what losses did all this cost us then, what trials did we have to go through before we finally broke the back of international terrorism in the Caucasus. We remember this and will never forget.
Yes, in fact, until recently, attempts have not stopped to use us in their own interests, destroy our traditional values and impose on us their pseudo-values that would corrode us, our people from the inside, those attitudes that they are already aggressively planting in their countries and which directly lead to degradation and degeneration, because they contradict the very nature of man. It won't happen, no one has ever done it. It won't work now either.
Despite everything, in December 2021, we nevertheless once again made an attempt to agree with the United States and its allies on the principles of ensuring security in Europe and on the non-expansion of Nato. Everything is in vain. The US position does not change. They do not consider it necessary to negotiate with Russia on this key issue for us, pursuing their own goals, they neglect our interests.
And of course, in this situation, we have a question: what to do next, what to expect? We know well from history how in the 1940s and early 1941s the Soviet Union tried in every possible way to prevent or at least delay the outbreak of war. To this end, among other things, he tried literally to the last not to provoke a potential aggressor, did not carry out or postponed the most necessary, obvious actions to prepare for repelling an inevitable attack. And those steps that were nevertheless taken in the end were catastrophically belated.
As a result, the country was not ready to fully meet the invasion of Nazi Germany, which attacked our Motherland on 22 June 1941 without declaring war. The enemy was stopped and then crushed, but at a colossal cost. An attempt to appease the aggressor on the eve of the Great Patriotic War turned out to be a mistake that cost our people dearly. In the very first months of hostilities, we lost huge, strategically important territories and millions of people. The second time we will not allow such a mistake, we have no right.
Those who claim world domination, publicly, with impunity and, I emphasise, without any reason, declare us, Russia, their enemy. Indeed, today they have great financial, scientific, technological and military capabilities. We are aware of this and objectively assess the threats constantly being addressed to us in the economic sphere, as well as our ability to resist this impudent and permanent blackmail. I repeat, we evaluate them without illusions, extremely realistically.
As for the military sphere, modern Russia, even after the collapse of the USSR and the loss of a significant part of its potential, is today one of the most powerful nuclear powers in the world and, moreover, has certain advantages in a number of the latest types of weapons. In this regard, no one should have any doubts that a direct attack on our country will lead to defeat and dire consequences for any potential aggressor.
At the same time, technologies, including defence technologies, are changing rapidly. Leadership in this area is passing and will continue to change hands, but the military development of the territories adjacent to our borders, if we allow it, will remain for decades to come, and maybe forever, and will create an ever-growing, absolutely unacceptable threat for Russia. .
Even now, as Nato expands to the east, the situation for our country is getting worse and more dangerous every year. Moreover, in recent days, the leadership of Nato has been openly talking about the need to accelerate, speed up the advancement of the Alliance's infrastructure to the borders of Russia. In other words, they are hardening their position. We can no longer just continue to observe what is happening. It would be absolutely irresponsible on our part.
Further expansion of the infrastructure of the North Atlantic Alliance, the military development of the territories of Ukraine that has begun is unacceptable for us. The point, of course, is not the Nato organisation itself – it is only an instrument of US foreign policy. The problem is that in the territories adjacent to us, I will note, in our own historical territories, an 'anti-Russia' hostile to us is being created, which has been placed under complete external control, is intensively settled by the armed forces of Nato countries and is pumped up with the most modern weapons.
For the United States and its allies, this is the so-called policy of containment of Russia, obvious geopolitical dividends. And for our country, this is ultimately a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a people. And this is not an exaggeration: it is true. This is a real threat not just to our interests, but to the very existence of our state, its sovereignty. This is the very red line that has been talked about many times. They passed her.
In this regard, and about the situation in the Donbass. We see that the forces that carried out a coup d'etat in Ukraine in 2014, seized power and are holding it with the help of, in fact, decorative electoral procedures, have finally abandoned the peaceful settlement of the conflict. For eight years, endlessly long eight years, we have done everything possible to resolve the situation by peaceful, political means. All in vain.
As I said in my previous address, one cannot look at what is happening there without compassion. It was simply impossible to endure all this. It was necessary to immediately stop this nightmare: the genocide against the millions of people living there, who rely only on Russia, hope only on us. It was these aspirations, feelings, pain of people that were for us the main motive for making a decision to recognise the people's republics of Donbass.
What I think is important to emphasise further. The leading Nato countries, in order to achieve their own goals, support extreme nationalists and neo-Nazis in Ukraine in everything, who, in turn, will never forgive the Crimeans and Sevastopol residents for their free choice: reunification with Russia.
They, of course, will climb into the Crimea, and just like in the Donbass, with a war, in order to kill, as punishers from the gangs of Ukrainian nationalists, Hitler's accomplices, killed defenceless people during the Great Patriotic War. They openly declare that they lay claim to a number of other Russian territories.
The entire course of events and analysis of incoming information shows that Russia's clash with these forces is inevitable. It is only a matter of time: they are getting ready, they are waiting for the right time. Now they also claim to possess nuclear weapons. We will not allow this to be done.
As I said earlier, after the collapse of the USSR, Russia accepted new geopolitical realities. We respect and will continue to treat all the newly formed countries in the post-Soviet space with respect. We respect and will continue to respect their sovereignty, and an example of this is the assistance we provided to Kazakhstan, which faced tragic events, with a challenge to its statehood and integrity. But Russia cannot feel safe, develop, exist with a constant threat emanating from the territory of modern Ukraine.
Let me remind you that in 2000-2005 we gave a military rebuff to terrorists in the Caucasus, defended the integrity of our state, saved Russia. In 2014, they supported the Crimeans and Sevastopol residents. In 2015, the Armed Forces used to put a reliable barrier to the penetration of terrorists from Syria into Russia. We had no other way to protect ourselves.
The same thing is happening now. You and I simply have not been left with any other opportunity to protect Russia, our people, except for the one that we will be forced to use today. Circumstances require us to take decisive and immediate action. The people's republics of Donbass turned to Russia with a request for help.
In this regard, in accordance with Article 51 of Part 7 of the UN Charter, with the sanction of the Federation Council of Russia and in pursuance of the treaties of friendship and mutual assistance ratified by the Federal Assembly on 22 February this year with the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic, I decided to conduct a special military operation.
Its goal is to protect people who have been subjected to bullying and genocide by the Kiev regime for eight years. And for this we will strive for the demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine, as well as bringing to justice those who committed numerous, bloody crimes against civilians, including citizens of the Russian Federation.
At the same time, our plans do not include the occupation of Ukrainian territories. We are not going to impose anything on anyone by force. At the same time, we hear that recently in the West there are more and more words that the documents signed by the Soviet totalitarian regime, which consolidate the results of the Second World War, should no longer be carried out. Well, what is the answer to this?
The results of the Second World War, as well as the sacrifices made by our people on the altar of victory over Nazism, are sacred. But this does not contradict the high values of human rights and freedoms, based on the realities that have developed today over all the post-war decades. It also does not cancel the right of nations to self-determination, enshrined in Article 1 of the UN Charter.
Let me remind you that neither during the creation of the USSR, nor after the Second World War, people living in certain territories that are part of modern Ukraine, no one ever asked how they themselves want to arrange their lives. Our policy is based on freedom, the freedom of choice for everyone to independently determine their own future and the future of their children. And we consider it important that this right – the right to choose – could be used by all the peoples living on the territory of today's Ukraine, by everyone who wants it.
In this regard, I appeal to the citizens of Ukraine. In 2014, Russia was obliged to protect the inhabitants of Crimea and Sevastopol from those whom you yourself call 'Nazis'. Crimeans and Sevastopol residents made their choice to be with their historical homeland, with Russia, and we supported this. I repeat, they simply could not do otherwise.
Today's events are not connected with the desire to infringe on the interests of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. They are connected with the protection of Russia itself from those who took Ukraine hostage and are trying to use it against our country and its people.
I repeat, our actions are self-defence against the threats posed to us and from an even greater disaster than what is happening today. No matter how difficult it may be, I ask you to understand this and call for cooperation in order to turn this tragic page as soon as possible and move forward together, not to allow anyone to interfere in our affairs, in our relations, but to build them on our own, so that it creates the necessary conditions for overcoming all problems and, despite the presence of state borders, would strengthen us from the inside as a whole. I believe in this; in this is our future.
I should also appeal to the military personnel of the armed forces of Ukraine.
Dear comrades! Your fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers did not fight the Nazis, defending our common Motherland, so that today's neo-Nazis seized power in Ukraine. You took an oath of allegiance to the Ukrainian people, and not to the anti-people junta that plunders Ukraine and mocks these same people.
Don't follow her criminal orders. I urge you to lay down your weapons immediately and go home. Let me explain: all servicemen of the Ukrainian army who fulfil this requirement will be able to freely leave the combat zone and return to their families.
Once again, I insistently emphasise: all responsibility for possible bloodshed will be entirely on the conscience of the regime ruling on the territory of Ukraine.
Now a few important, very important words for those who may be tempted to intervene in ongoing events. Whoever tries to hinder us, and even more so to create threats for our country, for our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences that you have never experienced in your history. We are ready for any development of events. All necessary decisions in this regard have been made. I hope that I will be heard.
Dear citizens of Russia!
Well-being, the very existence of entire states and peoples, their success and viability always originate in the powerful root system of their culture and values, experience and traditions of their ancestors and, of course, directly depend on the ability to quickly adapt to a constantly changing life, on the cohesion of society, its readiness to consolidate, to gather together all the forces in order to move forward.
Forces are needed always – always, but strength can be of different quality. The policy of the 'empire of lies', which I spoke about at the beginning of my speech, is based primarily on brute, straightforward force. In such cases, we say: 'There is power, mind is not needed.'
And you and I know that real strength lies in justice and truth, which is on our side. And if this is so, then it is difficult to disagree with the fact that it is the strength and readiness to fight that underlie independence and sovereignty, are the necessary foundation on which you can only reliably build your future, build your home, your family, your homeland. .
Dear compatriots!
I am confident that the soldiers and officers of the Russian Armed Forces devoted to their country will professionally and courageously fulfil their duty. I have no doubt that all levels of government, specialists responsible for the stability of our economy, financial system, social sphere, heads of our companies and all Russian business will act in a coordinated and efficient manner. I count on a consolidated, patriotic position of all parliamentary parties and public forces.
Ultimately, as it has always been in history, the fate of Russia is in the reliable hands of our multinational people. And this means that the decisions made will be implemented, the goals set will be achieved, the security of our Motherland will be reliably guaranteed.
I believe in your support, in that invincible strength that our love for the Fatherland gives us. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
