Hang The Russians, Hang The Russians

especially the Moskovite Bankers.

 

I have heard that the East is no longer getting news coverage from the west but later on I see there is a post showing that this video is 2 months old. Whether that is accurate or not remains to be studied but the fact is, as I suspected, the supposed happening in Kiev did not happen.

As you like the BBC you will no doubt find interesting it's report on the over the top propaganda from Russia. Includes some talk on your later post claiming that Ukrainians right sector no less was responsible for the almost certainly false flag on Sunday or Monday.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27104185

As I have read the majority of East and South Ukrainians want to stay united with the West just like the BBC group did till they were shown the threatening video known now to be a fraud.. They are though concerned that the West has not managed to sort out the issues in the East and come and speak to them. A large number did not agree with the change of government but that does not mean they want to leave and follow the infiltrators. I am imagining they are very scared. Unfortunately there really does seem to be very little that the West of Ukraine can do and when she wants Russia will bring her troops in and probably declare her an independent state. I have heard she will not annex her as that would be too costly.

I wish people would start to see it is the people of Ukraine who are being abused.

 

How about the West being held to account for the meddling in the internal affairs of a democratically elected government, the actions of which provided the catalyst for the coup?

There would of been no Russian illegality had there been no coup.

 

What have the West actually done?

 

Apart from encouraging, planning and organising the coup, nothing.

 

Give details

 

I'm pretty sure there has been constant meddling by both the West and Russia in Ukraine ever since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Deciding what meddling to focus on is about as arbitrary as throwing a dart at a board.

 

Alexa, it's long been in the public domain. There are literally scores of articles I could point to.

 

Sorry trout. That is unacceptable. It has not. It is something RT and you and Russian supporters say but there is no widespread agreement on this so I am asking you to explain what you have claimed.

 

I love reading quotes by Russia's Foreign Minister Lavrov. His logic and brilliance overwhelms me. I find it refreshing compared to the manipulative spins used by our politicians so they can sway public opinion:

“Ukraine is just one manifestation of the American unwillingness to yield in the geopolitical fight. Americans are not ready to admit that they cannot run the show in each and every part of the globe from Washington alone,” said Lavrov, adding Washington’s “ready-made solutions” cannot remedy a crisis that it does not understand.

He seems to have hit on the problem, when he said a crisis the U.S. cannot understand. But is it because Washington cannot understand the situation in other countries, or because they do not want to understand since their own domestic political concerns supersedes everything else?

 

Let me explain something. If China were to start a massive propaganda campaign in the U.S. against Canada or Britain, it wouldn't work with us because we have a similar heritage and speak the same language. It certainly would be ridiculous then if China was to accuse Britain and Canada of propaganda rather than taking our heritage into account.

By the same token, the majority of the people in Ukraine speak Russian and have not only the same language and heritage, but also the same religious faith so how can the U.S. say that Russia is using propaganda to sway them? It doesn't make sense? Wouldn't Russian speaking people have a natural affinity towards Russia?

The only people the U.S. propaganda was able to sway were the people from the Lviv area, since they were once part of Poland. This though is what is scaring the Russian speaking population since the people in that area still have Nazi supremacist ideas and even made a hero of someone who had committed genocide during WWII on the Russians, Poles, Jews and Romas.

 

The majority of people in Ukraine don't speak Russian as a first language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Language

The majority also isn't of Russian ethnicity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine

 

It's not just RT but the likes of the Independent and Guardian too. This is an excellent background summary of the wider issues, although I disagree with some of the individual views about legality and so on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNYkCvOhG4

The Kiev vote which claims to have deposed a democratically-elected president, was made by a rump of its 450 elected members (the remainder having fled to their Eastern constituencies in fear for their lives), acting outside its standing orders with no quorum and with those members who did vote doing so under threat of violence by armed men inside the parliament chamber - in other words under duress.
Also hardly mentioned in the Western media was the fact that Russian forces of up to 27,000 personnel were authorised, by treaty with the legal Ukrainian State, to be present in the Crimea and to conduct the operational maneuvers Russia deemed necessary to protect the Black Sea Fleet naval base at Sevastopol.

The contentious issue regarding legality, from my perspective, stems from whether Russia had imported any personnel not authorised under the treaty. I'm prepared to bite the proverbial bullet on this point, although I'm yet to be absolutely convinced that the Russian's exceeded the 27,000 figure.

Professor Francis Boyle's credible analysis is based on extensive experience of its earlier 'colour' and 'Arab Spring' revolutions. Boyle posits that the whole situation has been thoroughly gamed by the US-NATO and that Russia has done nothing that was not clearly foreseen and allowed for. Professor Boyle:

I suspect this entire Ukraine Crisis had been war-gamed and war planned quite some time ago at the highest levels of US/NATO. Notice DOD slipped 2 US warships into the Black Sea just before the Olympics under a patently absurd pretext. In other words, what we are seeing unfold here is a US/NATO War Plan. They instigated the fascist coup against Yanukovich. They anticipated that Putin would then respond by taking over Crimea.

I suspect the US/NATO/EU response will be to introduce military forces into Western Ukraine and Kiev and thus make Ukraine a de facto member of NATO, which has been their objective all along. They have already anticipated what Putin’s next move after that will be. Notice also the massive anti-Russian campaign by the Western News Media working in lock-step with each other. Another sign that all this has been planned well in advance.

I suspect that US/NATO/EU figure that Putin knows they have this offensive, first-strike strategic nuclear capability with a rudimentary ABM/BMD capability so that at the end of the day he will be forced to stand down—or else. Compellence as opposed to Deterrence. Just like during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That is where this US/NATO/EU War Plan is heading on the assumptions that they can keep their deliberate Escalation Dominance under their control and that at the end of the day Putin will be forced to stand down just like Khrushchev did and for the same reasons. That would leave US/NATO/EU in control of at least half of Ukraine as a de facto NATO member state.

Supporting this analysis are reports of groups of mercenaries - dressed in civilian clothes and carrying bulky packs - arriving at Kiev airport, from whence they are being sent to Odessa, in the south-east Black sea coast and close to the Crimea. They are reported to be employees of Greystone Ltd, a subsidiary of Academi (Fornerly Blackwater).

http://www.greystone-ltd.com/
http://www.voltairenet.org/article182499.html
http://toinformistoinfluence.com/2014/03/02/report-blackwater-in-ukraine/

It has also been reported that the Ukrainian regime has hired US Greystone mercenaries to suppress dissent in the Eastern regions and cities sympathetic to Russia. The initiative is reported as being financed by oligarchs Sergei Taruta and Igor Kolomoysk appointed by the Kiev regime as governors of Dnepropetrovsk and Donetsk regions respectively:

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_...ries-to-suppress-eastern-regions-source-3828/

An intercepted and leaked telephone conversation between US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, which took place during the third week of December 2013, was posted to YouTube on 4 February 2014. In it they discuss their preferred candidates for ministerial positions in a new Ukrainian government. Nuland reveals both her own and US contempt for the EU in her reply to Pyatt suggesting their preferences might not go down too well in EU circles; "(*)(*)(*)(*) the EU..." she replies. In the event she got her way with her preferred candidate for prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk ("Yats" as he was dubbed in the conversation) being appointed by the insurrectionists on 21 February 2014 and being immediately recognised by the US and a subservient EU:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_GShyGv3o

The video below was uploaded to YouTube by disaffected Ukrainian security services personnel, who say they are sick of the lies of the usurping regime. It provides compelling evidence that the 13 policemen and the protestors killed by sniper fire were all shot by the same people and that they were under orders from the protest organisers themselves - the people now recognised as the legitimate government of the Ukraine by the Western political establishment. A classic Gladio-style black operation in other words. The video also evidences the coercive methods employed by the putsch supporters to secure the compliance of the remaining parliamentary rump of elected members:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5qXS8Xc274

This analysis is consistent with the Paet's claims in his leaked conversation with Ashton:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEgJ0oo3OA8

Finally, on 13 March 2014, former Ukrainian internal security chief Aleksandr Yakimenko gave an interview to Russia today in which he confirmed that the buildings from which the the deadly sniper fire of 18-20 February came from was under the full control of the opposition. In particular he confirmed that the man in charge of those controlling the buildings was Andrey Parubiy who has since been appointed head of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine:

http://rt.com/news/ukraine-snipers-security-chief-438/

It should be added that there is historical precedence for the West's overthrowing of democratic regimes. In that regard, the fact that they overthrew the regime in Kiev ought not to come as a surprise.

 

This video looks very realistic to me, so how can you say it didn't happen? My granddaughter's friend who was protesting at Maidan, told her that if she dared say anything to her about Russia, she will never speak to her again. I was also on a forum once with Byzantine Catholics from the western part of Ukraine and their hatred of Russia was manifested many times. They were furious that their churches were taken away under the Soviet Union, and as far as I know, they're still fighting over them, so again how can you say that the hatred shown in the video isn't happening?

Actually I find the BBC slants everything, that's why I was shocked by what I read. There was another article in the BBC and I had planned on posting it, but when I went back to it a while later, it seems most of it was removed, and only a small part was left.

I found the same thing with Al Jazeera. There was an article with a comment on the bottom about the Geneva conference which was unfavorable towards the U.S., and later on that comment was removed. Seems the newspapers get their orders from a higher source.

The people in the Western part of Ukraine have a historical animosity towards Russia, and those animosities are being manipulated by the U.S. and Nato. They were once a part of Poland and then Austria Hungary, while the people in the East were united with Russia. It's foolish to believe that the majority of people want to join the E.U. since the commerce in the Eastern part of Ukraine is with Russia. When Russia told Yanukovich that it was impossible to continue its favorable trade agreements if it became part of the E.U., Yanukovich went to the E.U. and asked them if they would cover the losses and they said no.

The Western part of Ukraine is very poor, so it probably would be more profitable for them to have some sort of trade with the E.U., but look Ukraine can remain neutral. Finland is and it has done quite well, but is that what Nato wants, and let's face it, the problem is Nato.

As for Russia, Ukraine would be too costly to be annexed, so it doesn't really want to march in and take over...which makes me wonder, why are we encouraging Kiev to act the way it does? I know in the Crimea Russia decided to have gambling in one area to create jobs, something it wouldn't allow in Socchi. What Russia wants is for Ukraine to federalize so that each area could be semi independent and pursue its own economic interests, but Kiev doesn't want to lose control.

Frankly I think Nato is behind it. Putin said that Rasmussin will be out in October, and the new head is a much more logical man so things might calm down. ..hopefully!

 

It depends, which part of Ukraine you are visiting? In big cities like Kiev, Odessa, Donetsk and Dnepropetrovsk, all speak Russian. I had a chance to deal with a publisher in Kiev. He told me that publishing in Ukrainian is worthless, nobody would by books, no market and no profit. Publishing in Russian is a different matter. I personally never met anyone, in Kiev, who would not speak or would not understand Russian.

 

That is definitely not true. 15 of 20 largest cities is in southeast. And southeast using russian language. I lived there more then 25 years. TV and school is only sources where you can hear Ukrainian language there. People just don't using it in real life at all. And it is not only south and east. Kiev is also mostly russian-speaking city.

How about that?
...According to Gallup Institute, around 83% of Ukraine’s population prefer to use Russian in everyday life, business correspondence and while speaking to each other. The Russian language is suppressed in preschool education...
http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/04/16/europe-misses-chance-to-preserve-ukraine-unified.html

I knew Ukrainian language pretty well because i studied it in school as every other Ukrainian. I have nothing against it. But suppression of Russian language is a crime.

 

I would suggest that suppression of any language is a crime. In the east, Ukrainian was suppressed in the past.

However, in the Russian Empire expressions of Ukrainian culture and especially language were repeatedly persecuted for fear that a self-aware Ukrainian nation would threaten the unity of the empire. In 1804 Ukrainian as a subject and language of instruction was banned from schools.[4] In 1811 by the Order of the Russian government, the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy was closed. The Academy had been open since 1632 and was the first university in Eastern Europe. In 1847 the Brotherhood of Sts Cyril and Methodius was terminated. The same year Taras Shevchenko was arrested, exiled for ten years, and banned for political reasons from writing and painting. In 1862 Pavlo Chubynsky was exiled for seven years to Arkhangelsk. The Ukrainian magazine Osnova was discontinued. In 1863, the tsarist interior minister Pyotr Valuyev proclaimed in his decree that "there never has been, is not, and never can be a separate Little Russian language".[25] A following ban on Ukrainian books led to Alexander II's secret Ems Ukaz, which prohibited publication and importation of most Ukrainian-language books, public performances and lectures, and even banned the printing of Ukrainian texts accompanying musical scores.[26] A period of leniency after 1905 was followed by another strict ban in 1914, which also affected Russian-occupied Galicia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_language

So, it appears that there has been a lot of back and forth historically between ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians.

Not surprisingly, the average American is reluctant to have us involved in the mess, since no matter what becomes of all this, it's unlikely to resolve the lingering ethnic tensions.

 

I just want to make sure we do not get off topic here.

You said

to which I replied

to which you replied

so basically that is what I am looking for. Evidence that the West 'encouraged, planned and organised the 'coup'

I can tell you that I have read a massive amount from the Guardian and that is not the information I got. I rarely read the Independent now noticing some of the crap it writes about Scotland. Funnily enough another Independent reader I know is a Thatcherite and agrees with us removing the citizenship of even 3rd generation britains as well as those who would be stateless. Anyway not my cup of tea the last few times I have looked there it seemed to have gone downhill. I have though not seen anything in the Guardian to suggest this was all organised by the West. Rather I have got a very good indication of Russia's psychology.

I began with RT. When I looked on the BBC or Al Jazeera it looked such a different story that I just stayed with RT for a while. However once the government was changed and the situation became an extreme crises I started looking at different sources of information. It was the reality that what Russia said did not live up to scrutiny which pulled me back. I don't see Western sources trying to create the propaganda which Russia obviously does. Don't get me wrong I am sure there are those who do, but I have not been reading it.

Come on that is a RT video!

Is a 'coup' not supposed to involve the army? The argument is that it was the choice of the Ukraine leader to leave. He ought to have stayed and called an election. By not doing so it was necessary to fill this gap and the people who filled it was those who were there.

Russia said it had no military in Crimea. She has now admitted she did though it was well known at the time. She has claimed she has 100% support there when it is known this is not true. She does not to begin with have the Tartars support. She will not even allow their leader in. The UN has said that there was beatings, torture and arrest of those who opposed Russian annexation. These people were cut off from all media except Russian.

I believe that she has done and that is what she has admitted to - or that people were there doing the take over rather than protecting her fleet. She only has her base because she put the price of oil up so much when the Ukrainians were going to take it back that they had to change their minds. She has been bullying them for quite some time.

Russia broke the Budapest agreement.

https://www.msz.gov.pl/en/p/wiedeno...ssion_to_the_treaty_on_the_npt?printMode=true

Oh please, the man even suspects Amnesty

Yes I heard all about that on RT

here is the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27104185

In both these instances some form of proof is needed. Suspicions and just someone saying it means nothing.

So here is another idea

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/mar/01/ukraine-haze-propaganda/

voices of Russia again, come on.

Yes I know that. It certainly shows an interest but not that they encouraged. organised, organised or planned a 'coup'. It showed they wanted to get the best deal out of what was happening, nothing more. Try to look at what some Ukrainians say. You will find it fits in far more with the article I gave you. Indeed I can even remember some of that from RT, though it will have had another bent.

Look at what they were suffering. Obviously they will have wanted support from the EU and the US. Indeed I seem to remember them crying for us to go to war against Russia right at the beginning and that we must because of our signing of the Budapest agreement. Obviously also people in the EU and US will have had their interests but the people who planned, organised and carried out the protests in Ukraine which led to the President running away were from all walks of life and were Ukrainians.

The snipers were almost certainly the Ukrainian forces but this clearly needs to be looked into. RT also said that both the police and the opposition were killed with the same ammo and guns but I have seen the person who was supposed to have provided this information refute it resoundingly.

You have in no way shown that. You have clearly only looked at this from one perspective. You have produced Russian propaganda as evidence and it provides no evidence or you have presented people's suspicions based on their previous bias. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.

 

and soon they will admit to having military in eastern Ukraine.

you simply cannot trust Russia.

 

It doesn't matter if it isn't their first language, it is still the language most of them speak. I was told that I couldn't speak English until I was five, and believe me I know how Greeks think and I am definitely an American. Also the Eastern part of Ukraine was under the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow, even when it was under Poland, this is why it rebelled and reunited with Russia, while the Western part fell under the Pope and remained under Poland and then Austria Hungary... which again is a Catholic country.

In other words, they are two different cultures.

 

its really none of your business.

Ukraine has a right to decide how they shall be run.

 

Alexa, I might easily say that you are looking at this from one perspective based on Western media propaganda. I believe that the Paet-Ashton leak was significant at the very least to warrant media attention and a push for a proper independent investigation. But nothing. This thing is beyond fishy IMO. Yes, I have no hard evidence but given the balance of probability given factors like historical precedence of the kind I described as well as NATOs consistent push eastwards since the end of the cold war under the contextual umbrella of a series of U.S led war drives, I know where my money is placed.

 

Everything Russia did was legal since it is allowed to have twenty seven thousand troops in Crimea according to the treaty. ..and the soldiers are allowed to be active. If it were not so, Russia would not have admitted it. Also Yanukovich was forced to leave Kiev, and he had signed an agreement with the U.S. Germany, Poland, and the government occupiers that he would be allowed to remain in office until December, so he is still the legal president. If permission was needed to activate the troops, then it would have been up to him to decide.

It would have been more correct for you to say the U.S. cannot be trusted, because they signed a treaty and had about as much respect for it as they had for the people of Ukraine when they blatantly supported the terrorists who were setting the police and their city on fire.

 

they are allowed to keep them on the bases...............

and yet Russia allowed them to take over the whole Peninsula.

 

They're different, but the problem is that a lot of outside forces are trying to decide for Ukraine how they are to be run.

Both the West and Russia are guilty of meddling, and sadly, that isn't likely to change anytime soon.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that it's hard to find an investigative body that is truly independent.

A lot of the world is either a proxy of the US or a proxy of Russia.