Ukraine
weekly SITREP by Baaz
http://thesaker.is/ukraine-weekly-sitrep-by-baaz-and-request-for-comments/
2.
French Intelligence: USA lied about Russian invasion in Ukraine
3.
Armed conflicts registered among Ukraine’s army units in Donbass
4.
Sahra Wagenknecht: EU Policy Has Destroyed Ukraine and Damaged Europe
5. Kiev Needs $1.5Bln for Ukraine’s East Reconstruction - Deputy PMhttp://sputniknews.com/europe/20150412/1020773766.html
6. Russia Has No Plans to Invade Ukraine – French Intelligencehttp://sputniknews.com/russia/20150410/1020714734.html
7.
Repression by Post-Maidan Ukraine Govt. Shows Support for It Strictly
Limited
8.
Ukraine may lose Chinese investments due to outlawing communism
9. Odessa
Protesters Give a Clear Warning to Poroshenko during his Visit
10.
Expert: Social protests may spiral into “left terror” in Ukraine
after the ultra-right Kiev bans communist and left ideology
11.
NATO’s Anti-Russia Spearhead Force Conducts First Exercise
12.
S&P downgrades Ukraine’s rating to “CC” from “CCC-”
13.
Russian Duma deputy proposes to declare the Ukrainian Armed Forces an
extremist formation
14.
Political stability in Russia depends on Ukraine – report (has a
link to report as well)
15.
Great War is Coming in Ukraine?
16.
A Tale of Two Countries: The Post-Soviet Evolution of Belarus and
Ukraine
How
come that Belarus, which used to be four times economically less
productive than Ukraine, has become such a success story?
17.
Historic statues smashed in Kharkiv, Ukraine following adoption of
vicious thought-control laws
18.
Statement of the left forces of Lugansk People’s Republic
19. This
Is how Fascism looks like in Ukraine
20.
Ukraine: Which way to Europe and for Europe?
21.
Kiev starts reforms … by changing city names
22.
UN concerned about introduction of electronic pass system in Donbas
23.
NATO not going to cancel deployment of US missile defense system in
Europe — Russian envoy
24.
On March 17, 1991, 70% of Ukrainians voted to remain inside USSR
25.
Russian admiral dismisses Poroshenko’s threat to fight for
returning Crimea as bluff
26.
No comment from Kremlin regarding Kiev’s accusations regarding
presidential aide
27.
Russia to tighten rules for foreign-funded religious groups
28.
Ukrainian Anti-Totalitarianism Legislation an Act of Pure
Totalitarianism
29.
Ukraine’s State News Agency Hopes for New World War
30. Russian
political analyst Vladimir Fadeyev argues that the crisis in Ukraine
not so much changed the make-up of the international system as
revealed changes that have already happened within it but have not
been revealed until the crisis brought them to the surface. And what
the world saw surprised many
32.
Ukraine needs $ 217mn to abolish Soviet names – expert
35. US Paratroopers Arrive in Ukraine as Fighting Intensifies in Donbasshttp://sputniknews.com/europe/20150414/1020893219.html
36.
NATO activity near Russian borders increased by 80% – General Staff
(strategic
bombers from the US Air Force were used to perform strategic tasks
during those exercises.
He
also said that the US plans to supply its Eastern European allies
with JASSM-ER long-range aviation cruise missiles, which will enable
NATO warplanes to hit targets 1,300 kilometers inside the Russian
territory.
“In
the case of a military conflict, critical facilities on the territory
of almost the entire European part of Russia will be vulnerable to
NATO’s air attack, with the flight time of the missiles reduced by
half,”Kartapolov
warned.
The
General Staff official also spoke about increased intelligence
activity by NATO in the Black Sea.
He
said that US Global Hawk drones were spotted in Ukrainian air space
in March, with the UAVs increasing “the
depth of reconnaissance on the territory of Russia by 250-300
kilometers.”)
37.
DPR leader says many Ukrainian troops killed, 300 wounded nearby
Donetsk airport
38.
Ukraine PM: Kiev never again to restore former trade relations with
Russia ( Statement by a clown) (Once you read Mr.Buzinas last
interview you will know why they killed him as to not spoil their
party )
39. Ukraine
a Vector for GMO Poison’s Spread Through
EUhttp://journal-neo.org/2015/04/17/ukraine-a-vector-for-gmo-poison-s-spread-through-eu/
40.
Poroshenko Keeps his Word: Donbass Children Don’t Go to School
( A
Gentleman who always keeps his promises)
41.
If you cant get it up its putins fault. Last interview of Mr.Buzina
before he was murdered ( Gives an insight to the kind of man he was
and why he must have been a roadblock to those crazies in power)
42.
Kyiv’s war in eastern Ukraine having trouble finding soldiers
43. Has
Fighting Resumed in Donetsk?
44.
America’s Weaponising of Ignorance
45.
Conflict Rages in Donbass
46. General
Skrzypczak: “I retract everything I said about Ukraine
http://fortruss.blogspot.in/2015/04/general-skrzypczak-i-retract-everything.html
Bloomberg
Turns Interview With DPR Leader Zakharchenko Into a Hit Piece
Bloomberg
was perhaps the first western outlet to be given an interview by
Zakharchenko but its presentation could hardly be more misleading and
dishonest
Head of Donetsk People's Republic, Zakharchenko
Joaquin
Flores
18
April, 2015
In
a rare western interview of the leader of the Donetsk Republic,
Zakharchenko was given 'the full treatment' by Bloomberg. In
doing so, they indeed may have violated international law, and
committed crimes against humanity and crimes against peace.
Today's
article in the US publication was indeed particularly instructive.
It tells us how the US and the European Atlanticists will try
to spin the actual Ukrainian violations of the Minsk II Agreement and
ceasefire. The US and its direct and proxy agents working in
the ostensibly 'private/independent' (but de facto state controlled)
media are creating the pretext to use the UN Security Council
resolution which enshrines the Minsk II Agreement against those which
it favors; against those whose battlefield victories made it
possible. Barring that, at the very least they are breeding an
internal climate and setting the national discourse to justify things
which are in violation of international law.
Western
media is going to do it by twisting Zakharchenko's words to fit a
tremendous lie. Specifically they will do this by taking what
he said out of context and then inserting them into a fictional
context of western media invention.
As
things unfold, we will no doubt hear that 'Zakharchenko himself' said
that he intended to break the ceasefire all long.
If
you do not mind being insulted or enraged by what passes for news,
analysis, or commentary in the west, then we suggest you have a read
for yourself : "Gunfire
in Donetsk as Rebel Leader Refuses Ukrainian Unity".
In
this review, we will highlight some of the most dangerously
misleading and dishonest parts of the Bloomberg article.
Insofar as these are used to encourage the US public to support
the US government in increasing its illegal wars in the world, these
are war crimes as understood by the precedent established at
Nuremburg and subsequent prosecutions by the ICJ in The Hague in
decades that followed.
Naturally,
according to the theory of 'trickle down hubris', even the flies
yelling 'charge' whilst sitting on the chariot wheel of history, such
as the article's author Stefan Kravchenko, embody the imperial
arrogance which originates at the very top. It may escape these
criminals, big and small, that what they peddle is no different than
what Julius Streicher was hung for.
Yes,
the convictions at Nuremberg were not just those in the military
command, or policy making - but also in media. We must remember
Streicher, like Joseph Goebbels - only wrote words. They only created
a discourse which justified aggressive wars of conquest.
American
media bosses clearly believe they are on the winning side of history,
arrogantly assuming they will never be made to account for their
documented crimes.
With
US power now in decline, we are fast approaching a time when various
US statesmen and media tycoons will have to face trial similar to
Nuremberg, under the watch of the international community. That will
be an important time for truth and reconciliation
The
Minsk II Agreement came at a time when thousands of innocents were
being killed by UAF forces, and was later backed by a UN Security
Council resolution.
Working to undermine this UN enshrined agreement for peace is clearly a crime against humanity and a crime against peace, which are war crimes. In this context we can see what is in fact the most optimal end-game scenario for those in media who are guilty of crimes against humanity and crimes against peace, possibly inclduing Kravchenko and his employer, Bloomberg.
Working to undermine this UN enshrined agreement for peace is clearly a crime against humanity and a crime against peace, which are war crimes. In this context we can see what is in fact the most optimal end-game scenario for those in media who are guilty of crimes against humanity and crimes against peace, possibly inclduing Kravchenko and his employer, Bloomberg.
Understanding
how US media conducts its propaganda is very important. One of
the primary methods is the destruction of the English language.
Grammar and words are very important, as these define specific
concepts. When words and grammar are butchered, the very
concepts and thoughts which these represent are also destroyed.
Additionally,
when critical context is subtracted, the impoverished result is a
form of language which lowers the cognitive capacity of the reader.
It makes us stupid.
Certainly since at least last weekend, we have seen a real uptick in the reports of clashes. Around Donetsk Airport, there have been many hundreds wounded on the UAF side, according to DPR reports. Not only are some of these clashes reported to have occurred between the various forces fighting for the Kiev Junta and the revolutionaries in the Donbass, but also between the various groups of the Kiev Junta. Indeed, the UAF is confirmed to have had a few serious skirmishes with the OUN in the last week alone.
In
reading the Bloomberg article, a few things jumped out as
critical in defining the US narrative. One of the main 'tactics' used
to invent this narrative is to combine only tangentially related
facts and quotes into a single sentence or paragraph.
These facts and quotes may not even be correlated but are presented as if they are not only this, but but even causal.
These facts and quotes may not even be correlated but are presented as if they are not only this, but but even causal.
Other
obfuscations were also glaring, some of these were a matter of spin,
others of omission. Others still involved the use of
equivocation, a time-honored logical fallacy in western media. We
picked out a few highlights from the article in order to help better
inoculate the public from the kind of information war being waged by
the US media upon the US public. It is our hope that our
readers find these useful in disentangling fact from fiction. The
most frustrating thing about untangling lies and disinformation is
that it requires more text and effort to untangle them than to make
them.
Exhibit
I
Setting aside that the connotation here for western readers is that smokers, gun toters, and the devoutly religious are highly questionable people (and apparently Zakharchenko is all three rolled in one, on par with David Koresh), the first real lies here are contained in the second paragraph.
To
begin with, the 'enemy' that Zakharchenko refers to is not the
'country' of Ukraine per se. Country is a broad and ambiguous
term, but clearly expressions like "love your country, not your
government" are not possible constructions if they are
synonyms.
This
might seem like hair splitting to the sufficiently anesthetized or to
those whose Adderall has worn off, but these distinctions are
extraordinarily crucial, and critical to how international law and
specifically the Minsk II Agreement (which some fighting may be in
violation of) is understood by those who signed it.
These are also important distinctions not to ignore by those at Bloomberg whose circulation is almost one million. Readers of Bloomberg use the information provided to understand the world, and to support or oppose government initiatives, ranging from the relatively banal to the extraordinarily earth shaking, such as making war.
These are also important distinctions not to ignore by those at Bloomberg whose circulation is almost one million. Readers of Bloomberg use the information provided to understand the world, and to support or oppose government initiatives, ranging from the relatively banal to the extraordinarily earth shaking, such as making war.
To
the extent that Zakharchenko refers to the military of Ukraine, its
functions exist within the constitution, i.e the state, and
not the government, which includes as well as the various
non-government volunteer brigade and battalions such as the OUN,
Pravy Sektor, Aidar, and Azov. These are composed of elements
that are all part of the state (as citizens) but are not part of the
government per se.
Government is a function of the state; all citizens are a part of the state but not all citizens are members of government. A state possesses sovereignty, whereas government's powers are derived from the state. States have, for example - and in the case of Ukraine, a constitution.
Government is a function of the state; all citizens are a part of the state but not all citizens are members of government. A state possesses sovereignty, whereas government's powers are derived from the state. States have, for example - and in the case of Ukraine, a constitution.
Governments
come and go, are elected in or out by provisions in the constitution.
Typically and as with the case in Ukraine, for a government to change
the constitution and remain a constitutional government, it must
derive this authority from the state. In democratic republics
such as the pre-coup Ukraine, this authority is normally derived from
the people, who are all part of the state as citizens. The processes
to change to constitutions of this type, as creating new
constitutions creates a new state, are often called a
referendum.
While
these distinctions may seem tedious at first, the point ofBloomberg's
destruction of language is meant to combine into 'one feeling' a lot
of really distinct concepts, both in practical terms and in law.
Among them are the rights of citizens to rise up against the
unconstitutional creation of a new state by a puppet government
installed by a foreign sponsored and organized coup.
If
a government changes the constitution through unconstitutional means,
thus bringing in a new state which removes its foundation from the
citizens, it is no longer a constitutional government. Citizens,
historically and in law, are considered to have the right to rebel
using force, otherwise and typically reserved for self defense,
against an unconstitutional usurpation of power, as has occurred in
Ukraine.
Also
there are an array of mercenaries and conflict tourists fighting in
the region. In fact, reports to date of violations of Minsk II
are those carried out by these volunteer groupments fighting on the
Kiev Junta. The Minsk II Agreement specifically mandates that
these are disbanded. It is equally conceivable that
Zakharchenko refers to these illegal groupments, and not the state
sanctioned and government controlled military of Ukraine (the UAF).
Many
of our readers outside of the US will appreciate instantly the
distinction between government and state. A
corollary point here is that to the extent that Poroshenko is the
Supreme Commander in Chief of the state's military - he has this
power, according to the rebels, as the head of a government which
came to control the state's military as the result of an
unconstitutional coup against the state. That government
made a new constitution, which makes 'the state of Ukraine' a
'new state'.
Bloomberg,
making a case to the public for the illegal US shipment of weapons
and trainers to Ukraine, does so here by sleight of hand: the use of
equivocation where the words 'government' and 'country' are used as
synonyms. Now these very important categories in understanding
this US sponsored crisis, (the difference between government, state,
andcountry) have been rolled up together in Orwellian fashion.
That
said, the use of the term 'muddied the issue' in the same sentence in
question, is classical projection. Muddying the issue is
precisely what this passage, indeed this whole article, does its best
to do. In fact, the use of this term is extremely bizarre - the
'Pro-Russian' insurgency muddied the issue, is what grammatically
this sentence instructs us to infer. This is circular, because
logically the issue itself is the insurgency and its causes. What
is literally being said is that the issue muddied itself. The
author attempts to break our cognitive capacities on the rocks of
tautology. Literally, the author has said that the existence of
the insurgency has muddied the issue of (understanding?) the
existence of the insurgency.
In
the last sentence, we are told that "It also plunged Ukraine
into an economic crisis ...", we are instructed from the
sentence before to choose either from 'the UN' or 'the conflict',
with 'the conflict' being most reasonable.
And
that point is patently false - the 15bln euro debt which the Ukraine
suffered from was one of the causes of Yanukovich's looking to
Russsia in November of 2013, who by way of China, had arranged for a
bail out of that sum. The EU and the World Bank said they were
unable to help with this in any substantive way, with any balance of
payment aid, restructuring the debt, or other alternatives to payment
on the IMF loan. Even the IMF
stated in December of 2013:
This already was with an over 40% debt-to-GDP ratio. Bloomberg attempts to rewrite history, and confuse cause for effect.
And
what of our 'rebel' insurgency? Because the existence of the
insurgency 'muddies the issue' of the existence of the insurgency, we
are unable to ask why exactly the "muddy"
insurgency declared independence from the new state of
Ukraine. Indeed, the social contract was broken by Yatsenyuk
and Turchinov under the orders of the US. The new state of
Ukraine is an illegally occupied entity, under US administration.
The words 'coup', 'backed', 'funded', 'ethnic', 'cleanse',
'murder', 'killed' and 'unconstitutional' appear not once in an
article which purports to discuss Zakharchenko's thinking. Indeed,
this is a 'muddied' issue.
Exhibit
II
Yes, Ukraine is a country in the geographic area where there is both astate of Ukraine and a government of Ukraine. As we can already see, the term 'country' is also intentionally vague.
A
country by definition may refer to a sovereign state, or an area of
land under occupation, or a formerly sovereign state under foreign
occupation. Additionally, 'country' may refer to a part of a
state that is disputed by two or more states.
Donetsk,
arguably, is a country which is disputed not to be in
the state of Ukraine.
However, the word 'country' appears nowhere in the Minsk II Agreement, and it's clear why this equivocation fallacy was employed by Bloomberg. Ukraine is a country under foreign occupation by the US, who seized control of the government and brought a new state into existence. It is this state, and not the prior sovereign state of Ukraine, which the rebels are 'rebelling' against.
However, the word 'country' appears nowhere in the Minsk II Agreement, and it's clear why this equivocation fallacy was employed by Bloomberg. Ukraine is a country under foreign occupation by the US, who seized control of the government and brought a new state into existence. It is this state, and not the prior sovereign state of Ukraine, which the rebels are 'rebelling' against.
Bloomberg
misinterprets the Minsk II Agreement, misleading the readership which
is largely US. The resources at their disposal, the team of lawyers
working for them around the clock in other areas, and the relative
ease of finding the language of the agreement (it's on Wikipedia) as
well as the plain language it's written in, can mean only a few
things. In the context of the other willful omissions and
distortions which plague this 'article' and impugn the integrity of
its author, we are justified in concluding that this
'misinterpretation' is intentional.
Given that it is these lies about the meaning and language of a UN Security Council resolution that can manipulate a population into believing that its own government has a legitimate casus belli when it does not, it is inarguably a war crime. Let's look at the provisions involved here:
While the Minsk II Agreement states that the government of Ukraine is to take control of the state borders, nowhere in the agreement does it state that there is any eventuality to the return of Donetsk and Lugansk (collectively, the Federation of Novorossiya) to the country, the state, or the government of Ukraine. Also, the return of control of the state borders is not an eventuality, but rather is based upon other provisions that require bi-lateral agreement. The reference to the state border is in Point 9 of the agreement. Execution of the article does not occur until the fulfillment of Point 11.
Furthermore,
Point 11 requires a new constitution before even the restoration of
control of the border to the Ukrainian government can occur. Thus,
the word 'the' refers to a future government formed after the
creation of yet another new state, because Point 11 must be
accomplished before Point 9. It does not refer to 'the'
government of Ukraine in the present tense. It does not refer
to the present government.
The
Minsk II Agreement actually calls for a nullification of the foreign
installed coup-government, with federation - i.e. decentralization
being the key element of a new constitution. It also requires
the representatives of these districts - Donetsk and Lugansk - to
agree. The representative of Donetsk within the framework of
the Trilateral Contact Group is Zakharhenko himself.
Thus,
Bloomberg's interpretation is entirely false. None of these
events can transpire without bilateral agreement, and nothing is
'eventual'. But what we understand from this, is that
Zakharchenko is 'defiant' in the face of a mandated eventuality,
codified by the UN, which makes him seem to be a criminal.
And what of Zakharchenko's 'defiance' in the context of the truce? This is one of those words which is vague, but its intentional use (and placement) reveals the inference. Most generously, defiance can mean as little as 'willingness to fight'.
At worst, it means disobedient, non-compliant, and insubordinate. This is perhaps an 'imperial' meaning, i.e. non-compliant to the dictates of the US and its self-defined 'international community'. 'Defiant' is commonly used in western media to characterize global leaders against US empire who we are told are 'very bad men'. Or perhaps - and this is also intentional - they are implying that he is non-compliant with the Minsk II agreement, which is a very dangerous and criminal accusation to make, if it is not true.
They
do not need to land on one meaning, because 'defiant' both literally
and in this context means all of this.
The
quote which follows this accusation of non-compliant behaviour is
strangely placed, then, in order to cast his own assessment of what
others in Donetsk think as being, instead, evidence of his own
'defiance' of the supposed eventuality of re-unification. We
are meant to imagine him to be taking a 'defiant' tone when making
the quote that follows, even though the article does not technically
say that. It is actually just one line that follows another.
This is meant for us to make a clear inference which the
article's author could attempt to say was not implied.
Exhibit
III
Here in the first line of the exhibit we can see that they are implying that his defiant statement was actually a threat of violence, which we are to assume are underscored (transitive verb; "to make evident") by his actions which resulted in the loss of six Ukrainian soldiers. This phrasing is meant to imply, or rather cause us to infer, that the loss of six soldiers was the result of Zakharchenko's 'defiance' - either willingness to fight, or non-compliance with Minsk II. In short, we are to understand that Zakharchenko launched the attacks. In reality, the OSCE - the only 'legitimate' intergovernmental organization whose findings are meant to be 'objective', on the ground - reported offensive attacks by the Ukrainian forces.
The DPR rebels have accused the OSCE monitors of being engaged in intelligence gathering on behalf of the Ukrainian military or the US.
The second sentence has no connection to the first, and is placed next to the first in order to pin Russia as backing Zakharchenko's 'attack' which followed his 'defiant' warning.
The
second paragraph is included to imply that while Zakharchenko
defiantly breaks the Minsk II agreement, underscoring this with
Russian armed and financed attacks which leave Ukrainian soldiers
dead, Yatsenyuk is committed to implementation. This is
entirely at odds with the data that has been collected to date.
The
following is another example of the same pattern, the hinging
together of unrelated sentences, placed together to imply a natural
connection.
Exhibit
IV
The paragraph in this exhibit switches from quoting the official OSCE report to then a Ukrainian government statement via facebook. The first OSCE quote in the first sentence is part of a story which actually confirms that Ukraine has attacked the DPR at the Donetsk Airport in a "full scale tank battle". In the second sentence, placed right after the first for reasons we have discussed in the above, something quite strange happens. The Ukrainian 'National Security and Defense Council' claims that rebels attacked positions. Taken together, this one paragraph is meant to leave the impression that the OSCE and the National Security and Defense Council both agree that attacks were made by rebels on Ukraine positions near Mariupol. Actually the OSCE confirms hearing detonations 20km, from Mariupol:
"While
at an observation post located in the outskirts of
government-controlled Berdianske (2km west of Shyrokyne, 20km east of
Mariupol), between 09:10 and 12:10hrs, the SMM heard 40 detonations
in the distance, north of its position."
Given the history of OSCE reports on these kinds of incidents, had there been a way to imply that the DPR was responsible, they would have. In fact, the vagueness of this report, while seemingly objective, may even indicate that they could plausibly deny having certainty that it was the Ukrainian army, while knowing certainly that they wouldn't be able to claim it was the DPR.
The
next example from the Bloomberg story is also interesting, because it
uses the possessive determiner 'his' in place of the definite article
'the'.
Exhibit
V
The intended psychological effect of this sentence upon the reader is clear. It transforms 'the people's republic', which is an entire social process, brought about by objective socio-political conditions, and supported by millions of people, and makes it 'his' people's republic; i.e. something which exists almost purely in the mind of a cigarette smoking, bible thumping, gun toting, defiant madman violator of the Minsk II Agreement.
This
is the language of 'demonization', similar to 'Milosevic's
Yugoslavia', 'Saddam's Iraq', 'Gaddafi's Libya' or Stalin's Soviet
Union.
This
is not even arguably a case of varying style in the use of grammar.
In no way is the DPR the property of Zakharchenko. He was
elected last fall, in an election with sizable turnout. He does
not claim that the DPR is 'his', nor does the constitution - ratified
by the popular assembly - indicate in any manner that it is.
The mechanisms exist to remove him. The language used in the above is meant to give us the impression that he is dictator-ish with a single-track mind. They come very close, if not actually succeeding, in misquoting him as well. Given the general criminality of this article, the lack of journalistic ethics regarding the transformation of a definite article into a possessive determiner within a paraphrasing may seem relatively moot. Yet, it is how all of these pile up in the course of the article which leaves the reader with the unshakable conviction that they have received adequate information regarding the character and aims of Zakharchenko.
The mechanisms exist to remove him. The language used in the above is meant to give us the impression that he is dictator-ish with a single-track mind. They come very close, if not actually succeeding, in misquoting him as well. Given the general criminality of this article, the lack of journalistic ethics regarding the transformation of a definite article into a possessive determiner within a paraphrasing may seem relatively moot. Yet, it is how all of these pile up in the course of the article which leaves the reader with the unshakable conviction that they have received adequate information regarding the character and aims of Zakharchenko.
Exhibit
VI
As we can see in the above exhibit, the lie regarding the ceasefire is repeated. Again, the reintegration of Donetsk and Lugansk into Ukraine is not mandated by the Minsk II agreement; which is much more than a ceasefire. Regarding the 'his desire take to Mariupol', the section that exhibit V is taken from is titled 'Liberation of Mariupol', but only the strange and questionable paraphrase is attributed to him.
Without
a verified transcript of the interview, with his own words in the
original Ukrainian (or Russian), then - in light of the other serious
criminal and ethical problems with this article - it should not be
allowed to color our understanding of what he might have said or
meant. Nevertheless, a 'desire' does not 'run counter' to the
ceasefire, actions do. The article is essentially, in this
instance, trying to accuse him of violating the ceasefire based upon
thoughts they claim are in his head.
Exhibit
VII
Because the Malaysian Airline false flag has been debunked already, we won't belabor the first part. It is the quote from Zakharchenko that is problematic. This interview was not conducted in English, but rather in Ukrainian.
The
word that Zakharchenko most probably used for "sadly" was
"sumno". This can mean both "unfortunately"
or "sadly". Why would "sadly" make any
sense, unless to imply that Zakharchenko has regrets that they were
unable to shoot down a civilian airplane?
What
was meant instead is the rather cold, bureaucratic "unfortunately",
as in "unfortunately for those who would accuse us". This
is transformed from "unfortunately" into "sadly".
The article means for us to come away thinking that the defiant
Zakharchenko is sad that his people's republic didn't shoot down the
plane.
Exhibit
VIII
Again, the Minsk II agreement does not call for Ukraine to "gradually assert more and more control over the breakaway regions until full control is reached by year-end". It practically says the opposite: it mandates that the Ukrainian government move towards the creation of a new state, the constitution of which gives autonomy in defined stages to the ''breakaway regions''. We have provided some of the relevant sections as well as a link to the whole agreement.
There
are a series of clearly defined mechanisms, stages, which must be in
place for any of this to take place, however. There is no way to
interpret this any other way. The language is clear and
unambiguous in this regard.
The
issue of 'control' is only literally referred to in the section about
the border, and even here this relies on bi-lateral agreement between
the party's representatives as outlined in the Trilateral Contact
Group. At no point in the process do the 'break-away regions'
rejoin the present state of Ukraine, nor are they compelled
unilaterally to join a future state of Ukraine, nor are the forced to
do so by the present or any future government.
This
lie is promoted to mislead the US population in the direction of
continued and escalated US military support to Ukraine, which is a
war crime and also meant to undermine the Minsk II Agreement. The
logic of the lie is this: so long as the rebels continue to exist,
and don't "gradually assert less and less control'', then they
are in violation of Minsk II. They violate it by existing,
according this criminal article by Bloomberg.
What
Poroshenko signs or doesn't sign is practically irrelevant to the
Minsk II Agreement. The agreement calls for a new constitution.
Only a new Ukrainian state, organized as a federal state as
clearly stated in Point 11 is the mechanism which then triggers the
process - one which still requires bilateral agreement - regarding
any control of a future Kiev government on the borders, and only the
borders of Donetsk and Lugansk, with Russia. This is not about
control over the "break-away" regions at all whatsoever.
A
new constitution as required by Minsk II means a new state, a federal
and not a unitary state; this means essentially that the present
government headed by Poroshenko is provisional. A new
constitution, and only a new constitution, would lead to the
bilateral agreement of the representatives of Donetsk and Lugansk.
These aren't the Governors appointed by Turchinov, but
specifically those from the Trilateral Contact Group - Zakharchenko
et al. These and only these are called for in the Agreement,
and would likely require new elections, which would mean a new
government in Kiev.
Bloomberg
attempts to turn reality on its head. This US initiated
conflict has already cost the lives of 50,000 people according
to German
intelligence estimates,
as well as over a million displaced refugees according to the UN. In
so egregiously misinforming and disinforming the readership in a
matter of this magnitude, and misrepresenting facts, quotes, and
placing sentences together in ways meant to communicate a message
other than the truth, Bloomberg's writers, editors, and owners can be
charged with war crimes: crimes against humanity and crimes against
peace.
Oles
Buzina: His Open Letter to the US Ambassador in Kiev
20
April, 2015
During
the Maidan uprising, the now murdered journalist, historian and
writer, Oles Buzina, wrote an open Letter to Geoffrey Pyatt, the
Ambassador at the US Embassy in Kiev. It was published January 23,
2014, one month before the coup d’état on Buzina’s Blog on the
Ukrainian news site segodnya.ua
Edited
by @GBabeuf
Oles Busina: His Open Letter to the US Ambassador in Kiev
Mr.
Pyatt, I appeal to you as a recognised and well-known Ukrainian
writer, who never asked for and never took any grants [money –ed.]
from your country. This letter comes from my own
initiative, there are no political parties or oligarchic groups
behind it. However, I am sure my opinion coincides with the thoughts
of many Ukrainian citizens whom you blatantly ignore.
The
other day, when unrest on Maidan Square reached its peak, the
media reported that a representative of the U.S. National
Security Council,Kathleen
Hayden,
demanded that the Ukrainian government PULLS BACK THE SPECIAL FORCES
[Berkut –ed.]
from the centre of Kiev. Otherwise, she threatened sanctions against
Ukrainians, including a ban on visas to enter your country.
I
believe that, to a large extent, her statements as an official at the
White House, are based on the information provided to Washington from
the US Embassy in Ukraine—thus from you, Mr. Ambassador.
However,
at the moment, public order is preserved in the capital, precisely
BECAUSE “special forces” (i.e. units of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs) actually are in
the centre of the capital of my homeland, and I would not want them
to leave to anywhere based on the advice of foreigners, since
the leaders of our political opposition have shown themselves so far
to be unable to control the various militant groups [among them].
Please carry this simple message back to your government.
If
you do not agree [with me], let us discharge the Ukrainian police
protection around your Embassy in Kiev and dismantle the four metre
high iron fences, which so far have protected your new residence near
the metro station «Beresteyskaya», located on a street, that until
not long ago bore the name «Tankovaya» [Tank-Brigade Street]. Why
all these unnecessary security measures? After all, in Kiev,
nothing dangerous happens, except for a FESTIVAL OF DEMOCRACY.
You
may be surprised by my independent position. But I have achieved
success in my own country without foreign aid and I believe that we
ourselves, without interference from the outside, are able to solve
our own problems The less U.S. officials interfere in the internal
affairs of Ukraine, the faster it will be counted as one among the
SUCCESSFUL countries of the world.
 |
| Oles Buzina "The Secret History of Ukraine- Rus" |
Short
History of Ukraine. Oles' Buzina 23.12.2014
LONDON, April 17. /TASS/. Britain’s Foreign Office on Friday refused to comment on recent slayings of journalists in Ukraine, saying it never comments on situations not involving British subjects.
A Foreign Office spokesperson told TASS on Friday the Foreign Office typically did not comment on situations unless they were linked with British subjects.
Earlier on Friday, Britain’s embassy in Moscow said it was a "disgrace" of London to keep silent about the murders. "Journalist killings in Ukraine [are] appalling. But not a word of condemnation from Britain. What a disgrace," the embassy said on its Twitter account.
Ukrainian journalist Sergei Sukhobok, who regularly wrote for many Ukrainian publications as a freelancer, was killed overnight from April 12 to 13. On April 16, acclaimed Ukrainian journalist and writer Oles Buzina was shot dead near his house. Once a chief editor of the Segodnya newspaper, Buzina quitted his post in March due to censorship. On April 15, former member of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) Oleg Kalashnikov was murdered.
Military
exercises codenamed Tornado, with participation of the US Army
paratroopers kick off in Estonia Monday, the General Staff of the
country's Defense Forces said in a statement
A
key objective for NATO is not to let Russia outreach it in terms of
capabilities, the general said.
"We're
not interested in a fair fight with anyone," General Hodges
stated. "We want to have overmatch in all systems. I don't think
that we've fallen behind but Russia has closed the gap in certain
capabilities. We don't want them to close that gap,” he revealed.
“Maidan
was also our operation. The snipers were trained in Poland. These
terrorists shot 40 demonstrators and 20 police officers on the Maidan
in order to provoke disorders,” said the EU Parliament Deputy and
presidential candidate Janusz Korwin-Mikke.
Turning truth on its head
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.