Author: admin

‘Almost all’ opposition leaders knew about Venezuelan coup plot by U.S.; UK and Canada also involved

Posted by

0

Articles from Telesur

February 15, 2015:

President Maduro during the televised press conference Feb. 14, 2015.President Maduro during the televised press conference Feb. 14, 2015 Photo: VTV

Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro added that a U.S. Embassy advisor drafted the script that the coup plotters read in video they planned to air.

In a televised address Saturday night, Venezuela’s president Nicolas Maduro revealed new information on the foiled coup attempt against his government, including accusations that the country’s opposition leaders were aware of the plans.

“Almost all of the MUD leaders knew about this plan, this ambush, almost all of them, including the four-time losing candidate,” said the Venezuelan leader, referring to opposition presidential candidate, Henrique Capriles Radonski.

“I’m not saying all of them were actively involved. But it was a rumor circulating amongst them, that something was about to happen,” Maduro explained.

Maduro also said that those detained have confessed to the plot and have provided new information which authorities are investigating.

In addition to attempting to bribe officials and politicians with cash and visas to enter the United States, the Venezuelan president expanded on the role played by the U.S. Embassy in the country, saying that the script read by coup plotters in a video they planned to air once the plan had been initiated was crafted by an advisor at the Embassy.

Maduro called on U.S. president Barack Obama to stop his officials from meddling in Venezuelan affairs.

“In your name, they are organizing coup plots against democratically-elected government, such as Venezuela,” Maduro said.

According to Venezuelan intelligence and testimonies, the coup was set have taken place on Feb. 12, one day after opposition leaders Leopoldo Lopez, Maria Corina Machada and Antonio Ledezma published a “Transition” program which outlined measures including the privatization of oil, deregulation of the economy and agreements with International Monetary Fund..

The plan included targetted assassinations and bombing a series of targets – including teleSUR’s headquarters in Caracas – while opposition activists staged violent protests in the streets to mark one year since the start of opposition-led protests that claimed 43 lives.

February 14, 2015
Evidence Reveals Canada, UK Involvement in Venezuela Coup Plot

Evidence presented on Venezuelan TV showed a video of the coup plotters, as well as the 10-year U.S. visa granted to one of the accused.
By Telesur
February 14, 2015 “ICH” – “Telesur” – The president of Venezuela’s national assembly, Diosdado Cabello, presented further evidence of the  right-wing plot to overthrow the Bolivarian government Friday evening.

Cabello presented evidence of the foiled plans, including a video showing members of the military prior to recording a message announcing that the military no longer recognized the government.

The video, which was set to be aired after planned attacks had been carried out, was to have been televised by a station in Venezuela or Miami.

Cabello also showed a 10-year U.S. visa given to one of the detained, days before the plan was to be implemented.

Cabello also said that a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and a member of the U.K. diplomatic core in Venezuela, had been involved in plans, including seeking information on airport capacity in case of emergencies.

According to Venezuelan intelligence, the computers seized to military detractors revealed maps from the places where the opposition was plotting to carry out attacks, including the  Miraflores presidential palace, and the headquarters of teleSUR in Caracas.

Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro announced Thursday that the government had thwarted a coup attempt which was being coordinated by Venezuela’s right-wing opposition with the support of the U.S. government.

During the televised presentation, Cabello pointed to a recent interview given by U.S. president Barack Obama, in which he stated that “American leadership at times entails twisting the arms of states which don’t do what we need them to do.”

The plans were to take place exactly one year after opposition-led acts of violence rocked the country, claiming 43 lives and billions in damage.

On Wednesday, opposition leaders Leopoldo Lopez, Maria Corina Machado and Antonio Ledezma released a “transition plan” which involved privatization of the country’s oil, deregulation of the economy and accords with “international financial institutions” including the International Monetary Fund.

La nueva Televisión del Sur C.A.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Almost-All-Opposition-Leaders-Knew-About-Venezuelan-Coup-Plot-20150215-0006.html

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40990.htm

Financial Times: Kiev is the aggressor

Posted by

0

From Russia Insider, February 14, 2015

Even those in Donetsk who originally supported Kiev have come to realize that Ukraine is waging a war against its own people.

Although this article tries to make the people of Donetsk appear gullible and indoctrinated, it does make one incredible admission: Kiev is waging a vicious war against its own people—something that East Ukrainians will never forget, and probably never forgive. This article originally appeared in Financial Times

As world leaders convened in Minsk this week to decide the fate of east Ukraine, Tatiana Prussova, a teacher at Khartsysk school number 23, stood in front of her class, a map on the wall behind her.

For 10 minutes, she led a group of 15 and 16-year-old students through the day’s lesson: a review of the recent developments in the self-declared Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR). She explained a new local holiday — February 8: Day of the Young Anti-Fascist Heroes — and recounted a pivotal week in which the US was considering arming Kiev while the rebel army had gained ground around the crucial rail hub of Debaltseve.

“Thanks to the gains of our Donetsk People’s Republic rebels, the road to Debaltseve has been closed and the town has been encircled,” Ms Prussova told the students, gesturing at the map in the same way other history teachers might point to the battle lines in Flanders or the Napoleonic War.

The class is one of dozens of so-called political information lessons now being taught at schools across rebel-controlled east Ukraine. It is a Soviet tradition that was disbanded following the fall of the USSR but has been revived by the pro-Russian DPR’s education ministry.

“We decided to inform the children from an objective point of view about the current developments of what’s happening inside the Donetsk People’s Republic,” said Lidiya Aksyonova, the school’s principal. “The beliefs that we form here in school will in 10 years become the political views of our government.”

While some may see this week’s Minsk memorandum, which calls for a ceasefire in east Ukraine and the eventual re-establishment of national borders, as the first step towards the DPR’s disbandment, there are few signs in the region of a rebel leadership preparing to relinquish control — or a society that wants them to.

After a months-long siege that has destroyed local infrastructure, and left the population under the near-constant percussion of artillery, a new sense of regional identity has taken hold in Donetsk. Though some of it is being transmitted through top-down initiatives such as Ms Prussova’s class, much of it has come through the Ukrainian army’s shelling, which has turned many formerly pro-Ukrainian locals against Kiev.

Another source of anger for many was an October speech by President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, in which he declared that the region’s citizens would suffer for the rebel leaders’ actions. “Our children will go to school and nursery school, and theirs will sit in basement!” he declared, waving a finger.

“As a student, as the future generation, I was for a united Ukraine. We really believed in Poroshenko,” said Yekaterina, a 20-year-old student at Donetsk National University. While her family fled to the Ukrainian side during the summer, they were forced to return to Donetsk in September after they ran out of money. It was then that her feelings changed.

“We thought [Mr Poroshenko] would come to Donetsk, but he didn’t come once,” she said. She dismissed claims that Donetsk locals were being brainwashed by the rebel leadership and Russian television. “You don’t need to be a soldier to understand from what direction artillery fire is coming,” she said. “We have access to the internet. We’re not in the stone age. We’re not zombies.”

In Donetsk’s Kievsky district, one of the most heavily bombed parts of the city, a middle-aged worker named Svetlana said she had been living underground in a cold war-era bomb shelter with 50 of her neighbours since the bombing began in May. While she refused to take part in the separatists’ referendum and appeal to join Russia in May — “I could tell that something smelt funny,” she explained — her views changed during the months underground.

“How can I be for a united Ukraine when Kiev has spent the past six months bombing us?” she asked. “They came to power and destroyed the entire infrastructure of southeast Ukraine.”

Enrique Menendez, a Ukrainian-born businessman with Spanish roots, said one of Kiev’s biggest mistakes was to vilify the people of southeastern Ukrainian rather than open a dialogue.

“At the beginning, a lot of journalists, bloggers, opinion leaders — most of them pro-Ukrainian — left Donetsk. But when they got to Kiev, the rhetoric [about southeast Ukraine] was very negative,” said Mr Menendez. “This aggression and lack of understanding of what was going on here really offended the people that stayed behind.”

One of a dozen organisers of a March rally for a united Ukraine, Mr Menendez eventually decided to stay in Donetsk to set up an organisation that delivers humanitarian aid.

In August, there were only five people left in his apartment building. They would crowd into the corridor during the worst of the shelling. Now, nearly all the 80 or so former residents have returned.

“The wartime mentality has changed us,” he explained. “We’ve stopped valuing the superficial things in life. We’ve lost everything: our savings, our prospects, our businesses. Some people lost their relatives. But we’ve become more pure.”

Even though the rumble of artillery fire could still be heard in central Donetsk this week, much of city life felt normal. A ghost town for much of last year, most of the city’s residents have now returned. Restaurants and shops are reopening, and most local schools are in session.

Igor Kostenok, the DPR’s education minister, appears determined to use his post to encourage a lasting regional identity. In addition to the new political information classes, Mr Kostenok said schools would also teach students about the experience of youngsters who fought for the rebels during the summer.

“Our story of the Great Patriotic War [second world war] tells us that many children who were forced to grow up early because of the war took up arms and defended their home. History is doomed to repeat itself,” he said.

One such youngster is Alexander Vasin, a 16-year-old student from the Donetsk suburbs who fought at Donetsk airport over the summer in a rebel battalion called the 15th International Brigade, despite his parents’ objections. He returned when school resumed in September, but said he would go back to the battalion later this year if the war had not ended. Of the fighting, he said: “It’s difficult at the beginning, but you get used to it.”

A video of the fighting he shot on his mobile phone won a prize from the DPR education ministry and is now being shown at schools across the region.

 

http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/02/14/3489

Reprinted under Fair Use Rules.

The Paet-Ashton transcript and the snipers at Maidan

Posted by

0

Excerpt from annotated transcript below:

It is, and actually the only politician the people from civilian society mentioned positively was Poroshenko, so that he had some so to say trust among all these Maidan people and civilian society; and  second, what was quite disturbing, the same oligarch [Poroshenko] told that well, all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers, from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides.
Well, that’s yes, …
So that and then she [Dr. Olga Bolgomets] also showed me some photos, she said that as medical doctor, she can, you know, say that it’s the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition that they don’t want to investigate, what exactly happened; so that now there is stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new coalition.
I think that we do want to investigate.  I mean I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh?
So that it was in this instance disturbing that if it’s us now to live its own life very powerfully, then it already discreditates from the very beginning also this new coalition.

Posted on Fort Russ
By Eric Zuesse, 3 Feb. 2015

Here is a complete transcript of the extraordinarily revealing phone conversation, that occurred on 26 February 2014, in which the foreign-affairs chief of the European Union, Catherine Ashton, was informed by her investigator, Urmas Paet, into his findings regarding what had been the cause of the violence that brought down the Ukrainian Government of President Viktor Yanukovych — whether it was Yanukovych himself, or the people who had opposed Yanukovych and who had supported Ukraine’s joining the EU (which Yanukovych had finally decided not to do). 
This conversation makes absolutely clear that the EU had not participated in bringing down Yanukovych and was shocked to learn that Yanukovych had not been behind the violence on that historic occasion, which had occurred only days prior.
This conversation goes by so fast so that a transcript of it is really necessary, in order for one to be able to absorb the full import of what’s happening and being revealed in it. Consequently, what now follows will be the transcript of this entire astounding phone call, with explanatory notes added in brackets by myself, for the reader’s comprehension of what was being referred to by these officials, in this phone-call that shows the truly astonishing extent of U.S. President Barack Obama’s depravity — a depravity that clearly shocked these EU officials, even while they seemed to have been resigned to it. (Subsequently, they went along with it, with only weak ongoing resistance to it.)
Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet phones the EU’s foreign-affairs chief Catherine Ashton, to report on the findings of his February 25th inquiry for the EU, into the situation in Ukraine right after the coup that had just overthrown Ukraine’s democratically elected (in 2010) President Viktor Yanukovych:

Continue reading →

Ukrainian General Staff confirms Debaltsevo force collapse

Posted by

0

Posted on Fort Russ, February 17, 2015

2/17/2017

Ukrainian General Staff Confirms Losing Control Over Debaltsevo Forces

Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

Earlier today the Russian Spring reported that, according to the information from the relatives of UAF troops located in the vicinity of Debaltsevo, the chain of command has completely broken down and the troops were issued orders to break out of the cauldron on their own. However, several Ukrainian media immediately denied the reports, claiming it was panic-mongering.

However, only an hour ago the acting spokesperson for the Ukrainian General Staff Vladislav Seleznev confirmed this information during a live interview on the TV channel 112, saying that DPR units were assaulting the UAF base-camp at Debaltsevo, and that the headquarters for all UAF forces there has been destroyed.

Oddly enough, Seleznev would not confirm that the Ukrainian forces are in a cauldron. But he did not deny it either.

J.Hawk’s Comment:  So it’s coming to an end. It’s only a matter of how many troops make it out alive. But the loss of equipment, combined with earlier losses here and everywhere, put into question the UAF’s ability to conduct large-scale operations for a long time to come. The days of “Victory” have come to an end. The days of “Treason” are only beginning… Poroshenko and others were able to avoid reckoning for the earlier Ilovaysk debacle apparently only by promising a rematch. They seem to have lost that one too, and Round 3 does not seem in the cards. But Round 2 is the only thing that kept all the different factions of the very fragile “pro-European” junta together.

 

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/ukrainian-general-staff-confirms.html

 

German military association demands massive armaments increase

Posted by

0

Welt.de reports that Lieutenant Colonel André Wüstner, President of the Armed Forces Association, said, “Whoever wants peace must prepare for war.” [1]
——————————————————————————

From World Socialist Web Site, February 14, 2015
By Johannes Stern

Against the backdrop of the Ukraine crisis, leading German politicians and military leaders are demanding a massive rearmament of the army.

On Sunday, the president of the armed forces association [Bundeswehrverband], André Wüstner, attending the Munich Security Conference, declared: “Whoever wants freedom must be ready for war.” He has precisely the same view as the German government, namely that the conflict in Ukraine cannot be solved militarily, but that the army must prepare itself for any emergency.

The past year has shown “how quickly risks can turn into dangers,” said Wüstner. The situation in Ukraine, Syria and Iraq is dramatic, he said.

“For us, that means insisting that the army should be fully equipped—equipment caps passed by the previous legislature must be abolished! That begins with the weapons system and goes all the way to the personal equipment of the individual soldier.”

“To achieve complete preparation of the army for deployment”, he added, “we must raise the defense budget step by step in the next few years. Otherwise, we risk losing the trust of our allies that we have only just won back.”

Wüstner was referring to “global challenges” and the German role in NATO. Germany has a “payback responsibility” with regard to the army and NATO.

The lieutenant colonel complained, “Since 1990, the budget was restructured to save money at the expense of the army,” and demanded: “It is time for that to end—there have to be credible assurances of funding for deterrence and security!”

This year’s defense report raises similar demands and read like a blueprint for the rearmament of the army. In the forward, the parliamentary defense commissioner Hellmut Königshaus (Free Democratic Party, FDP) describes the year 2014 as “the year of truth” for the army. It is being rebuilt into an army capable of intervening worldwide, but is “stretched to the limit of its capacity.”

The first part of the report creates the impression that the German armed forces are a chronically underfinanced scrapheap in need of redevelopment and in urgent need of a massive increase in budgetary allotments.

In nearly all units, there are personnel problems: the anti-aircraft missile unit stationed in Turkish territory, the speedboat squadron, the U-boat squadron, the tactical air force squadron, the marine planes and the signals division.

With regard to large military equipment, the report says there are massive “inadequacies and deficits.” It mentions, for instance, the Eurofighter, the transport helicopter NH 90, the transport airplane Transall and the marine mine warfare systems. There are not enough armored personnel carriers, and barracks are dilapidated. Replacement parts for military equipment and adequate ammunition are also lacking. And the main gun used by the army, the G36, does not shoot accurately.

Wüstner and the defense report demand what the German government and NATO have wanted for a long time but have previously only formulated cautiously because of widespread popular opposition.

Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen (Christian Democratic Union, CDU) said in her opening speech to the Munich Security Conference last weekend that Germany is working “very hard to bring the army’s weaponry and equipment into a condition that will allow us to maintain our role as enduring alliance partners.” NATO wants this to take place immediately. The military alliance has long demanded of its members that they raise their defense budgets to at least two percent of GDP. Recently, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg insisted that Germany set a good example.

Stoltenberg held talks with Chancellor Angela Merkel, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Defense Minister von der Leyen about increasing military funding during his inaugural visit to Berlin in January. He also presented his plans to the parliamentary committees for defense and foreign policy.

Germany is a “key country” on the continent and has an important leadership role to play, said Stoltenberg. Therefore it must set an example for other NATO countries with its military. The security situation is changing “and we must adjust ourselves to that,” the NATO secretary general said.

Like Wüstner and von der Leyen, Stoltenberg directly related his plans for armaments with Russia’s “confrontation course”. NATO must stock up its arsenal, because only on the basis of a “position of strength” is a dialog with Moscow possible.

However, the most important reason for the demand to build up the army is not the NATO insistence, but the end of German restraint in matters of foreign policy announced by President Gauck and the German government a year ago. In order to be able to intervene worldwide to defend German economic, geopolitical and security interests, they need an army that is well equipped and prepared.

The complaints of the defense report about the bad condition of the army evoke historical parallels. In 1933, minister of the army of the Reich, Werner von Blomberg, prepared a memorandum in which he called the state of the German army “hopeless.” Like the current defense report, Blomberg’s memorandum complained that there were inadequate personnel reserves, military equipment and ammunition. Not even the equipment guaranteed by the Versailles treaty was available to the marines. Armoured ships were not delivered and the air force was almost nonexistent.

The dramatic development that then followed is well known. At the end of the same year, the Nazi regime began a rapid rearmament of the army. Within a short time, the German weapons industry, which had shrunk dramatically in accordance with the Versailles peace treaty, became a powerful fighting force that began the Second World War in 1939, left large parts of Europe in ruins and led a brutal war of destruction against the Soviet Union.

 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/14/bund-f14.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-army-association-demands-massive-armaments-increase/5431282

[1] http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article137224332/Deutschland-muss-auf-Krieg-vorbereitet-sein.html

 

Leading Ukrainian Nazi will visit Washington next week seeking weapons

Posted by

0

From Fort Russ
By Eric Zuesse, February 17, 2015

Andrey [Andriy] Parubiy, a co-founder of the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine, which the CIA renamed the “Freedom” Party (“Svoboda”) in order to hide its origin as Ukraine’s nazi party, announced on Sunday February 15th, that he’ll be seeking weapons from the U.S. He had started (but the CIA named) Ukraine’s ‘Anti Terrorist Operation,’ which has been trying to exterminate the residents in Ukraine’s Donbass region, Ukraine’s separatist region. Parubiy’s announcement said, “Next week I’m off to the United States to speak about this very subject,” of getting Washington to supply the weapons necessary to finish that job. 
The reason for his visit is: Ukraine is running out of bullets, guns, and other necessary equipment to achieve his goal. It’s a goal he had only begun as the organizer of Ukraine’s ‘Anti Terrorist Operation.’ The ‘ATO’ had commenced soon after the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, and has not been proceeding nearly as quickly as had been planned; it’s way behind schedule. 
According to German intelligence sources, no more than 50,000 people have been killed so far in the operation, though more than a million have fled, which also counts as success because the goal is to clear the land there. As a retired Ukrainian general who supports the operation said, “The shelling there is done as intimidation, … not just object destruction, but [also as] intimidation [to get the population to flee to nearby Russia]. The civilian population is intimidated by a chaotic bombardment.” That constant bombardment requires lots of bombs and bullets, which is why Parubiy now needs a big resupply.
Crimea’s Chief Prosecutor, Natalya Poklonskaya, who lived in Kiev and was a criminal prosecutor in Ukraine’s national government until the coup, but who quit because she didn’t want to serve in what she called a “nazi” government which was being established from the coup, says that Parubiy “was the leader of the armed part of Maidan” —  he was the key organizer of the masked snipers who dressed as government forces and shot both the police and the Maidan demonstrators during the coup and so brought down the sitting President of Ukraine. If what she says about his role is correct, then Paribuy was crucial in the success of the 22 February 2014 overthrow of democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and was also crucial to the fulfillment of the appointment that occurred four days later of Yanukovych’s replacement as Ukraine’s leader, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, whom Victorial Nuland of the U.S. State Department had already selected, on 4 February 2014, to become Ukraine’s new leader. 
So, Parubiy was crucial in America’s successful take-over of Ukraine, and he will now be coming to Washington to request from Congress and the U.S. President the military support needed to finish the job that he and they had started, by completing the extermination of the residents in the Donbass region, which is the region whose residents had voted 90% for Yanukovych (it’s dark purple on that map) and have refused to accept the legitimacy of the Obama-coup Government. If those voters aren’t successfully eliminated, then any future Presidential election in Ukraine that would represent all of the land-area of the pre-coup Ukraine would need to include those anti-coup voters, and so would probably end U.S. control over Ukraine.
Parubiy in his announcement warned of the aggressive intentions of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin: “If he feels that he can go further, there is no doubt that there will be an attempt to break through and make a Crimea land corridor, he’ll attempt to get at least to the borders of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. And so, in order to have the guarantee that this will not happen, the most important thing is to strengthen our armed forces, and seek that the United States give us the modern weapons we need.”
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/leading-ukrainian-nazi-will-visit.html

Ukraine: How can this happen? Here is how.

Posted by

0

By Eric Zuesse
Posted on Global Research, February 17, 2015
—————————————————————–
How can this happen?

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/ukrainian-soldiers-break-into-house.html

Here is how:

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/ukraines-land-agency-give-land-to-soldiers-in-the-east-for-free-352100.html

Screen Shot 2015-02-15 at 6.48.31 PM

So: Ukraine’s troops are permitted to steal whatever they want from the residents in Donbass, the rebelling region. The particular victim here lives in an apartment, and so all that Ukraine’s troops can take from him are his belongings.

He’s lucky they didn’t shoot him (if they didn’t).

The cover story in the 4 August 2014 issue of TIME was: “In Russia, Crime Without Punishment: Vladimir Putin backs the rebels …”

Screen Shot 2015-02-15 at 6.56.26 PM

Would a more-honest news-report have been titled, “In America, Crime Without Punishment: Barack Obama institutes ethnic cleansing in southeast Ukraine”?

Or, perhaps: “Crime Without Punishment: TIME magazine lies about Russia and Ukraine”?

Either way: How can such things as this happen?

Well, both things did — the ethnic cleansing did and does, and the cover-up of it and of its source did and does.

And that’s the biggest uncovered news-story of our time: both the ongoing crime, and its ongoing cover-up.

The present news-report is being distributed to virtually all U.S. ‘news’ media for publication, so that readers of all which do publish it (which can be determined by a google-search of this news-report’s headline) can come to know, from all that do not (show there), which ‘news’ media (other than TIME) are co-conspirators with Obama, in deceiving the American public into hiding reality so as to encourage further movement toward a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia — a nuclear war in which America (and definitely not Russia) was the instigator. (Even the founder of the “private CIA” firm Stratfor acknowledges that the February 2014 overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovuch, which started this, was “the most blatant coup in history” — and it was run from the U.S. White House. It precipitated, as a purely defensive measure by Russia, Russia’s accepting Crimea’s bid to rejoin Russia: Crimea had been since 1783 the base for Russia’s crucial Black Sea fleet, which Obama wanted to kick out of there.)

Any news-media that issue this news-report are honest, because the news-report itself is (and none of them is being charged anything to publish it; so, expense is not involved here). Any that don’t issue it, each reader can judge — and nobody has to wait for a nuclear war in order to do so; the ‘news’ media can be judged right now, because this coup occurred a year ago, and yet still it has not been reported in the U.S. as having been a coup (this overthrow was supposedly instead a result of ‘the democratic Maidan demonstrations’ that were actually used merely as a cover for it).

Furthermore, the present reporter offers to all other journalists the full text of the only thorough investigation that was ever done regarding the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych, a rigorous scientific analysis of all of the existing evidence. It concludes exactly as did the European Union’s investigator when he first reported on 26 February 2014 that it had been a coup, which had been perpetrated by “someone” allied with the EU (presumably by the U.S. White House); it shocked Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign-affairs chief, when she learned it from him. This lengthy subsequent independent investigation into the matter is by far the most thorough examination that exists of the event, and it is titled, “The ‘Snipers’ Massacre’ on the Maidan in Ukraine.” Its author is University of Ottawa political scientist, Dr. Ivan Katchanovski. Any ‘news’ medium that decides not to publish the present news report about this American international atrocity, and that also does not at least request from me (or from Dr. Katchanovski) that full investigative report by Katchanovski about how this ethnic cleansing started, is clearly not interested in reporting the truth, regarding what is actually the most important international-affairs news-story of the past year, since the February 2014 coup, at least — the only matter that could very possibly end up producing World War III. (Obama wanted a proxy war against Russia to soften them up for the real thing; and the result is all of this bloodshed in Ukraine during and since that coup a year ago.) So: nobody can say that the reason it’s not being reported is that it’s not important news (now become history) to report. It was, and (unfortunately) still is.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

“Loud Talk, Not Loud Deeds”–NATO aid to Ukraine

Posted by

0

Posted on Fort Russ

By Alex Leshy, 2/16/2015
Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

I can’t characterize NATO’s position in any other way. A complete mess. The Secretary General says one thing, the supreme military commander something entirely opposite. While the heads of NATO member states say something different altogether. Which means that NATO has officially adopted a very curious position. Something along the lines of “we, as alliance will not give Ukraine any aid, but individual member states may make their own decisions. Any decisions.”

Officially that position is formulated as follows. The matter of arms supplies to Ukraine will not be raised at NATO level. This was announced by NATO SecGen Stoltenberg in an interview with Kommersant.

So the simple conclusion is that Ukraine will get no weapons. Instructors will appear. But only as instructors, and only very far away from the front line. Not that there will be much use from them, given their “effectiveness” at training Iraqis or Afghans. No successes anywhere. US military assistance is what is preventing their collapse. But as soon as the Americans start to “leave”, everything falls apart. The story of ISIS success is a perfect example.

Why would anyone expect something different? For example, German or US tanks? Which cost $6.2 million apiece?

During the summer of 2014 UAF had 600 perfectly fine tanks, while the militia had none. Did that help the UAF? On the other hand, let’s assume the UAF somehow could train its crews to operate NATO tanks. But how many would it expect to receive? The US has a total of 8725 M1 Abrams MBTs. UAF would need 600-700 vehicles to replenish their units. Does anyone seriously expect the US will simply give Ukraine 10% of its MBT fleet, which would cost $4.3 billion? Or perhaps 600 Leopard’s from the Bundeswehr, out of the total store of 1048 vehicles? There are also the French Leclercs, which total 776 [that’s the total number produced—the French army purchased only 400 of them]. Would France be willing to transfer virtually all of its heavy armor to Ukraine? Does anyone seriously believe that?

This does not even address the question of fuel and lubricants, which Ukraine likewise has in short supply, so that too would have to be imported, in other words, bought using hard currency which Ukraine doesn’t have. As a reminder, a single round of tank gun ammunition costs $25 thousand. In some cases it may be as low as $6-8 thousand. Still, that means a full load of 40 rounds costs a quarter of a million dollars minimum. And a single load can be easily expended in a single day. Even if you stretch it out over a week, it still means Ukraine would have to spend 150 million a week for tank ammunition. Or 450 million a month.

So I understand the NATO SecGen and the US president perfectly well. Supporting democracy is one thing, but are we going to gift them $4.3 billion worth of tanks, and then continue giving them half a billion a month worth of ammunition? For what? Just to watch as the Novorossia “radishes” blow up the expensive NATO tanks and then make selfies with the wrecks in the background? Well, to hell with Ukraine. And to hell with the money. But who will buy our “armored coffins” after that kind of advertising? Even the much praised and invincible Abrams tanks turned out not to be the wonderwaffles [a pun on the German word “wunderwaffe”, meaning wonder weapon] their marketing claimed. Even in the hands of skilled US crews. To say nothing of local crews. While the T-72s spat upon by the Western media are operating quite effectively. Even in the hands of local crews.

So would France want to turn over its entire tank fleet to Ukraine, only to then watch all potential buyers steer clear of them in the future. No thanks. But that’s politics. Loud words are no less important than loud deeds. Therefore when it comes to words the entire Western world is lined up shoulder to shoulder, full of readiness to help, support, strengthen, and supply. But when it comes to deeds…NATO already said noooo, not us. But hey, if individual countries want to help, that’s fine because democracy is sacred. We just can’t see any individual members do anything serious. For example, there have been many discussions about the Polish Dana152mm SP howitzers [actually a Czech design, though also used by the Polish Army] that have started last year, all these talks and so far not a single Dana had been seen in Ukraine. Not even a single blurry photograph. There are photos of everything else. Even of drunk US instructors asleep on the grass. But not of the Danas. So it would seem there no Danas in Ukraine. There were discussions, but that’s as far as things got.

In conclusion, it seems to me that Kiev’s hopes to get Western weapons and other “state of the art” stuff are about as likely to be fulfilled as the expectations that the EU will immediately open its borders to Ukrainians in February 2014.

J.Hawk’s Comment: I could only add that NATO countries have no guarantees the equipment they supply would not end on the international arms market. Which would be an even greater embarrassment than seeing it being destroyed on the Donbass.

 

http://alex-leshy.livejournal.com/456913.html
NATO-Ukraine Relationship: What is the best way of doing nothing?

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/loud-talk-not-loud-deeds-nato-aid-to.html

 

Former EU Parliament member speaks out about Washington’s offensive against Russia, and the nazification and possible death of Europe

Posted by

0

Translation of interview of Giulietto Chiesa
From ZAVTRA.ru, February 12, 2015

Famous Italian politician – the dangers of the modern world

ZAFTRA Mr. Chiesa, the relationship between Russia and the West in general, including with leading European countries are becoming increasingly strained. Sanctions, unacceptably demanding tone, rudeness on the part of the PACE … And “who benefits?”

Giulietto Chiesa. Who benefits from the situation? Beneficial to those who created it. Absolutely clear to me is that the performance against Russia was organized in advance. And the artificial creation of the Ukrainian crisis has been carefully prepared by the American authorities. I do not know how Mr. Obama worked and participated personally in this area. But it is clear that in America today is not run by Mr. Obama. The neocons control, the Republican Party controls, the Pentagon controls, the secret services of the United States control…

The governing elite in the US believe that the time has come when it is necessary to engage in a decisive battle with Russia. For the time being, this fight – economic, diplomatic, sanctions. Not yet a nuclear war. But the American elite go to smash Russia.

They consider that Putin – the man who will not exacerbate the conflict. Mr. Putin protects and does not attack.

And it is clear that since he protects, then it is not he who created this situation. He still has even posed in extremely difficult conditions, acts very carefully and very reasonable. But there is a limit of him and his patience. This limit is clearly visible in the situation with the Donbas. Putin cannot allow that the Russian minority in Ukraine will be destroyed. This is not possible! It is impossible for Russia, its people, it is impossible for the internal psychological state of Putin himself. This is unacceptable because it breaks all the rules of international life. And when Putin says that we are in a situation of total chaos, and the rules are inactive, he is saying things that are obvious.

But it is not he who broke all the rules of conduct, he did not break them. He is called aggressor, though he never attacked, he at no one waged the offensive, he did not attack anybody. His behavior is called expansionist, even though around Russia accumulates NATO weapons, created by a chain of facilities, the borders of NATO expanding. Everything is planned and carried out by the West. In a literal sense intended by the United States and carried out under their supervision.

That is why the present situation cannot be corrected, the tragic situation cannot be remedied if this fix will not take namely the American authorities. It depends on them.

The biggest question – why the organizers of all this accelerated the process and the situation is developing at such a rate? That is the question that stands open. I think that in the West and especially in Europe there are still many do not understand, do not realize what is happening in what they willingly or unwillingly involved. And do not behave the way they should behave as reasonable political leaders, and are like spoiled boys who would like to teach all and very quickly break the enemy triumph over him. How come? Because they are dissatisfied with the current course of the world, the course of its development.

The world goes its own way. But they want the 21 century to be the American century. This very phrase that they repeat says everything. But the present age cannot to be an American one! After the action toward Syria the world has changed radically. And these capricious obstinate boys claim to further rule the world. Although these claims of theirs clearly are not feasible.

And here is the question: either they change their policies, or suffer defeat. I think that the danger of war (risk of a major war) lies in the fact that the world’s elite are playing for broke to get at once, immediately to them the desired result – smashing, the defeat of Russia. And they are confident that afterwards this problem will be solved, because they will become the most powerful, will retain the power for themselves …

But I think that even if Russia does not survive the blow and would have to retreat before them, to hand over their positions, they will not stop. After Russia, China is the object of aggression. But China will definitely be an insurmountable obstacle. And without war there can no longer be avoided. So the situation is extremely dangerous.

ZAFTRA Some time ago, the Estonian authorities have expelled you from the country.[i] That is expelled from the European Union a EU citizen. Maybe the Estonian authorities do not realize what is the principle of the European Union and do not know the rules? Or is it a provocation?

Giulietto Chiesa. I arrived in Tallinn to make a very topical lecture on “Should Europe be afraid of Russia?” I wanted to explain that Europe has nothing to fear Russia, it poses no threat. But the Estonian authorities do not even want to hear about it! They did not give even to hold a discussion on this topic!

With respect to me, they acted, breaking EU rules, which states that a European citizen may choose to travel around Europe if it does not threaten anyone’s security. I did not represent a danger to anyone and no one is threatened. This is obvious. I just wanted to express your opinion and share your point of view, about what has openly declared. But I was not given that opportunity.

So, firstly, I have not broken any European rules. And secondly, I was insulted. The charges which later against me were formulated and presented, far-fetched. Attributes to me statements that I never said. I allegedly encouraged the genocide of the Estonian people. When did I say that? Never. At the time I did an interview with Arnold Meri, and the Estonian authorities claim this, that I encouraged genocide of the Estonian people. It is offensive to me approval.

I demanded that the Estonian authorities, that they bring me an apology. They did not apologize. But if they did not apologize to me, I will file with the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights with the demand to Europe to give a clear and unambiguous assessment of the actions of the Estonian authorities. I shall demand an official statement by Europe.

It is not a question of my own personal situation. It is a question of Europe. Because if Europe issues a verdict that these actions of the Estonian authorities were competent and lawful means, Europe is dead. Meaning the Schengen [Convention] is dead, the fundamental European principles do not exist anymore – they died.

In this regard, I intend to, and am simply obliged to go to the end, and if an apology is not forthcoming, I will take it to the end. It is necessary, at last, to answer the question: can Europe influence the undemocratic behavior of one of its members and in general to manage? Can Europe urge Estonia, and add – Latvia, Lithuania – to order that they act in accordance with European laws and European rules subordinate? Or not?

And those who really are not turning a blind eye, look at the situation on these issues, understand that it is no accident these republics plus Poland operate the way they behave during the crisis in Ukraine. The behavior of of Estonia, which we are now discussing, explains why there is such a relationship with the current government of Estonia in Ukraine. All this is understandable. And if we close our eyes to what is happening and do not stop this madness, we obtain the Nazi Party in the European Parliament. We obtain the Nazi party, which will open to advance on the European institutions.

In addition, in all probability, NATO enters a country that has the same idea as the current Kiev. Occurs literally Nazification of Europe. And this is – a complete denial of the fundamental principles and traditions of Europe. It is not just the expansion of NATO or the inclusion of other states. This change is in the nature and state of political and ideological positions of Europe and NATO. And that means a sharp turn in the history of the continent.

Whence comes the offensive to our principles and foundations? Europe bears a great responsibility for the fact that she did not respond properly, did not prevent the development of a dangerous situation. On the contrary, she was enabling the movement and even associate themselves with this movement. The offensive begins in America. And Europe is responsible for the fact that Western Europe has done nothing to stop this madness.

ZAFTRA How do you assess Merkel and Hollande visit to Moscow and talks with Putin?

Giulietto Chiesa. I do not have any additional information to what took place in the media. But I drew attention to this fact: Mrs Merkel and Mr Hollande decided to fly to Moscow after visiting to Kiev, where their meeting with Poroshenko lasted five hours. So, they diligently tried to convince some ways Poroshenko. This is the first one.

Second. As can be seen in all the information media, the meeting was not agreed with the Americans. And the first step, when the Europeans moved in a different direction. Why do I say “in a different direction?” Because very carefully read the interview of Mrs. Mogerini in the newspaper «La Republica», where she clearly said that to now give the weapons to Ukraine – means to make a decisive step into war. This sentence I highlighted throughout the text, because Mrs. Mogerini cannot make such statements without prior agreement with Germany, and France. It is obvious that this phrase – a key and says that some European leaders are beginning to realize now that America wants to supply weapons Kiev (incidentally, fatal), and are very afraid of this development.

I consider all of this a change in the previous position of the European leaders. They, of course, stay tuned hostile to Russia, but it is clear that they began to speak their mind. That’s the only positive thing that I noticed in this meeting. Can the Europeans get rid of blackmail of the United States? I do not know. But now it seems clear that some of them – which was not until recently – are already beginning to realize the danger of the situation.

ZAFTRA What do you think: will be the effect of the election of the new President of Italy – Sergio Mattarello – on the relations between Russia and Italy?

Giulietto Chiesa. No, on the relationship between our two countries electing a new president will not affect Italy. The new president will continue the same course. His influence on the nature of relations between Russia and Italy is traditionally low.

 

Interviewed by Catherine Glushik

http://zavtra.ru/content/view/ssha-shantazhiruet-evropu/

[i] http://rt.com/news/215339-chiesa-arrest-estonia-italy/

Also posted on

http://rusvesna.su/recent_opinions/1424105010
US blackmails Europe! | Russian Spring

Evidence about the connection between the Ukrainian coup and Crimea’s breakaway

Posted by

0

By Eric Zuesse
Posted on Fort Russ, February 16, 2015

Little attention is generally paid to the connection between the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, and Crimea’s breakaway from Ukraine. The testimony that will here be cited helps fill this in. An attorney in the federal prosecutor’s office at the time of the coup refers to the longtime national socialist, Andriy Paribiy, as having been the key person behind the coup. In the new regime, Paribiy became appointed to become the chief of national security, and the top person overseeing the war against “ATO” ‘Anti Terrorist Operation’ to exterminate the residents in the formerly Ukrainian area, Donbass, the area which had voted 90% for the overthrown President Viktor Yanukovych, and which consequently rejected this new regime, which Washington violently imposed to replace him.  

Below is a Crimean TV interview with Natalya Poklonskaya, who was a senior criminal prosecutor in Kiev at the time of the February 2014 Maidan demonstrations and overthrow of President Yanukovych, and who resigned her post during the coup and drove back to her childhood home in Crimea, because she objected to what she called “nazis” who, she said, had done the overthrow; she objected to the way that Yanukovych was replaced, and to the unconstitutional and violent nature of it, which she didn’t view as being a democratic action, at all, but instead a “nazi” one.
This interview was telecast shortly after the February 2014 overthrow, but before the March 16th referendum in Crimea on whether to reject the new Government and to rejoin Russia (of which Crimea had been a part during 1783-1954).
Poklonskaya was interviewed in this call-in live TV show so as to inform her fellow Crimeans what she had seen happen during the overthrow, and why she couldn’t, in good conscience, remain as a Ukrainian official in Kiev, and swear loyalty to the new Ukrainian Government there. She had heard the chants of the Maidan protesters and smelled their piles of burning tires, and seen their marches in Kiev with nazi symbols and salutes, and she didn’t want to become any part of that. So, she quit and was now unemployed back home in Crimea at the time of this interview.
The key moments in this interview are shown below, with English subscripts. (Here is the full interview, for anyone who wants to see that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaXA9xPGhKo.)
“He” refers to 

Andriy Paribiy was the co-founder (along with Oleh Tyahnybok) of the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine, which the CIA had persuaded to change its name to “Freedom” or “Svoboda” in order not to offend Westerners with its origin as a native Ukrainian version of Hitler’s National Socialist Party of Germany. Polonskaya said:
“He was standing on Maidan and delivering orders.” The interviewer asked:
She then asked, rhetorically:
And she answered, also as a question (since she’s a good trial-lawyer):
She was asked her view of the new Ukrainian Government’s declaration that this referendum in Crimea would be illegal:
The referendum took place entirely peacefully, because Russian troops from Crimea’s naval base in Sevastopol Crimea prevented an invasion from Kiev. The results were 96% for reunion with Russia. A 2013 Gallup poll of Crimeans, and also a 2014 Gallup poll of Crimeans after the referndum, both showed overwhelming support for Russia and opposition to the United States; and the 2014 poll also showed that almost all Crimeans thought that the referendum-results had been free and fair and accurately reflected the views of Crimenans. However, the United States Government, and its allies, claim that the overthrow of Yanukovych was legal and that the reunification of Crimea with Russia was not, and also that the ethnic cleansing against the residents in the Donbass region of the former Ukraine is legal and that the military assistance that Russia is providing to enable those residents to defend themselves from being exterminated is not. The United States Government, and its Ukrainian Government, call that extermination-program Ukraine’s “Anti Terrorist Operation,” and the United States is sending Ukraine weapons to carry it out.
 
When the Crimean people voted to rejoin Russia when they did, they saved themselves from the fate that soon thereafter befell the residents in Donbass. 

—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/evidence-about-connection-between.html