I listened live to Putin’s speech yesterday with great interest. Here is my own analysis, for what it is worth.
Putin was strongest in his accusations of western hypocrisy. His ironic welcoming of the West having suddenly discovered the concept of international law was very well done. His analysis of the might is right approach the West had previously adopted, and their contempt of the UN over Iraq and Afghanistan, was spot on. Putin also was absolutely right in describing the Kosovo situation as “highly analogous” to the situation in Crimea. That is indeed true, and attempts by the West – including the Guardian – to argue the cases are different are pathetic exercises in special pleading.
The problem is that Putin blithely ignored the enormous logical inconsistency in his argument. He stated that the Crimean and Kosovo cases were highly analogous, but then used that to justify Russia’s action in Crimea, despite the fact that Russia has always maintained the NATO Kosovo intervention was illegal(and still refuses to recognize Kosovo). In fact of course Russia was right over Kosovo, and thus is wrong over Crimea.
I was very interested that Putin made distinct reference to the appalling crimes against the Tartars in the 1930’s, but also to the terrible suffering of Ukrainians in that period. His references were not detailed but their meaning was clear. I was surprised because under Putin’s rule there has been a great deal of rehabilitation of Stalin. Archives that were opened under glasnost have frozen over again, and history in Russian schools now portrays Stalin’s foreign policy achievement much more than his crimes (and it is now again possible to complete your Russian school education with no knowledge the Stalin-Hitler pact ever happened). So this was both surprising and positive. Designed to be positive was his assurance that Crimea will be trilingual. We will see what happens; Putin’s Russia is in fact not tolerant of its ethnic populations in majority Russian areas, and in fact contains a great many more far right thugs than Ukraine – probably about the same percentage of the population.
The 97% referendum figure is simply unbelievable to any reasonable person and is straight out of the Soviet playbook – it was strange to see Putin going in and out of modern media friendly mode and his audience, with their Soviet en brosse haircuts and synchronized clapping – obviously liked the Soviet bits best.
The attempt to downplay Russia’s diplomatic isolation was also a bit strange. He thanked China, though China had very pointedly failed to support Russian in the Security Council. When you are forced to thank people for abstaining, you are not in a strong position diplomatically. He also thanked India, which is peculiar, because the Indian PM yesterday put out a press release saying Putin had called him, but the had urged Putin to engage diplomatically with the interim government in Kiev, which certainly would not be welcome to Putin. I concluded that Putin was merely trying to tell his domestic audience Russia has support, even when it does not.
But what I find really strange is that the parts of the speech I found most interesting have not drawn any media comment I can see. Putin plainly said that in his discussions with Kuchma on the boundaries of Ukraine after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they hadn’t wanted to open any dispute with what they expected to be a friendly neighbor, and that therefore the boundaries of Ukraine had never been finally demarcated. He said twice the boundaries had not been demarcated. That seemed to indicate a very general threat to Eastern Ukraine. He also spoke of the common heritage of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine in a way that indicated that he did not accept that Ukraine might choose a political future away from Russia.
Secondly, he said that on the day the Soviet Union broke up, Russians in many places had “woken up to find themselves in a foreign country.” Again from the context in which he said it, this referred not just to Crimea, and not just even to the rest of Ukraine, but to Russian nationals all over the Former Soviet Union. I would be worrying a lot about this part of the speech if I was Kazakh, to give just one example. Putin seemed to be outlining a clear agenda to bring Russian speaking areas of CIS countries back in to Mother Russia – indeed, I see no other possible interpretation of his actions in Georgia and Ukraine.
I think that we should start listening much more carefully to what he says. I also think that the weakness of the EU’s response to events gives Putin a very dangerous encouragement to pursue further aggrandizement. I posted a few days ago:
The EU I expect to do nothing. Sanctions will target a few individuals who are not too close to Putin and don’t keep too many of their interests in the West. I don’t think Alisher Usmanov and Roman Abramovic need lose too much sleep, that Harrods need worry or that we will see any flats seized at One Hyde Park. (It is among my dearest wishes one day to see One Hyde Park given out for council housing.) Neither do I expect to see the United States do anything effective; its levers are limited.
The truth is of course that the global political elite are in the pockets of the global financial elite, and while ordinary Russians are still desperately poor, the money the oligarchs rip out of Russia’s backward commodity exporting economy is parceled around the world financial system in ways that make it impossible for the western political classes to do anything. Whose funds would the hedge fund managers look after? Whose yacht could Mandelson and Osborne holiday on?
Personally I should like to see a complete financial freeze on the entire Russian oligarchy. The knock on effects would only hurt a few bankers, and city types and those who depend on them (cocaine dealers, lap dancers, Porsche dealers, illegal domestic servants). Sadly we shan’t see anything happen. They won’t let Eton go bust.
http://www.buildingsafersexes.org/characteristics-bullies-abusers
Resident Dissident; “One of the signs of bullies is thinking that they have the right to speak for their targets. As well as being a bully you really are just not that smart”
Yes of course, I used my ESP powers to make Uzbek claim that Russians are inherently chauvinistic ! Rather, you will find he did it all by himself,as the Crimean Referendum thread clearly shows.
Again I used my ESP powers on this very Thread to cause Uzbek’s failure to answer a simple question about the State promoted chauvinism iro Israel & the US, thus causing his Russophobia to be revealed for what is it !
Re “bulling”, I refer to my reply here;
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/03/deconstructing-putin/comment-page-3/#comment-448119
For real disgusting vicious bullying I would refer you to the months of abuse Mary had to endure upon the arrival of a certain Habbabkuk.
Buy hey, I agree, I’m really not that smart ! How can I be, leaving a failing run-down comprehensive school at 16, brought up in a deprived part of London, so no expensive, and university extended education for me ! Yet for some reason, my simple questions cause apparently even very educated people to resort to bizarre obfuscating tactics, (including ex-Ambassadors !), and my simple observations sometimes cause amazingly abusive hysterics !
Goodness, imagine if only I was “smart” ! 😀
Anyhow enough about me, here’s the question you are trying to avoid again;
After arguing that the Crimean vote was invalid because it was at “gunpoint” & under “intimidation” due to European standard anti-fraud see-through ballot boxes (!), you finally agreed that this was a moronic argument as the result was inevitably going to be the same given the majority pro-Russian population,so no need at all for unnecessary & gifted Western beating stick, of the Russians fixing the vote; you then switch from that that non-argument to straight Russia bashing, by insisting that the Russians must be punished for the non-crime of ensuring a peaceful referendum (in contrast to the bloodbath in Kiev), therefore to be logical, and to ensure you are not pontificating as a result of Russo-phobia, if you want sanctions, etc on Russia for “annexing” the Crimea, you surely must then also support sanctions against Israel for the totally illegal annexations of the Golan Heights & Palestinian territories, also against Turkey for the ethnic cleansing & 40 year occupation of northern Cyprus ?
Here’s a Ukrainian anarchist perspective from a few days ago. Original in Spanish here.
“We are very alarmed because much of the Western left has fallen under the spell of the ” anti -imperialism ” and only condemn the actions of the United States and the European Union. Right now, Russian imperialism is much more dangerous for Ukrainians…It is true that the Ukrainian government is extremely disgusting. Consists of neoliberals who want to implement austerity reforms . Also, there are fascists in the country and are now stronger than before. But the Ukrainian government has consistently shown they do not want a war. And the Russian regime is an obvious aggressor, the most reactionary force in Europe today … We can try and fight our own fascist , but need help if Russian fascists divide this country along with the Ukrainian fascists.”
here‘s another interview with a Ukranian which includes:
“Right now the biggest threat to the left is the Russian invasion…The left forces abroad should condemn the war and show solidarity with Ukrainian workers, and not the nationalist and neoliberal government. We can fight our local nazis, but Putin’s “protection” will be much worse”
Both stories are similar and from media with a history that suggests the source(s) are credible. This is also the same pov coming from my non-anarchist friends in Kiev.
Here’s an article wondering how we might tackle the increasing success of the street fighting right in the ‘global uprising’ (from Ukraine, Venezuela to Bosnia, Greece, USA). Although it is labelled an anarchist text it should be interesting to all.
http://crimethinc.com/texts/ux/ukraine.html
Macky
And when did you stop beating your wife? You see even simple questions don’t need to be turned into a diatribe of self righteousness.
Phil
It’s not just Ukrainians that understand the real nature of Putin – there are not a few Russians as well. Right wing nationalists waving the flag is the oldest thing in the book.
Thank you Phil for those extracts from a Ukrainian prospective; the first person starts off by expressing “alarmed because much of the Western left has fallen under the spell of the ” anti -imperialism ”, whereas in fact general Liberal/Left Wing opinion in the West, is more than alarmed that some people who should know better, if only through clear examples of the recently documented past, are now seeking to deny/minimize the role/responsibility of the West in the events leading upto & during the violent overthrow of his/hers legitimate government. He/She talks about “Russian imperialism” & that “the Russian regime is an obvious aggressor”, whereas to most fair minded observers, Russian actions are of a defensive re-active nature rather than moves of a calculating instigator keen on expanding a Greater Russia; the fact that the Ukrainian Russians, with natural affinity to Russia, are labelled as “fascists”, and are put in equivalence with the Kiev fascists, tells you all you need to know about this particular person.
The second extract starts with a reference to a “Russian invasion”, so I guess the author must be living on a different planet, as there is no such invasion, no such occupation, and states that “Putin’s “protection” will be much worse” than the chaos & austerity that will be the inevitable fruits of the fascist/nationalist/neoliberal “government” in Kiev, which is rather strange on several levels, the first being that Putin has not shown any intention of taking over the Ukraine, his very generous financial aid bail-out proposal, and the years of subsidized/cheap gas supplies do not really indicate a fate worse then being governed by the criminal thugs presently in Kiev.
What really should concern the authors of these two extracts, is that as Ukrainians, not only did outside interests ferment, encourage & ultimately hi-jack the genuine discontent with their elected Government, not only did this nefarious foreign factor cause/contribute to the incredible bloodshed of their own compatriots, not only has this resulted in the bunch of the very unsavory people now put in power, with the resulting impending chaos looming, but that as Ukrainians, they were robbed of their democratic right to vote out the person that they had previously voted in for somebody new & legitimate, and in less than a year’s time.
I know you mean well Phil, and yes it’s important to have local prospectives, but please don’t automatically think these POV’s are just normal middle of the road views, as they certainly seem very partisan to me.
Resident Dissident; “And when did you stop beating your wife? You see even simple questions don’t need to be turned into a diatribe of self righteousness”
As we have established that I’m not very smart, can you please explain what your wife has got to do with a very simple request to be consistent? If you cannot condemn the two examples I gave, but still insist on condemning the Russian for the same thing, then the only logical conclusion is that you are not at all concern with the “crime”, but rather who the criminal is, so all that you say on this matter should be viewed as the hypocritical & bias nonsense that it is.
“there are not a few Russians as well”
So you keep saying, and probably there might even be some, but if you have provided any links for this assertion, then I must of missed them.
Some well needed sense on the Ukraine
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n06/james-meek/putins-counter-revolution
Macky
I can and have condemned the two examples of others occupying territories that they shouldn’t – that doesn’t mean that the responses should all be the same or even more bizarrely that the response should be the same throughout the time cycle of each case. There are different counterparties involved, with different strengths, weaknesses and characteristics and the circumstances of acquisition were different in each case.
I have in the past given many links in the past to the views of those Russians who dissent to the extreme nationalism and corruption of the Putin regime and also do so in English (there are a lot more in Russian) but here is a good enough starting point if you are genuinely interested and wish to understand that there is a viewpoint that exists outside the Kremlin and Russia Today.
http://www.interpretermag.com/
http://imrussia.org/
http://navalny-en.livejournal.com/ (currently under censorship)
Masha Gessen’s book – just out in paperback, and Luke Harding’s book are also excellent if you want to know what is really going on – and if you want to understand why opposing Putin does not amount to hating Russia as you so stupidly accuse those who disagree with you.
“As we have established that I’m not very smart,”
Some that I never said of course – bullying is not linked to intelligence and neither is agreeing or not agreeing with most political viewpoints.
Macky 30 Mar, 2014 – 6:54 pm
“but please don’t automatically think these POV’s are just normal middle of the road views, as they certainly seem very partisan to me.”
I stated their provenance is anarchists. They will be known as anarchists to other anarchists in Europe long before any of this kicked off. Someone unknown would not get published. If you do not believe what I say then write your own report and send it to the publishers. You will find they will immediately ask who you are and who can vouch for you. These reports are from known Ukrainian anarchists.
It is nonsense to call them partisan. They clearly oppose both Russia and US/EU. They just judge the Russian state more of a threat to their egalitarian aspirations.
Phil; “I stated their provenance is anarchists. They will be known as anarchists to other anarchists in Europe long before any of this kicked off. Someone unknown would not get published. If you do not believe what I say then write your own report and send it to the publishers. You will find they will immediately ask who you are and who can vouch for you. These reports are from known Ukrainian anarchists”
Yes you did state where these views were originating from, but you also stated “This is also the same pov coming from my non-anarchist friends in Kiev”; anyhow admittedly I don’t know too much about Anarchist theory, but I would have thought that a basic fundamental must be basic mutual agreement between free, equal citizens, ie respect for a democratic process, which is certainly at odds with what happened in Kiev.
“It is nonsense to call them partisan. They clearly oppose both Russia and US/EU. They just judge the Russian state more of a threat to their egalitarian aspirations.”
I called the view “partisan” because of the very strong anti-Russian emphasis, compared to the barely acknowledge nefarious Western involvement in the crises, which I find very irrational for the reasons I stated in my earlier reply to you.
Do you personally believe that the Russian state is “more of a threat to their egalitarian aspirations”, and if so why ?
Resident Dissident; “Some that I never said of course”
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/03/deconstructing-putin/comment-page-4/#comment-450013
??!!
“As well as being a bully you really are just not that smart”
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/03/deconstructing-putin/comment-page-3/#comment-449899
Macky
“Yes you did state where these views were originating from, but you also stated “This is also the same pov coming from my non-anarchist friends in Kiev””
I used to work with a bunch of Ukrainians so I have friends in Kiev and second generation Ukrainians here in the UK. I speak with them. I have spoken with another non-Ukrainian who has been in Kiev during this shitfest. I read reports on sites that I have learnt to trust over time. Every single thing I have heard expresses the tough conclusion.
“I would have thought that a basic fundamental must be basic mutual agreement between free, equal citizens, ie respect for a democratic process, which is certainly at odds with what happened in Kiev.”
They are not claiming that the events are ideal. They judge that the conditions for Ukrainians generally, and for a better revolution, would be worse under a Russian backed government. They explicitly acknowledge they are being forced to side with the least bad of two evils.
“Do you personally believe that the Russian state is “more of a threat to their egalitarian aspirations”, and if so why ?”
I accept their judgement. I try to not presume I know what is best for other people.
Phil; “I accept their judgement. I try to not presume I know what is best for other people”
Nobody is asking you to presume to know the best for others, I was merely asking you for your own opinion based on your Ukrainian contacts input plus the various reports you say you have read; anyhow perhaps you can venture an informed guess on the “why” question, or if not, perhaps enquire next time you engage with your Ukrainian contacts, as I’m genuinely interested to know the answer.
CRAIG:
There is no country more hypocritical on voting than our ‘special firends’ across the pond in fascist Amerika.
This about sums up Amerikas Demoracy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1zRfXkOmPI
The dangers of self-deception iro Russia;
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-infantile-diplomacy-behind-demonising-russia/14824#.UzmiTXf7zP0.twitter
Resident Dissident; “I can and have condemned the two examples of others occupying territories that they shouldn’t – that doesn’t mean that the responses should all be the same or even more bizarrely that the response should be the same throughout the time cycle of each case”
I see, you do condemned others for the same crime, but reserve the right to apply different “responses”, and/or no responses at all; that normally having different standards, and also having your cake, and wanting to eat it.
Seeing as you are flexible according to the “the time cycle of each case”, perhaps you will now follow Kerry’s dropping of the Crimean issue, and concentrate instead on the future status of the Ukraine, eg federalization, etc ;
http://darussophile.com/2014/04/the-lavrov-kerry-meeting/
“I see, you do condemned others for the same crime, but reserve the right to apply different “responses”, and/or no responses at all; that normally having different standards, and also having your cake, and wanting to eat it.”
Your words not mine – where did I say there should be no response?
My immediate concern would not be with the Crimea but stopping a repeat performance in Eastern Ukraine, and as always with what Putin is inflicting on his own subjects. It is revealing that Putin has suddenly discovered federalization when it comes to his neighbour – but when it comes to his own territory he has a sustained programme of taking powers away from the regions.
Given the author of your piece said “The reality is that despite the occasional nationalistic posturing of President Putin” might I suggest that he is also a victim of self deception since he clearly has done little to follow recent Russian history.
As for the NGO point perhaps it should be noted that much of the impact of Putin’s legislation has been felt by agencies involved in charitable and religious work – and not just the “nasty” ones that naively believe that human rights should be universal.
I’m afraid the who example is just another written from the anywhere is better than the West perspective – and I guess that the writer had precious little knowledge about Russia or Ukraine before the latest episode.
Resident Dissident; “Your words not mine – where did I say there should be no response?”
So you skip over the fact that you apply different/double standards depending on the perpetrator, and instead quibble about the pointing out that the natural inference that your conditional “time cycle of each case”, could mean no response any more, which would explain why compared to your active commendations of Russia, your commendations, past or present, iro Israel & Turkey seem to be non-existent, unless you can prove this incorrect ?
“always with what Putin is inflicting on his own subjects”
?? Please elaborate as to what you are referring to here.
“Putin has suddenly discovered federalization when it comes to his neighbour”
I think you will find that he has been advocating federalization as a solution to the situation in the Ukraine from the very beginning.
“but when it comes to his own territory”
Err, yes how a State administrates its own provinces is its own sovereign right.
“Given the author of your piece said “The reality is that despite the occasional nationalistic posturing of President Putin” might I suggest that he is also a victim of self deception since he clearly has done little to follow recent Russian history”
Ok, feel free to flesh out this criticism with even a bit of substance.
“and not just the “nasty” ones that naively believe that human rights should be universal”
Problem is that the Russians have good cause to be paranoid about US linked NGOs, seeing as they have a habit of being used as fronts for more nefarious agendas.
“I guess that the writer had precious little knowledge about Russia or Ukraine before the latest episode”
Well I guess you didn’t bother checking to note that this Russian orientated blog started back in 2008 !; looks like it going to be hard to find anybody with enough knowledge to match the your estimation of the uniqueness of your own knowledge !
“So you skip over the fact that you apply different/double standards depending on the perpetrator, and instead quibble about the pointing out that the natural inference that your conditional “time cycle of each case”, could mean no response any more, which would explain why compared to your active commendations of Russia, your commendations, past or present, iro Israel & Turkey seem to be non-existent, unless you can prove this incorrect ?”
Making more straw men again
“always with what Putin is inflicting on his own subjects”
My concerns about the multiple abuses inflicted by Putin on the ordinary Russian people by Putin and his oligarch friends
“I think you will find that he has been advocating federalization as a solution to the situation in the Ukraine from the very beginning.”
But most definitely not when it comes to Russia – hence the gross hypocrisy
“Err, yes how a State administrates its own provinces is its own sovereign right.”
Strange you don’t apply this principle to the Ukraine – and I have never noticed a lack of willingness on your part with regard to other countries you dislike. Also sovereign rights do not override human rights or treaty obligations. And I also have several close family members who are Russian nationals.
“Ok, feel free to flesh out this criticism with even a bit of substance.”
I have posted regularly on what is happening in Russia – you chose to ignore what I have to say
“and not just the “nasty” ones that naively believe that human rights should be universal”
“Problem is that the Russians have good cause to be paranoid about US linked NGOs, seeing as they have a habit of being used as fronts for more nefarious agendas.”
But that is not an excuse to extend the treatment to all NGOs as I have pointed out – many of those targeted have no links to the US or political causes.
“Well I guess you didn’t bother checking to note that this Russian orientated blog started back in 2008 !; looks like it going to be hard to find anybody with enough knowledge to match the your estimation of the uniqueness of your own knowledge !”
the comment was clearly directed at the article on spiked on-line not the second blog that you linked to – please don’t be so disingenuous
PS When are you going to write something of substance on Russia rather than just parroting the party line and engaging in disruptive trolling against those who don’t share your view.
Personally I am pleased Russia has taken back it’s previous territory. I have far less worries about Russia than I do about the Bankster War Criminal ‘NWO’.
I read Craig’s article, and skimmed through the comments, but nowhere did I see any apparent realisation of what had induced Putin to act.
Here is some food for thought:
‘Ukraine Protests Carefully Orchestrated: The Role of CANVAS, US-Financed “Color Revolution Training Group” (Global Research)
‘Documented: US Coup Plan for Venezuela 2013’ (AXIS OF LOGIC).
And, would you believe it, the ‘Regime Change’ trainers are a US-funded and organised ‘NGO’ in Serbia!
This is not ‘Conspiracy Theory’; just check out the above articles.
And regarding Venezuela again, if you check out the video interview ‘Aaron Russo – Historic Interview’ you will see that Russo says he was befriended by Nick Rockefeller whilst he (Russo) was standing for Governor of Nevada. Rockefeller also tried to recruit Russo into the CFR.
In 2000, eleven months before 9/11, Rockefeller told Russo that there was going to be ‘an incident, leading to America going into Afghanistan and Iraq, he would see US soldiers hunting through caves for Arabs, there would be a ‘War on Terror’, and then we (US) would go after Venezuela’. In 2002, there was a US-planned and backed coup attempt.
And re the ‘Arab Spring’, 4* General (ret) Wesley Clark is on video stating that in 2001, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, he was told by a 3* serving General that the US was going to ‘overthrow 7 governments in 5 years – Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran’ (obviously there has been some slippage in the timeline!).
Thanks to Russia, the US hasn’t effected ‘Regime Change’ in Syria, even with their ‘False Flag’ Chemical Weapons deployment.
They are now trying to get Turkey to pull a ‘False Flag’ attack on the Tomb of Suleyman Shah; there’s quite a bit about it on the web, because someone leaked the plans, so it may have to be aborted. But interestingly, ‘Stop the War’ have an article on it on their website: ‘Is a key Nato member plotting a fake terrorist attack to justify war on Syria?’.
Encouraging that they are belatedly coming to the realisation that there are such events as ‘False Flag’ attacks.
Personally I am pleased Russia has taken back it’s previous territory. I have far less worries about Russia than I do about the Bankster War Criminal ‘NWO’.
I read Craig’s article, and skimmed through the comments, but nowhere did I see any apparent realisation of what had induced Putin to act.
Here is some food for thought:
‘Ukraine Protests Carefully Orchestrated: The Role of CANVAS, US-Financed “Color Revolution Training Group” (Global Research)
‘Documented: US Coup Plan for Venezuela 2013’ (AXIS OF LOGIC).
And, would you believe it, the ‘Regime Change’ trainers are a US-funded and organised ‘NGO’ in Serbia!
This is not ‘Conspiracy Theory’; just check out the above articles.
And regarding Venezuela again, if you check out the video interview ‘Aaron Russo – Historic Interview’ you will see that Russo says he was befriended by Nick Rockefeller whilst he (Russo) was standing for Governor of Nevada. Rockefeller also tried to recruit Russo into the CFR.
In 2000, eleven months before 9/11, Rockefeller told Russo that there was going to be ‘an incident, leading to America going into Afghanistan and Iraq, he would see US soldiers hunting through caves for Arabs, there would be a ‘War on Terror’, and then we (US) would go after Venezuela’. In 2002, there was a US-planned and backed coup attempt.
And re the ‘Arab Spring’, 4* General (ret) Wesley Clark is on video stating that in 2001, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, he was told by a 3* serving General that the US was going to ‘overthrow 7 governments in 5 years – Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran’ (obviously there has been some slippage in the timeline!).
Thanks to Russia, the US hasn’t effected ‘Regime Change’ in Syria, even with their ‘False Flag’ Chemical Weapons deployment.
They are now trying to get Turkey to pull a ‘False Flag’ attack on the Tomb of Suleyman Shah; there’s quite a bit about it on the web, because someone leaked the plans, so it may have to be aborted. But interestingly, ‘Stop the War’ have an article on it on their website: ‘Is a key Nato member plotting a fake terrorist attack to justify war on Syria?’.
Encouraging that they are belatedly coming to the realisation that there are such events as ‘False Flag’ attacks.
In response to Resident Dissident on the Andy Myles thread redirected by Clark here.
RD, I read your Guardian link which is more than you appear to do with those I provide. Here is a quote from it.
“Presidential elections will be held on 25 May. Yanukovych suggested that these could scarcely be considered legitimate because his eviction from office was unconstitutional.”
How does “eviction from office” equate with your assumption:
“The government of Ukraine is not illegal – the previous President fled the country, after on his own admission inviting Russian troops into the Crimea, and a new President was appointed by the Ukrainian Parliament.”?
Whoops! Sorry, I double-posted.
Paul Barbara 5 Apr, 2014 – 11:45 am
Thanks for raising the Aaron Russo video. All those who consider us conspiracy theorists shy away from this because, firstly Russo was Jewish, and secondly there is no argument that Nick Rockefeller knew about this false flag event beforehand. They choose not to debate it and hope it will go away. “Conspiracy theorists” is a catch-all term for those who put forward an alternative to government propaganda over false-flag events. Here is an extract from the video again. Followed by one from General Wesley Clark. 9/11 was a false flag event. The day before it happened Donald Rumsfeld talked about billions of dollars that could not be accounted for in defence expenditure. All details of that were lost in the 9/11 detonations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZjKKUEHTKk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LTdx1nPu3k
I’m pretty sure no one on this Forum would condemn Russo just because he’s Jewish; there are good and bad in all races.
Anyone who takes the hour to watch that interview will plainly see the honesty and goodness in Aaron Russo. If he had taken what Rockefeller offered him, he would have been a ‘Made Man’; one of the elite scumbags that contrive to rule us and ride roughshod over the law, domestic and international.
Russo did not know what Rockefeller was talking about in 2000, but on holiday in Hawaii on 9/11, he saw the ‘events’ on TV, and immediately realised what had happened. He started to speak out, and ‘contracted’ cancer. He died in 2007; RIP to a great man, who followed his conscience rather than sink to the level of the Banksters, Fraudsters and War Criminals.
Paul Barbara, I think you misunderstand. I was not criticising Russo, nor Jews, who as you rightly say have many good upstanding people like Aaron Russo in their communities. My criticism was against people who troll and sock-puppet on this blog but never address videos like the two I linked at 12.19 pm. Aaron Russo is one of the people for whom, like yourself, I have the highest respect.
But the trolls will steer well clear of commenting on this and just refer to people like you and me as “conspiracy theorists”.
John Goss 5 Apr, 2014 – 12:19 pm