Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 02, 2014

"White Ribbon" Armed Men Explain Russia's Crimea Reaction?

Secretary of State Kerry on Face the Nation:

Russia chose this brazen act aggression and moved in with its forces on a completely trumped set of pre-texts claiming that people were threatened ...

Kerry should watch the following videos.

This one is of interest. The (auto-translated from Russian) subtitle:

Compilation with video surveillance cameras installed in the building of the Council of Ministers of Crimea on 27.02.2014, during the capture.


The video shows a group of 20 to 30 armed people, soldier like, well armed but not full professionals, storming and then searching a building with the help of flash-bang grenades. The time marks in the the CCTV are between 0400 and 0700 on the 27th of February. The last pictures to be seen are when the intruders smash the CCTV cams one by one. To mark themselves the men wear white ribbons on their left arms. This is a longer CCTV video from only one camera uploaded by the same account, Редактор Новостей (newsmaker), on February 28. It shows the group storming and securing one of the entrances to the building.

This is a video uploaded on March 1 by a French TV station. The (auto-translated from French) subtitle:

Latest news on A group of twenty armed as professional men shot Saturday on the government building in Simferopol in Crimea. "It was weapons of professionals," says special envoy BFMTV Patrick Sauce. Russian soldiers who protect the site did not respond. The attackers withdrew in a bus a few minutes later.


The video shows a group of some 30+ armed men - again soldier like, well armed but not full professionals - in daylight trying to storm some building. They retreat to a civilian bus and seem to depart. The men are again marked with white ribbons on their left arms. What was this about?

Here is another snippet (at 1:20) of the situation from a different perspective by a Russian TV station.

Someone has done a photo analysis of hand weapons Russian troops in the Crimea carry. But the second photo is not of Russian soldiers but is from the same scene than the video above. It shows armed men with white ribbons and in partly civilian cloth. One of their weapons is identified as a Russian grenade launcher but with a U.S. made holographic sight.


Unfortunately no "western" media have yet asked who these white-ribbon guys are and what they are doing. To me it seems possible that they are some kind of half trained gang send from Kiev to takeover government buildings in the Crimea. The presences of these groups, starting early on February 27, could be the reason why Russia decided it needed to take control of the Crimea. Fear that these groups would receive reinforcement through other groups arriving by plane led to the temporary guarding of the Crimean airports by (unmarked) Russian troops.

Please let me know of other media occurrences of such white-ribbon marked persons and of their background.

Posted by b on March 2, 2014 at 16:12 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Engdahl says the snipers were Gladio

Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Mar 2 2014 16:25 utc | 1

As Churkin speaks in the UN, the video and audio go out. Another coincidence.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 16:48 utc | 2

Power speaking now. Soulless.

"Russia must stand down"
"Political dialog must continue"
"We recognize and respect Russia's interests in Ukraine" (?!)
"Russia's incitement for groups to protest is destabilizing" (?!?!?!?)
"Monitors should be sent in from OSCE immediately"
"Our paramount concern is to defuse the situation" (!!!!!)

She spoke for not even a minute and said >nothing.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 17:00 utc | 3


Ukraine's just-appointed Navy commander defects, takes oath to follow orders of Russian govt in Crimea

Posted by: b | Mar 2 2014 17:03 utc | 4

Everyone wants peace. So long as it is their peace, right?

Now that the anti-Russian fascists are installed "our paramount concern is to defuse the situation". Before, not so much. Before, it was to light the fuse.

Now the R2P'ers, having set one part of a population upon another, realize their responsibility to protect those they have put into deep danger. How nice of them.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 17:12 utc | 5

John Kerry and Obama's proxy-whores stir up trouble undercover to get an overt and justified reaction from Russia.

If America cared about herself and her people, they would, at the very least, clamor to be partners with Russia. However the opinion manufacturers with their Cold War bias are strong within the Empire's borders and the people by and large are ignorant about their nation's lawlessness and weak in their minds.
The transnational elite only know domination and subjugation on their terms.
Much respect here to Putin and mother Russia. I would have him as the American president in a heartbeat - all of the bought and paid for Zionist shills in the US ruling clique COMBINED cannot equal the deft skill, the spine, and the patriotism of Vlad Putin. US people don't know what to make of someone like you, as their own politicians are always so useless, unpopular and ultimately forgettable.
Please sir teach the sneaky Americanski and their proxy-whores a lesson when they come to cause trouble in your backyard that they won't soon forget.

Posted by: Prey4 Justice | Mar 2 2014 17:17 utc | 6

great catch b @ 4

Like I keep saying, those that instigated this sh*tstorm ain't seen nothing yet. The next time they organize their fake regime change nonsense, they'll think 1000 times before proceeding.

The world's stood by for far too long and watched how legitimate governments, from Africa to Asia, From South America to Europe, have bee toppled one by one by people that think they can decide for us all. Sooner or later, something's gotta give.

Basically, all the pillars NATO's depended on for this regime change to succeed is crumbling right before their very eyes and they don't have answers. The idiots in Kiev might want a war to save themselves from the mess they've created, but truth is, they have no troops for it. No sane person, however anti-Putin they might be, should support/encourage those Maidan fascists thugs. Their fate is sealed!

When this party started a few weeks ago, I knew it was all going to end in tear. Didn't know it'll come this soon.

Posted by: Zico | Mar 2 2014 17:26 utc | 7

The next time they organize their fake regime change nonsense, they'll think 1000 times before proceeding.

I doubt it.

Posted by: tgs | Mar 2 2014 17:38 utc | 8

@ 6 "The transnational elite only know domination and subjugation on their terms."

How true.

@ 1: Thanks for that link. Good read.

Damn b, I'm constantly amazed at the info here at MOA. Thanks!

Posted by: ben | Mar 2 2014 17:39 utc | 9

If you want to get some idea of what the Russian left think about things (as opposed to the thousands of Western pundits), check out this piece, tho I warn you, it's rather depressing:

Ukraine: The left and the movement to overthrow Yanukovich: two interviews

Posted by: William Bowles | Mar 2 2014 17:39 utc | 10

The US and the EU should be very careful. Having used fascists in Ukraine they now find themselves in a familiar position: they find that they can no longer control them. This is what happens: the smartass politicos convince themselves that types like Hitler and Mussolini are not serious, so they use them, laughing in their sleeves at their vulgar rhetoric and crude manners. And then... if they are lucky they end up in Istanbul, with jobs, as von Papen did. More often they slip off into exile in case they end up as Kurt von Schleicher did in June 1934.

Right now there isn't, it seems, an army in Ukraine that the coupists can rely on. Nor is there likely to be one, as most officers and men appear to be leery of the fascists from Lvov. So the only armed forces in Ukraine are the Bandera disciples, who are very likely to be armed, financed and advised by the usual suspects. No doubt is was an American idea to test Crimea by attempting a coup there. It has the silly sort of ring of Obama's NSC- a dummies' brains trust.

The "west" would be well advised to call back their people in Ukraine. The fascists are now beyond control but the SAS men, the Special Forces, the Mossad and CIA agents, Bandar's banditti, the "contractors", the agents from the Baltic states and Poland, the Turks and all would be advised to tip toe back to Kiev, before they are caught up with and start to sing.

The "west's" case in international law could hardly be weaker: the coupists in Kiev have very little legitimacy. Their claim to Parliamentary approval carefully omits the glaring fact that the Parliament was purged by frightening or tricking government supporters away from the assembly. On the other hand the governments of Crimea and elsewhere retain their legality and are absolutely justified in calling upon Russia to assist them in warding off armed fascist coup attempts.

This is a very dangerous situation, however, given that the children in the White House are playing with sharply edged tools. Equally dangerous is the fact that egging them on, instead of cautioning them are allied leaders, such as Abe, Cameron, Harper, Netanyahu and Abbott most of whom are almost as close to being fascists as the men from Lvov.

No doubt, beneath the headlines, in Kiev and where the coup writ runs, men with or without white armbands are going door to door and dragging honest people away. Some of these will disappear forever, others will be beaten and tortured. Among them, sadly, will be many of the misguided young idealists who were deluded into thinking that the fascists pulling down Lenin statues were motivated by a dislike of corruption or a love of purer democracy.

Those who sup with the Devil, goes the proverb, need a long spoon. It is a simple lesson but one that liberals seem to have difficulty understanding.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 2 2014 17:50 utc | 11

regarding the identities of various Gunmen-persons

I saw this Photo yesterday of what looks like, to me anyway, as two women in unmarked uniform

Wasn't aware that the Russian Military had women in a combat role - so maybe they are not women, but they look like they are. Even their height looks wrong for 2 males

Posted by: brb | Mar 2 2014 17:56 utc | 12

Any truth that the navy in krimea have deserted?

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 2 2014 17:57 utc | 13

Anonymous @ 13

New head of Ukraine's navy 'defects' in Crimea

Posted by: Zico | Mar 2 2014 18:00 utc | 14

Off topic but very relevant. US support for facism is very old and spans the globe.

The US Greenlights Militaristic Japan

...These founding fathers knew that the westerners felt that the Asians were inferior – so they decided to craft an identity separate from other Asians. They developed a western-styled military; they wore western clothes; they strung telegraph wire; they practiced using knives and forks. They opened Japan to western teachers and missionaries. The sent their children to western schools. Most importantly, they developed the western attitude of colonization through conquest. (P. 182)

They became “Honorary Aryans,” apart from other Asians and now western in many ways. The World’s Fair in Philadelphia, in 1876, heralded this distinction: the Chinese were declared a dying race; Japan was praised. (P. 182)

By this time, the Americans sent a capable instructor to the Japanese founding fathers, Charles LeGendre, known as “General.” He offered the following advice as to how Japan should move the rest of Asia from barbarism to civilization:

LeGendre recommended Anglo-Saxon methods: “Pacify and civilize them if possible, and if not…exterminate them or otherwise deal with them as the United States and England have dealt with the barbarians.” (P. 188)

Japan exercised this method of civilization against Taiwan – an island previously subservient to both Japan and China. (P. 190) Next, they looked to Korea. Dressed now in Western suits and top hat, the Japanese came via an American-made warship, bearing an American-style treaty of friendship. After all, it worked for Perry! Given the backbone provided by China, the Koreans didn’t budge. (P. 192)

In the background, the Americans gave verbal assurances to the Korean King Gojong regarding independence, all the while pushing Japan to aggress against this neighbor....

Posted by: Lysander | Mar 2 2014 18:06 utc | 15

Laughable: Kerry said Russian President Vladimir Putin should respect the democratic process through which the Ukrainian people ousted their pro-Russian president and assembled a new government.

Posted by: georgeg | Mar 2 2014 18:08 utc | 16

@bevin: Absolutely right. The EU technocrats, in their expensive suits and with their expensive degrees, would never for a moment accept in their governments the thugs now in control of the Ukraine.


The western media are pushing this hard, with their boldface, 48pt fonts claiming "Russian Troops Seize Crimea".

The fact is the media knows its role is to push for war and let Obama make the decision - and then rely on people's goldfish like memories to forget all about the "excitement".

But of course we don't. We all recall what occurred in Syria. The lies were obvious then, and the lies are obvious now. The comments section of the New York times shows no love for the putschists - though certainly the New York Times does in spades, calling for "partisans" and civil war from the comfort of their expensive new building on Manhattan's 8th Avenue and 41st Street.

We know that the people of the Ukraine love their new, unelected leaders even less than we love our "elected" ones.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 18:14 utc | 17

@14 I fully expect Cameron, Hague, Merkel et al to defect to Russia. They must surely have had enough of this nonsense.

Posted by: dh | Mar 2 2014 18:17 utc | 18

From the Greek language military/political blog, Defence Net,

The commander of the Unkraine fleet, Dennis Berezovski, has gone over to Crimea, calling on his men to not adhere to commands from Kiev. Confirms @4 above.

He further ordered the remaining Ukrainian marines holed up in their base at Perevlnoye to accept the will of the Crimean people. The base contains is a large ammunition and arms dump. Its commander has asked for time to talk it over with his colleagues. The base had been under a 4 hour deadline to surrender, and been surrounded by up to a thousand pro Russian troops.

Some 15,000 Ukrainian officers and sailors have so far.declared allegiance to Crimea. A total of 18 Ukrainian warships have raised the Russian flag of St. Andrew.

Six Russian warships, (3 frigates, 2 corvettes and one mine laying ship have cut off the port of Sebastopol.

I cannot vouch for the above; the site is pro Russian but level headed. Personally, I think Nuland stepped on a gigantic Ukrainian cow patty.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Mar 2 2014 18:36 utc | 19

CNN & other mainstream outlets, there IS the OTHER SIDE on this issue, duuuuh! You are feeding the masses your blind, one-eyed, propaganda! What is the point of Freedom of the Press when we're fed viral bullshet propaganda? Madmen who crush intelligent debate and reason by labelling it TREASON are your talking heads! There's not a rational thought in all their insane babble combined! The Zionist mainstream media is the motor of ZUSA tyranny. Our only hope is the internet and sites like this...for now.

Posted by: kalithea | Mar 2 2014 18:36 utc | 20

See my 'Frauds-R-US' for some history of the Bush family's involvement with not only financing the German Nazi Party during its start-up period but later, during WWII with investments in Nazi-owned industry, and after the war laundering money for Thyssen! Written awhile back (2003)

Posted by: William Bowles | Mar 2 2014 18:41 utc | 21

b - thanks for all your work here.

@5 - my thoughts exactly.

@10 - thanks for that link.

@11 - thanks.. our canuck stooge is again a regular embarrassment.

@13 and 14 - you could have seen @4.. not sure why you skipped that.

Posted by: james | Mar 2 2014 18:54 utc | 22

From another thread #220
Any idea to what happened to the troika Hungarian etc ministers who were supposed to go to Kiev in name of the EU last Thursday?

Posted by: Mina | Mar 2 2014 19:13 utc | 23

The NAZO (read that however you like) powers have pushed this past the point of all rationality.

You can hear the ghosts of Napoleon and Hitler groaning and rattling their chains... "NOW can we do this thing?"

But the Ukraine dug its own grave (from William Bowles Ukraine: The left and the movement to overthrow Yanukovich: two interviews)

But, obviously, there are very real reasons for people to hate the government, too. When Yanukovich became president in 2010, he started pushing for unpopular neo-liberal steps. The natural gas tariffs were growing; the government launched medical reform which will eventually lead to closure of many medical institutions and to introducing the universal medical insurance instead of the unconditional coverage; they pushed through extremely unpopular pension reform (raising pension age for women) against the will of more than 90% of population; there was an attempt at passing the new Labour Code which would seriously affect workers’ rights; the railway is being corporatized; finally, they passed a new Tax Code which hit small business. But eventually this assault wasn’t very successful, and the government had to back off. The tariffs of natural gas, electricity, heating, water are frozen at a level which is one of the lowest in Europe and ex-USSR; the Labour Code is buried in the parliament; the next stage of the pension reform (introducing compulsory pension saving plans instead of the solidarity system) is halted. They saw they can’t move on with such low levels of support. But still, the welfare of the working classes, as well as the general state of the economy leaves much to be desired, and people have all legitimate reasons to demand better living standards. Sadly, these grievances are dressed in the false consciousness of nationalism.

The countries that follow the neoliberal model, the model Yanukovich followed, will not have any popular forces available to fend off western onslaught. They may, ultimately secure their independence having the threat shown to them so clearly, but this is too late! Now, they must weather the storm, just as Syria has.

Look at Venezuela. Instead. Though the protests continue, they are largely confined to the upper class neighborhoods. Life in the barrios - education, commerce, life - continues unabated because they know that the alternative means an end to those very things. So they love their lives and they come to march for it, and they go home. They follow the lead of the government, because the government works for them. So let the rich close themselves off, let the rich destroy their own neighborhoods, have no schools, have not commerce - let them live like the poor they hold in such disdain - and maybe they will start to understand what is at stake.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 19:34 utc | 24

NATO warmonger check it live here!:

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 2 2014 19:52 utc | 25

18) German Foreign Minister might.

9:00 Uhr: Steinmeier sieht G8-Ausschluss Russlands skeptisch

Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier hat sich skeptisch zu dem Vorstoß seines US-Kollegen John Kerry geäußert, Russland wegen seines Vorgehens in der Ukraine notfalls aus der Gruppe der G8 auszuschließen. "Ich bin eher bei denen, die sagen, das G8-Format ist das einzige Format, in dem wir aus dem Westen noch mit Russland unmittelbar sprechen", sagte Steinmeier der ARD. "Und sollten wir wirklich dieses einzige Format opfern? Ich denke, wir sollten sehen, dass wir zur Deeskalation in der Ukraine beitragen und nicht jedmögliche Verschärfung herbeireden. Das wird im Zweifel nicht helfen."

Translation: Steinmeier doubts Russian exclusion from G8 is a good idea.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 2 2014 19:54 utc | 26

@10 Interesting links.
What strikes me is the emptiness of the perspectives of these (hard pressed, sincere, honest) socialists.
What is missing is a reform programme, making demands of a practical, economic and political sort. It is hard to believe that the matters of pensions, wages, work conditions, unemployment and precarity, housing and other aspects of reality "the shitty life" that Ames talks about, would not resonate.

As to "nationalism", it is fairly clear that the independence and dignity offered by the right in Ukraine is simply Russophobia/Anti-communism plus subordination to any other power available, the EU, perhaps, Poland or the US, which would imply a complete sacrifice of any shred of national sovereignty though it would leave the fascists their folk culture, until that too, together with the language comes to be erased by English, German or whatever the imperial lingua franca would be.

It is interesting that, in the post Soviet Ukraine, the school curriculum seems to have been taken over by ultra nationalists (in Ukraine aka nazis). I don't doubt that these were projects of emigre groups with well oiled organisations and big budgets, underwritten by security services and NATO governments.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 2 2014 19:58 utc | 27

24 somebody

Stupid europeans do what US tells them to!

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 2 2014 20:14 utc | 28

@bevin "No doubt, beneath the headlines, in Kiev and where the coup writ runs, men with or without white armbands are going door to door and dragging honest people away. Some of these will disappear forever, others will be beaten and tortured."

And this is what is so sad.

Having taught the oligarchs to follow the western model (which boils down to: "we're all the same nationality on our yachts") the state, as something to respect if only because it could pay its bills and provide security, vanished completely. And now the average people are at the mercy of some real shitheads.

And we all know the type. Who doesn't know the thugs and criminals in their town? And these are the people the United States is calling "legitimate" power in the Ukraine. As if you woke up and Tony Soprano was the mayor of your town - and you're the police chief who hasn't been able to pay anyone for a month...

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 20:35 utc | 29

Thrasyboulos | Mar 2, 2014 1:36:26 PM | 19

LOL and thanks

Posted by: jo6pac | Mar 2 2014 20:36 utc | 30

NATO keep wwarmongering now russia is apparently a threat to europe?!
ukraine isnt even in nato!

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 2 2014 20:44 utc | 31

Some good comments in the Independent on Sunday this one from Ian Watson an example..
Ian Watson 22 minutes ago
lol new Navy chief defects and hands over the ships sitting in the port there, the coastguard abandoned the port some time before and were somewhat wondering why the ten odd Ukrainian naval vessel's seemed at ease.
And it is only America's interpretations of the treaties that its claiming, the Russians are claiming any agreements were broken when Kiev ordered Russia to not sail or land any ships which is a direct breach of the freedom of movement clause.
This is also some payback for Libya and how the US took the right michael over a UN resolution, with Russia and China on the UN security council, the US knows it cannot go the UN route.
The EU are really not impressed with the announcement about trade isolation, already reeling from losing cheap Iranian oil, the EU fear America may force them to not buy Russian gas which much of European and our own gas power stations need to generate electricity as well as for heating, cooking and other widespread uses, the EU will see rioting on their streets if they force Putin to turn the taps off.

Posted by: harrylaw | Mar 2 2014 20:59 utc | 32

My God, did anyone hear what John Kerry said today:

You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text.

Question. Is that the stupidest thing John Kerry has ever said?

Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Mar 2 2014 21:21 utc | 33

This is funny - what did Donald Tusk say?

In German he said this:

Der polnische Regierungschef Donald Tusk hat im Ukraine-Konflikt "harten Druck" auf Russland gefordert. Die Welt dürfe ihren Blick nicht von der Ukraine abwenden, teilte Tusk nach parteiübergreifenden Konsultationen in Warschau mit. "Dieser Konflikt hat alle Anzeichen eines Konflikts, der einen Krieg auslösen könnte, welcher alle Staaten der Welt betreffen würde", warnte der konservative Politiker. Die Folgen wären schwerwiegend, für Polen gehe es um eine "Frage des Seins oder Nichtseins". Tusk forderte, die Modernisierung der polnischen Armee zu beschleunigen.

Translation: He asked for strong pressure on Russia, the world should not turn away from Ukraine, this conflict shows all signs of a conflict that could start a war concerning all states of the world. Consequences would be grave, for Poland it would be a question of "to be or not to be". Tusk demanded to hasten the modernization of the Polish Army.

In English he said this:

(Reuters) - Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Sunday it was essential to prevent Russia's seizure of Crimea expanding into a wider regional conflict.

"We should be able to stop Russia in its aggressive moves precisely in order to avoid a conflict," Tusk told reporters on Sunday after an extraordinary meeting with party leaders.

But he said doing nothing was also not an option.

"History shows - although I don't want to use too many historical comparisons - that those who appease all the time in order to preserve peace usually only buy a little bit of time."

The German translation from Polish is sanitized. He sounds rational there. The English translation probably is closer to the original: Putin is Hitler, we are in Munich, no appeasement.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 2 2014 21:29 utc | 34

@31 Possibly. But I wouldn't bet its the last.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 21:30 utc | 35

All these statements by nato, poland (poland?! lol what is that), obama, eu, show the racism against Russians.

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 2 2014 21:37 utc | 37

@32 The Poles are positively off their rockers.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 21:41 utc | 38

Colm O'toole @31 This may come close, Kerry says Russia should respect the democratic process through which the Ukrainian people ousted their pro-Russian president and assembled a new government.The inmates of the asylum, including Kerry, are fully in charge

Posted by: harrylaw | Mar 2 2014 21:48 utc | 39

Watch as "Yats" shats himself, and the other guy... well, if he could keep both eyes pointing in the one direction, that would be a start I suppose...

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 21:54 utc | 40

russia may win this war without firing a shot:
Blacklisted News ‏@BlacklistedNews 1h
Ukrainian Navy chief fired for 'treason' after surrendering Sevastopol headquarters
snigger : so its not treason to surrender the entire country to foreign regimes: EU and US?,,,,,snigger

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 22:25 utc | 41

Army of Ukraine is not able to fight"
The expert believes that the Ukrainian army is currently unfit for combat.

"Now the Ukrainian armed forces are not able to fight, - he said. - Almost all units, except, perhaps, special forces and airborne troops, elementary unable to take any active steps. They served in the barracks when Yanukovych was overthrown, and to the west of the country and allowed the opposition does get to the weapons, so the army as a military force, I would not consider. Especially because two days ago Yanukovych also urged the military not to intervene in the situation. "

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 22:26 utc | 42

Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold 1h
The regime currently in "power" in Kiev has no electoral basis. It was put in place by a mob. But @WilliamJHague considers them legitimate.

Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold 1h
America is the last country on earth with the right to lecture others on "invasions of foreign countries, in defiance of international law".
Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold 24h
Interesting that the two Nobel Peace Prize winners, Obama and the EU, are doing their best to set everything on fire.
Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold Feb 28
Russian troops in Crimea are merely securing military infrastructure due to the State of Emergency created by the illegitimate regime.
Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold Feb 28
“Democracy” is gradually being reduced to a mere ideological excuse to attack, ravage and pillage small but rich nations #Libya #Iraq et al
Garikai Chengu @ChenguGold Feb 28
Putin must intervene in #Ukraine to restore democracy.

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 22:26 utc | 43

oh well it is solved now

Russia's Vladimir Putin has agreed to a proposal from Angela Merkel to set up a contact group on Ukraine, the German government said Sunday.

"President Putin accepted the German chancellor's proposal to immediately establish a commission of enquiry as well as a contact group, possibly under the direction of the OSCE, to open a political dialogue," Berlin said in a statement.

according to Voice of Russia. German press reports something similar.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 2 2014 22:32 utc | 44

Putin has everyone else whining, bitchin' non-stop, worried, scrambling without direction and scratching their heads: AS IT SHOULD BE. Carry on Putin, carry on.

Posted by: kalithea | Mar 2 2014 22:44 utc | 45

41) Poland now presumably relives the nightmare of the Hitler-Stalin pact.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 2 2014 22:45 utc | 46

Oh, now, Jackass Kerry is giving Russia the ol' "all options are on the table" bit. Give me a fucking break.

You've got one option. Watch Russia be the adult, and watch your puppets twist in the wind (literally, if there is any justice in this world at all).

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 23:04 utc | 47

PressTV needs to vet their interviewees better. They just had some lunatic talking about the second coming of Christ.

Said the interviewer: "And we'll have to leave it there..." Indeed.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 23:10 utc | 48

@43 Poland. They need to get used to the fact that they are a stepping stone between two of the world's greatest powers. I suggest this: relax, and spend heavily on truck stops.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 2 2014 23:13 utc | 49

OK: israeli 'journalist' currently in Crimea..,says to jews No worries: its mostly Putin propaganda:
Anshel Pfeffer ‏@AnshelPfeffer Feb 25
The dilemma of the Jews in #Ukraine - warn against anti-Semitism and play into Putin's hands? my report @haaretzcom … ........................
another 'journalist' seeks to whitewash the coup, make it seem nobel (prize winning) and legitimate and not full of racists.

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 23:40 utc | 50

defending a PUTSCHT is tedious business: just ask israeli 'journalist' works for Haaretz :Anshel Pfeffer @AnshelPfeffer Feb 22
Putinist @Chabad rabbis have long peddled Kremlin line that #Ukraine anti-Semitic while Russia is not. .............while Ukraine is for antisemitism...well lets not mention israel

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 23:53 utc | 51

Retweeted by Anshel Pfeffer
Tal Ofer ‏@TalOfer Feb 13
Speech by @MartinSchulz was full of support to Israel. Shame that Bennett and Bibi hijack a single point from it for internal point scoring

Schulz is a candidate for president of EC

Martin Schulz Verified account
I am the @PES_PSE candidate for President of the @EU_Commission in #EP2014. Updates are mainly by @mingul & @kingboru. I sign my tweets – M.

Posted by: brian | Mar 2 2014 23:57 utc | 52


Obama brings out comedy even in dour Russians like Vladimir Putin, who supposedly said that "Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, shits on the board and then struts around like it won the game."

Posted by: Cynthia | Mar 2 2014 23:57 utc | 53

Garry Kasparov ‏@Kasparov63 17h
Putin doesn't need to "win" in Crimea / Ukraine. Only to show power, look tough. This is what dictators do instead of having real elections.
@Kasparov63 Hey, that's a good one. Now do it without the CIA's hand up your ass.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 0:00 utc | 54

" Poland now presumably relives the nightmare of the Hitler-Stalin pact."

Poland was largely responsible for the original- its refusals to allow the Red Army passage to back the Czechs in 1938 was followed, after Munich, by a further refusal to discuss a defensive pact with the USSR.

re the Israelis: they will be delighted by the chaos and nothing will please them more than the power of Svoboda and other fascists.

Threats to impose sanctions on Russia, now emanating from the dumber puppets in the Canadian and British cabinets, might be just what is needed to consolidate, internationally, the unity of those nations which are fed up of being bullied by Washington and the jackals which run at America's heels. The Iranians, for example, might find it a little late but this should speed up delivery of their missile defence systems, now about fifteen years overdue. And the Chinese, fresh off yesterday's terrorist attacks, by men almost certainly known to or connected with US Great Gamers, as well as being subject to loud threatening noises from Mr Abe, the Nanking massacre denier, will be up for a reconsideration of the turn another cheek philosophy.
And, given the inexorable decline of the globalised economy, it is about time that states began to protect themselves and their markets from the depradations of the "Free Market" and the financial system which is inexorably linked to Washington and the US government.
Sanctions, that is to say, will backfire. On the other hand the US will almost certainly want to employ them as an alternative to the two more obvious options: war or backing down.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 3 2014 0:05 utc | 55

Pfeffer can be useful:
According to the Russian Marine Corps' website, “There is no better way to rest after Sochi than coming to Crimea"

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 0:21 utc | 56

White ribbon guys-

A week ago these white ribbon guys were being portrayed as 'police snipers' by the MSM and the fake alternative media such as the 'Young Turks'.
White ribbon guys at 2:50 onwards.

Posted by: Angus | Mar 3 2014 0:26 utc | 57

Pfeffer can be useful:
According to the Russian Marine Corps' website, “There is no better way to rest after Sochi than coming to Crimea"
but he is also comical:
'Russian businessmen in Moscow are already preparing a $5 billion package to purchase Crimean infrastructure and set up new industries. The oligarchs owe the Kremlin their fortunes and are putting them now at Putin’s disposal.'

and as he knows many of Yeltsins oligarchs being jewish,and ukrainians, well they were/are just good businessmen

'As in the Georgian war of 2008, the West will be forced to stand on the sidelines while Putin invades a neighboring country. Without a shot being fired, he has returned Crimea to Mother Russia.'

right...snigger..lets just ignore israels war on Lebanon 2006, where plenty of shots were fired, 1200 or so lebanese civiians killed....not so bloodless

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 0:29 utc | 58

Obama and his whole administration is utterly toxic when it comes to international relations. They have put international relations and goodwill back to the late 80's and the Reagan administration. At this rate Russia will be putting the Berlin wall back up.

Posted by: Cynthia | Mar 3 2014 0:44 utc | 59

@50 Cynthia

Other than that funny line you posted about pigeons shitting on a chessboard this article is nothing but American reichwing claptrap written by and for people who are stuck in the Cold War mentality. I mean, PNAC much?? LOL.
Neocon blabber which actually includes references to "good and evil", Israel as a victim,Israel as a democracy,Iran as a "Khomeini Cult" and other such ill-informed pro-Israel, pro-Nazi, Russophobic nonsense of the highest order.
The irony is that it is from a site called "The American Thinker." No wonder why the rest of the world laughs at us, great thinkers that we are...propagandized and so very, very deeply fucked stupid.
Yeah get another Bush in there, a person who can't guzzle enough Israeli sputum. Who won't think twice the next time AIPAC and Netanyahu want to invent lies to get America to fight another war for them. That will make everything ok.

Posted by: Prey4 Justice | Mar 3 2014 0:55 utc | 60

It is illustrative of a certain ham-handedness on the part of the PR campaign's authors, and bears a similarity to the choice of white ribbons—a World War II symbol worn by Nazi collaborators and Wehrmacht auxiliaries in Nazi-occupied territories—which were shipped in from abroad for the anti-government demonstrations in Moscow in December of 2011. These demonstrations are commonly thought to have been organized by Western NGOs.

Posted by: Bren | Mar 3 2014 1:26 utc | 61

Washington Post: Ukraine crisis tests Obama’s foreign policy focus on diplomacy over military force

Another dangerous article from the Washington Post. "Ukraine crisis tests Obama’s foreign policy focus on diplomacy over military force." Hmm. I'm not sure what part of "diplomacy" is (or what part of "military force" is not) encompassed by sending a bunch of armed revolutionaries to seize power in a foreign capitol. Maybe this article will illuminate us. Or maybe the insanity begins in the title, and it only goes downhill from there...

For much of his time in office, President Obama has been accused by a mix of conservative hawks and liberal interventionists of overseeing a dangerous retreat from the world at a time when American influence is needed most.

By definition, the weaker the United States is, the more its "influence" will be needed. This is the zero sum strategy of American "thinkers" and is precisely why the US seems to be, month by month, pushing the world towards a third world war. So of course, anything that cannot be seen by absolutely everyone - including the Bush-era Neocons - is a "dangerous retreat". And, though it seems as though in Syria the US backed down when things got a little too hot, we can always be assured that "all options are on the table" because anything less, of course, is unacceptable when you're dealing with extremists. And these people are extremists.

There are rarely good — or obvious — options in such a crisis. But the position Obama is in, confronting a brazenly defiant Russia and with few ways to meaningfully enforce his threat, has been years in the making.

The language is interesting. A "brazenly defiant Russia". The inference is that the United States is the boss of the world, and Russia, of course, the employee. And of course, this cannot stand. One does not "brazenly defy" the boss - or perhaps stated more correctly - the Don. The problem is - the United States does not yet own the world. Somehow, our leaders always seems to forget this. No matter who "defies" us, they are shocked. They are left in utter disbelief. This is a pathology.

At a North American summit meeting in Mexico last month, Obama said, “Our approach as the United States is not to see these as some Cold War chessboard in which we’re in competition with Russia.”

This statement can only be seen one of two ways: Obama is either an outright liar making such statements, or he has no actual control over US foreign policy. Because if one doesn't see the world as some Cold War chessboard, then why exactly does one go around launching coups and civil wars inside every single one of Russia's allies? Is it the case that Obama is simply not in control of Nuland as she meddles in the Ukraine? And those State Dept. officials at work in Venezuela - no sabé, Senor? Because this would be hard - very hard - to believe. The fact is that the United States never dropped the Cold War mentality and has been steadily following up with its plans to dismember Russia just as it had done so to the Soviet Union. Not for a moment has this goal been strayed from, and though it supposedly has never been said aloud, the words "Siberia is too large and rich to belong to one country" echo in every move of the US.

It was Obama’s threat of a military strike, after the Syrian government’s second chemical attack crossed what Obama had called a “red line,” that prompted Putin to pressure Assad into concessions.

Here we see a very clear symptom of a pathology. The pitiable stand down in Syria, where we watched the United States demand and bluster only to eventually be deserted by her closest allies in the face of Russian and Chinese naval power, has been transformed into a victory for the United States instead of the simple lesson about cause-and-effect that it was. Now it is clear proof that, if the United States acts tough and threatens to rain missiles down on a small, defenseless, war-torn state (or now, seemingly, a big, giant like Russia) - it wins. This is entirely akin to the alcoholic who, having sobered up in the jail house from his last bender, begins to rationalize to himself "well, it wasn't the alcohol causing the trouble really. Its those cops. I ought to have a drink and go teach them a lesson..." This is pure insanity.

And those pushing this line to Obama (assuming he is not pushing it himself) are extraordinarily dangerous figures. Because they won't be saying "that was a close one, what were we thinking" they'll be saying "see, it all went according to plan, we're on the right track..."

And to this kind of self-destructive behavior there is no real end - except to, as every sad addict finally does, hit bottom. The problem here, of course, is that "bottom" in this case means a nuclear confrontation, or the destruction of the dollar - and its means all of our asses.

The time has never been more right than for an eruption of dissent in the United States of America. Who can doubt that what goes on in the offices of Goldman Sachs make Yanukovich look like a piker? Or that we aren't all being dragged to our doom by this group of moral mice?

What is it going to take to stop these people?

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 1:31 utc | 62

@58 I really really like Orlov. This article reminds me why. Thanks.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 1:45 utc | 63

Can you just... "Year by year, the Russian political system becomes more of a corrupt Oriental despotism — with Moscow closer to Almaty than Berlin." (Gag)

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 1:53 utc | 64


While the media keeps fueling the flames on social issues and dividing the citizens, the Plutocrats go to work. They keep us divided about guns, abortion, gay marriage etc. etc on purpose. If we ever woke up to this divide and conquer plan and all citizens stood in solidarity against the 4 or 5 mega industries that own our government, we just might get somewhere. Why do you think Rush on the Reich and Cos on the phony Left get paid so much?

Posted by: Cynthia | Mar 3 2014 1:59 utc | 65

Daily Beast article about European white nationalists traveling to Ukraine to support their comrades in Svboda and Pravy Sektor. And they accompany it with a picture of Russian protesters carrying a Russian flag.

Posted by: J. Bradley | Mar 3 2014 2:00 utc | 66

Mahatma Gandhi Bush
*Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century*

Posted by: denk | Mar 3 2014 2:24 utc | 67

Oh, this is nice, from TIME magazine:

In preparation, he said, his group of several hundred men had armed themselves with assault rifles and begun to train for battle. “There’s not a chance in hell we’re going to accept the rule of that fascist scum running around in Kiev with swastikas,” he said. That may be overstating the case. Nowhere in Ukraine has the uprising involved neo-Nazi groups, and no swastikas have appeared on the revolution’s insignia. But every one of the dozen or so people TIME spoke to in Sevastopol was certain that the revolt was run by fascists, most likely on the payroll of the U.S. State Department. That message has long been propagated in Russian state-run media, which millions of people in Crimea and eastern Ukraine rely on for information.

Oh no... no neo-Nazis here!

And that's not a swastika... though it is two swastikas...

Or here...

I haven't seen such pure horseshit in a while...

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 2:43 utc | 68

In 2004, the US was banning Svoboda leaders from entering the US. Now they are giving them control of the country.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 3:26 utc | 69

Here's a pretty good rundown on the Ukrainian far right

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 3:28 utc | 70

Most of the NYTimes commenters see that the west has overplayed its hand, and that the new government is tearing the country apart.

Then there is this guy:

andrew brooklyn, ny 10 hours ago
I am not sure what to think here. It saddens me.

Why wouldn't a superpower like Russia simply try to aid in a strict humanitarian way given the unrest in a country that is already in an upheaval. What threat does the Ukraine truly pose to them? None.

The US would never invade Mexico, it would never invade Canada, or Cuba, or anyone else within arm's reach.

I mean... did he skip all of his history classes?

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 4:39 utc | 71

@ 65 Nice find guest77 - and they were banned in 2013 by Obama's administration not in 2004. Has any mainstream media made mention of this?! Oleh Tyahnybok was meeting with McCain and intriguing with Victoria Nuland (her friends call her "'toria" ya know)and not a single dickhead in the US MSM digs this juicy factoid up? Pathetic!!

And why are we banning people from coming here because they hold unconventional political beliefs or have ideas contrary to the government's (or the Simon Wisenthal Center's in this case)? This is hardly the behavior of a free and open society.

Posted by: J. Bradley | Mar 3 2014 5:18 utc | 72

Guest 77 -

This propaganda from the mainstream US media is tailored for ignorant Americans who rely exclusively on them alone for information about the world. Anyone who steps outside the bubble will see that they're being lied to on a level that easily exceeds the mendacity which led to the 2003 Iraq invasion.

How can ANY respectable news outlet claim that there are no neo-Nazis or fscists in Ukraine when the actual groups don't even attempt to hide this fact!?!?!?

How can the "liberal" Israeli newspaper Haaretz claim that Jews are safe in Kiev and that the Rabbi's there issuing warnings are all "working for the Kremlin" when synagogues are being burned/attacked and neo Nazis are roaming the city with bats as the BBC is now FINALLY reporting?

Also worth noting: this whole debacle in Ukraine has also exposed the so-called "human rights" NGO's for the frauds that they are. What has Amnesty international and HRW had to say about the chaos in Ukraine thus far replete with Nazis running around, laws being passed banning the Russian language and media, the demolition of WW2 memorials, etc.? Not much. You can be rest assured that their party line is in sync with the US medias and when/should Russia carry out an invasion, they'll step in and condemn Russia for not "respecting human rights."

They are sitting around with baited breath waiting for the next Pussy Riot PR stunt.

They could care less about the horrors in Ukraine.

Posted by: RC | Mar 3 2014 5:33 utc | 73

Yesterday I asked why the Kiev junta is calling for military mobilization? Do they not have an army already? (Evidently not.)

The news says that some 1% of those drafted showed up.

I now understand what this is about.

1) The junta has no control of the Ukrainian military. The draft will create totally new units.
2) The 1% that registered are in fact the Pravyi Sector thugs that have been terrorizing Ukraine for the last week. Now they will get new uniforms and a licence to kill. The reign of terror will be elevated to a totally new level.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Mar 3 2014 6:45 utc | 74

Before this thread, too, turns into a greenwald thread I'll quickly jot down some thoughts.

Once more a lot of misunderstandings seem to be centered around "sniper rifles" and, more generally, the use and worth of diverse add ons.

Kindly get it, no matter how often it's written, Dragunov is NOT a sniper rifle. It's designed, meant, and used as what the west calls "designated marksmans rifle" - that's an important difference.
For one, a DMR typically - and wisely - uses more widely spread caliber; typical ones are in the 7,62 class, while sniper rifles are typically in Lapua (~ 9mm) or even 12.5 calibers. Unless you want a lengthy elaboration on caliber, which *do* warrant a lot of attention because a gazillion factors are related to them (like: how much ammo can troups reasonably carry with them), just trust me when I tell you there's good reason for those caliber choices.
And just btw., there *do* exist (and are made) real sniper rifles in Russia, industrial production rifles (and actually good ones) and even excellent hand-made ones.

One reason why I have my doubts about the analysis (based on weapons and add ons) linked to by b is because to me it sounds like the guy has lots of theoretical computer game weapons know how but is lacking on the professional military side.

Most importantly: It's soldiers making good shots, not equipment! Second "holy law": It's the barrel, the mechanism, and the quality of ammo that make a gun a good gun.

There are quite diverse philosophies around guns. The Russian philosophy is simplicity and reliability centric. That's what the whole AK series still is about. That's not at all to mean that precision doesn't count but frankly, in 99% of cases in actual fighting limited precision is damn good enough. Because there is way more to precision than the gun (and in western perspective some high-tech sight), such as heart rate, moving profiles, practice, a.s.o.
To put it simply, soldiers in a fighting situation are rarely in a situation and condition where even 2 MOA (no pun. "moa" tells about precision. 1 MOA ~ 1" or 25 mm at ~ 100m) can be achieved; more realistic values are in the 5 MOA range - for a well trained soldier that is. And guess what? That damn good enough because unlike, say, the police sniper who just has to hit that famous 1" - 2" area at a hostage takers head to prevent him from killing the hostage, soldiers are going for the torso which translates to around 7-10 MOA (quite low "precision") at typical shooting distances like 250m.

Next, as you have certainly noticed, basically all rifles used in basically all armies are assault rifles, that is *automatic* rifles. This directly translates to "rifles of limited precision" (to word it friendly). To put a high quality sight on an ar-15 is, frankly, a) senseless and b) a sign of bad shooting capabilities. If your soldiers aren't capable to shoot typical infantry distances of 50 - 300 m with 5 MOA precision with simple standard sights, you have a problem of soldier/training and not of gun sights.
And, No, switching your gun to single shot doesn't change those "laws" because your gun is still limited to mediocre precision.

To bring this to a point: Forget those battlefield 2000 (or whatever) analysis. Russian troups, in particular special forces *are* properly equipped nowadays, and if a RF DMR wants an add on sight for certain situations, he can attach a Kobra or a well proven and adequate scope. But to "enhance" an AK rifle with EOtech holosights clearly suggests "western" and "guerilla" (or bought nazi) to me.
And btw, No, one can not judge that someone is special forces based on his weapon, just because it's "known", for instance, that spec forces often use a certain rifle. The weapon Russian spec forces carry is very dependent on the mission. And rest assured that for CQB they wouldn't walk around with fat long Dragunovs.
But ask a western, in particular a zamerican "spy master how to false flag disguise those payed nazis in your service to make them look Russian, he'll sure enough come up with "Dragunov!".

Another issue: As I've thought (and written) the ukrainian troups won't fight against Russia. Partly because they are not amongst the bravest, partly because Russia is their Angst-Opponent, partly because ukraines military is still largely influenced by the common heritage and history (and quite a few of the higher officers were trained in Russian facilities/academies, and partly because it's against the nature of any military with character to subdue themselves to criminal rats, particularly if the are cia payed.

This leads to the funny situation that ukraine (kyiv variant) de facto doesn't have military forces, even less forces they can trust and count on), doesn't have special police forces and even doesn't have police forces, simply because they were betrayed by all sides and wouldn't fights anyway when it gets hard. One Exception, Berkut, which however is on Russias side.

Also, What is Russias probable strategy?

Well, from what I've seen so far it seems they are following a very smart "oyster" scheme, i.e build up in steps combined with a "we don't fight. We only protect our bases" strategy.

So, Krim now basically her own military incl. navy, police, and Berkut - and all of them convinced and rather loyal. This has two major strategic advantages. a) Krim is pretty much secured by now. Sure, there will from time to time be small operations and attempts by kiev, but Krim will be easily capable to handle those. b) Once Krim has fully established and properly implemented power, they will be a bridge head from which the counter revolution can spread into neighbouring pro-Russia provinces.
Doing it this way carried a small risk of kiev filling the "void" (which wasn't really a void but rather a not too active counter revolution). But that risk was quite limited anyway as there was always the option to fight down an kiev attempts.
But it has the major advantage that Russia could restrain themselves to protective observers rather than actively involve party. And indeed, pretty everything was done and handled by *ukrainians*; sure those were "Krim ukrainians" and, yes, they were clearly very close to Russia but anyway they were ukrainians.
They will, so I assume strongly, continue that very successful strategy and even more so when looking at the kiev regime being in gross disarray and increasingly desperate.
So there isn't too much suspense while looking at things unfolding. One point, however, remains very interesting for me: Will they a) simply ignore Odessa, b) spread out to Odessa last (after the eastern regions) or c) first?
All those options have their positive and neg. sides. In my minds eye their way of dealing with Odessa will be an interesting hint to their attitude, e.g. is their goal simply to somehow establish security and some autonomy in the regions that desire that? Or, the other extreme, are they about to pro-actively establish some kind and version of "eastern ukraine", be it formalized as a proper country to create or be it as a largely autonomous large "eastern ukraine" block that stays part of ukraine in name?
Also linked to Odessa: What are their plans concerning zusa? Will they just ignore the anyway rather insignificant zusa presence at Odessas doors? Or will they pro-actively engage them in one way or another, for instance by *first* spreading to Odessa and creating a pro-Russian autonomous fait accompli there (and then asking the zusa ship to get lost or else ...).
For the moment, I feel, they haven't yet taken a clear decision. Quite probably this also depends largely on a) kiev staying out and b) zusa staying *obviously and very passive*. My guess is that, as soon as zusa so much as coughs in an unpleasant way the "crimean navy and army" will clean Odessa and very strongly demand (with gun covers taken off and guns trained) the zusa ships to leave.

Finally, the G7/G8 thingy

Honestly, I was very pleased by that western approach. For two reasons:

- With the western perspective of Russia militarily enganging the zusa partner an zato member in all but name ukraine ... threatening Russia to be excluded from G8 is their reaction? Wait a second, I need an extensive laughing and carpet biting time out.
In other words: This comes down to basically capitulating and declaring that zato is afraid of the slightest military engagement of Russia. Period.

- How lovely! What will Russia being zusa sanctioned and G8 excluded do? Well, for one, they will demand Rubels or Yuans for their oil and gas. Furthermore they will take that as an invitation to, uhm, make zamerican enterprises in Russia (who earn a very major amount of money there) feel considerably less well and a largely increased level of bureaucracy (read: they'll kick their asses day and night). And, of course, it will make Russia to look for alternatives. Like China and, more generally, BRICS.
All in all, that stupid G8 move will turn out to be more or less insignificant for Russia but quite damaging for zusa and particularly their us$.
As I said: Lovely!

There will, of course, also be unpleasant implications for zeu but frankly, my interest in zeu is limited to zeu and particularly zeuro breaking. So I won't waste any further thoughts on that zusa metastase.

Ceterum censeo israel americanamque vehementer delenda esse!

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 3 2014 6:53 utc | 75

Small post scriptum

I don't know much about finance stuff but I would seem to me that Russia asking for their oil and gas to be payed in Yuan would be a very smart move. Because (and here I'm weak and possibly wrong, so, please, let me know when I say nonsense) Russia buying more from China can use those Yuan. At the same time this would force western countries (think "zeu", the major gas client) to buy Yuans, which again might turn against the us$ because zeu will like to pay for those yuan in zeuro, which aren't too trustworthy but a) better than us$ anyway and b) China could way easier enforce anything against zeu than against zusa.
Sure enough there are more major goodies in that which I, lacking know how finance stuff, can't see. It might an interesting matter though.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 3 2014 7:09 utc | 76

@Augus #54: The ribbons are "yellow" and the video is broadcast by, the CIA broadcast station RFERL –RadioLiberty [=identical to] RadioSvoboda– . I kinda made a thorough study of this "revelation" by RFERL on 20 February when The Guardian spliced this segment to the deaths of the massacre in Instytutska Street. An extended video of the victims under fire here.

Write-up in this article - Who Were Snipers In Kiev Massacre - A CIA-Svoboda False Flag Op?

My conclusion, the RFERL segment of black-ops with yellow ribbons was taken during the revolt of 29-30 November 2013. The article by The Guardian where these two events are joined is ugly propaganda to put blame on the government for the sniper deaths of 20 February 2014.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 3 2014 8:49 utc | 78

@Mr. Pragma #71: Thanks for clarity.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 3 2014 8:55 utc | 79

This guy may be one of the "white ribbons". Their job is to look for documents and pass them to the US

Posted by: Mina | Mar 3 2014 9:20 utc | 80

RT is showing some nice humour today. That's what the caption on the front page next to Kerry's picture says:
"Seriously, what?! Kerry tells Russia 'you don't invade a country on completely phony pretexts'
The US Secretary of State spoke today of the unacceptability of invading a sovereign country on phony pretexts in order to assert one’s own interests in the 21st century. But no, he was not speaking about the United States, as one might have thought."

Posted by: Mina | Mar 3 2014 9:24 utc | 81

Pussy Riot : the movie. complete with dancing cossacks with whips.....or ..have we bene conned yet again by the 'free'(of morals) press?

(google trans)
And this story began with a strange call. February 18, exactly one day before the performance of the attack "Cossacks" to "Pussy Riot", filmed the clip in the Olympic Sochi called me friend from Adler. Knowing that I'm not just writing about "pusyah", he talked about the fact that a representative of the creative team of local hires to participate in the video as extras. Pay $ 500 or more. Selected middle-aged men of Slavic appearance. Ten - twelve people. Agree with the two candidates - and what a lady Peter blond 35-40 years. Like, nothing worthy of attention in this report was not. Well, are gaining. So what? Conventional shooting.

But interesting was another - Usage shoot video. The plot was the fact that the extras, costumes obryazhennaya Cossacks had to simulate an attack on the speakers «Pussy Riot». Portray the fight, swinging whips, unmask and so on. Warned that the shooting will be a lot of journalists and should therefore represent a very naturalistic, but try not to injure the participants. And then suddenly "customer" refused the services of local "actors", citing the fact that "the issue decided with the other candidates."

And on February 19 all the media blew the information about that Tolokonnikova, Alekhine and other participants «Pussy Riot »during the filming of the video in Sochi Cossacks attacked by a group consisting of ten to twelve people. They (the "Cossacks") attacked the participants performance, waving whips, tore balaclavas and so on. Everything happens for a previously announced scenario. Within minutes a message of "Cossacks attack on Pussy Riot» appeared in all the Western news media and tapes - "The Independent", BBC, C NN and so on.

NOTE the foreign 'free' (of morals) press thruout the olympics was on the prowl for anything to defame the Sochi games and resident Putin .They have no morals nor any shame to manufacture stories, or as here be the willing dupes?

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 10:03 utc | 82

What Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis
President Barack Obama has been trying, mostly in secret, to craft a new foreign policy that relies heavily on cooperation with Russian President Vladimir Putin to tamp down confrontations in hotspots such as Iran and Syria. But Obama’s timidity about publicly explaining this strategy has left it open to attack from powerful elements of Official Washington, including well-placed neocons and people in his own administration.

The gravest threat to this Obama-Putin collaboration has now emerged in Ukraine, where a coalition of U.S. neocon operatives and neocon holdovers within the State Department fanned the flames of unrest in Ukraine, contributing to the violent overthrow of democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych and now to a military intervention by Russian troops in the Crimea, a region in southern Ukraine that historically was part of Russia.

Though I’m told the Ukraine crisis caught both Obama and Putin by surprise, the neocon determination to drive a wedge between the two leaders has been apparent for months, especially after Putin brokered a deal to head off U.S. military strikes against Syria last summer and helped get Iran to negotiate concessions on its nuclear program.

Putin also is reported to have verbally dressed down Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan over what Putin considered their provocative actions regarding the Syrian civil war.

American neocons – along with Israel and Saudi Arabia – had hoped that Obama would launch military strikes on Syria and Iran that could open the door to more “regime change” across the Middle East, a dream at the center of neocon geopolitical strategy since the 1990s.

This neocon strategy took shape after the display of U.S. high-tech warfare against Iraq in 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union later that year. U.S. neocons began believing in a new paradigm of a uni-polar world where U.S. edicts were law.

The neocons felt this paradigm shift also meant that Israel would no longer need to put up with frustrating negotiations with the Palestinians. Rather than haggling over a two-state solution, U.S. neocons simply pressed for “regime change” in hostile Muslim countries that were assisting the Palestinians or Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

Iraq was first on the neocon hit list, but next came Syria and Iran. The overriding idea was that once the regimes assisting the Palestinians and Hezbollah were removed or neutralized, then Israel could dictate peace terms to the Palestinians who would have no choice but to accept what was on the table.

U.S. neocons working on Netanyahu’s campaign team in 1996, including Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, even formalized their bold new plan, which they outlined in a strategy paper, called “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” The paper argued that only “regime change” in hostile Muslim countries could achieve the necessary “clean break” from the diplomatic standoffs that had followed inconclusive Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

In 1998, the neocon Project for the New American Century called for a U.S. invasion of Iraq, but President Bill Clinton refused to go along. The situation changed, however, when President George W. Bush took office and after the 9/11 attacks. Suddenly, the neocons had a Commander in Chief who agreed with the need to eliminate Iraq’s Saddam Hussein — and a stunned and angry U.S. public could be easily persuaded. [See’s “The Mysterious Why of the Iraq War.”]

So, Bush invaded Iraq, ousting Hussein but failing to subdue the country. The U.S. death toll of nearly 4,500 soldiers and the staggering costs, estimated to exceed $1 trillion, made the American people and even Bush unwilling to fulfill the full-scale neocon vision, which was expressed in one of their favorite jokes of 2003 about where to attack next, Iran or Syria, with the punch line: “Real men go to Tehran!”

Though hawks like Vice President Dick Cheney pushed the neocon/Israeli case for having the U.S. military bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities – with the hope that the attacks also might spark a “regime change” in Tehran – Bush decided that he couldn’t risk the move, especially after the U.S. intelligence community assessed in 2007 that Iran had stopped work on a bomb four years earlier.

The Rise of Obama

The neocons were dealt another setback in 2008 when Barack Obama defeated a neocon favorite, Sen. John McCain. But Obama then made one of the fateful decisions of his presidency, deciding to staff key foreign-policy positions with “a team of rivals,” i.e. keeping Republican operative Robert Gates at the Defense Department and recruiting Hillary Clinton, a neocon-lite, to head the State Department.

Obama also retained Bush’s high command, most significantly the media-darling Gen. David Petraeus. That meant that Obama didn’t take control over his own foreign policy.

Gates and Petraeus were themselves deeply influenced by the neocons, particularly Frederick Kagan, who had been a major advocate for the 2007 “surge” escalation in Iraq, which was hailed by the U.S. mainstream media as a great “success” but never achieved its principal goal of a unified Iraq. At the cost of nearly 1,000 U.S. dead, it only bought time for an orderly withdrawal that spared Bush and the neocons the embarrassment of an obvious defeat.

So, instead of a major personnel shakeup in the wake of the catastrophic Iraq War, Obama presided over what looked more like continuity with the Bush war policies, albeit with a firmer commitment to draw down troops in Iraq and eventually in Afghanistan.

From the start, however, Obama was opposed by key elements of his own administration, especially at State and Defense, and by the still-influential neocons of Official Washington. According to various accounts, including Gates’s new memoir Duty, Obama was maneuvered into supporting a troop “surge” in Afghanistan, as advocated by neocon Frederick Kagan and pushed by Gates, Petraeus and Clinton.

Gates wrote that Kagan persuaded him to recommend the Afghan “surge” and that Obama grudgingly went along although Gates concluded that Obama didn’t believe in the “mission” and wanted to reverse course more quickly than Gates, Petraeus and their side wanted.

Faced with this resistance from his own bureaucracy, Obama began to rely on a small inner circle built around Vice President Joe Biden and a few White House advisers with the analytical support of some CIA officials, including CIA Director Leon Panetta.

Obama also found a surprising ally in Putin after he regained the Russian presidency in 2012. A Putin adviser told me that the Russian president personally liked Obama and genuinely wanted to help him resolve dangerous disputes, especially crises with Iran and Syria.

In other words, what evolved out of Obama’s early “team of rivals” misjudgment was an extraordinary presidential foreign policy style, in which Obama developed and implemented much of his approach to the world outside the view of his secretaries of State and Defense (except when Panetta moved briefly to the Pentagon).

Even after the eventual departures of Gates in 2011, Petraeus as CIA director after a sex scandal in late 2012, and Clinton in early 2013, Obama’s peculiar approach didn’t particularly change. I’m told that he has a distant relationship with Secretary of State John Kerry, who never joined Obama’s inner foreign policy circle.

Though Obama’s taciturn protectiveness of his “real” foreign policy may be understandable given the continued neocon “tough-guy-ism” that dominates Official Washington, Obama’s freelancing approach gave space to hawkish elements of his own administration.

For instance, Secretary of State Kerry came close to announcing a U.S. war against Syria in a bellicose speech on Aug. 30, 2013, only to see Obama pull the rug out from under him as the President worked with Putin to defuse the crisis sparked by a disputed chemical weapons attack outside Damascus. [See’s “How War on Syria Lost Its Way.”]

Similarly, Obama and Putin hammered out the structure for an interim deal with Iran on how to constrain its nuclear program. But when Kerry was sent to seal that agreement in Geneva, he instead inserted new demands from the French (who were carrying water for the Saudis) and nearly screwed it all up. After getting called on the carpet by the White House, Kerry returned to Geneva and finalized the arrangements.[See’s “A Saudi-Israel Defeat on Iran Deal.”]

Unorthodox Foreign Policy

Obama’s unorthodox foreign policy – essentially working in tandem with the Russian president and sometimes at odds with his own foreign policy bureaucracy – has forced Obama into faux outrage when he’s faced with some perceived affront from Russia, such as its agreement to give temporary asylum to National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.

For the record, Obama had to express strong disapproval of Snowden’s asylum, though in many ways Putin was doing Obama a favor by sparing Obama from having to prosecute Snowden with the attendant complications for U.S. national security and the damaging political repercussions from Obama’s liberal base.

Putin’s unforced errors also complicated the relationship, such as when he defended Russian hostility toward gays and cracked down on dissent before the Sochi Olympics. Putin became an easy target for U.S. commentators and comedians.

But Obama’s hesitancy to explain the degree of his strategic cooperation with Putin has enabled Official Washington’s still influential neocons, including holdovers within the State Department bureaucracy, to drive more substantive wedges between Obama and Putin. The neocons came to recognize that the Obama-Putin tandem had become a major impediment to their strategic vision.

Without doubt, the neocons’ most dramatic – and potentially most dangerous – counter-move has been Ukraine, where they have lent their political and financial support to opposition forces who sought to break Ukraine away from its Russian neighbor.

Though this crisis also stems from the historical division of Ukraine – between its more European-oriented west and the Russian-ethnic east and south – neocon operatives, with financing from the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy and other U.S. sources, played key roles in destabilizing and overthrowing the democratically elected president.

NED, a $100 million-a-year agency created by the Reagan administration in 1983 to promote political action and psychological warfare against targeted states, lists 65 projects that it supports financially inside Ukraine, including training activists, supporting “journalists” and promoting business groups, effectively creating a full-service structure primed and ready to destabilize a government in the name of promoting “democracy.” [See’s “A Shadow US Foreign Policy.”]

State Department neocons also put their shoulders into shoving Ukraine away from Russia. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, the wife of prominent neocon Robert Kagan and the sister-in-law of the Gates-Petraeus adviser Frederick Kagan, advocated strenuously for Ukraine’s reorientation toward Europe.

Last December, Nuland reminded Ukrainian business leaders that, to help Ukraine achieve “its European aspirations, we have invested more than $5 billion.” She said the U.S. goal was to take “Ukraine into the future that it deserves,” by which she meant into the West’s orbit and away from Russia’s.

But President Yanukovych rejected a European Union plan that would have imposed harsh austerity on the already impoverished Ukraine. He accepted a more generous $15 billion loan from Russia, which also has propped up Ukraine’s economy with discounted natural gas. Yanukovych’s decision sparked anti-Russian street protests in Kiev, located in the country’s western and more pro-European region.

Nuland was soon at work planning for “regime change,” encouraging disruptive street protests by personally passing out cookies to the anti-government demonstrators. She didn’t seem to notice or mind that the protesters in Kiev’s Maidan square had hoisted a large banner honoring Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist who collaborated with the German Nazis during World War II and whose militias participated in atrocities against Jews and Poles.

By late January, Nuland was discussing with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt who should be allowed in the new government.

“Yats is the guy,” Nuland said in a phone call to Pyatt that was intercepted and posted online. “He’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the guy you know.” By “Yats,” Nuland was referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who had served as head of the central bank, foreign minister and economic minister — and who was committed to harsh austerity.

As Assistant Secretary Nuland and Sen. McCain cheered the demonstrators on, the street protests turned violent. Police clashed with neo-Nazi bands, the ideological descendants of Bandera’s anti-Russian Ukrainians who collaborated with the Nazi SS during World War II.

With the crisis escalating and scores of people killed in the street fighting, Yanukovych agreed to a E.U.-brokered deal that called for moving up scheduled elections and having the police stand down. The neo-Nazi storm troopers then seized the opening to occupy government buildings and force Yanukovych and many of his aides to flee for their lives.

With these neo-Nazis providing “security,” the remaining parliamentarians agreed in a series of unanimous or near unanimous votes to establish a new government and seek Yanukovych’s arrest for mass murder. Nuland’s choice, Yatsenyuk, emerged as interim prime minister.

Yet, the violent ouster of Yanukovych provoked popular resistance to the coup from the Russian-ethnic south and east. After seeking refuge in Russia, Yanukovych appealed to Putin for help. Putin then dispatched Russian troops to secure control of the Crimea. [For more on this history, see’s “Cheering a ‘Democratic’ Coup in Ukraine.”]

Separating Obama from Putin

The Ukraine crisis has given Official Washington’s neocons another wedge to drive between Obama and Putin. For instance, the neocon flagship Washington Post editorialized on Saturday that Obama was responding “with phone calls” when something much more threatening than “condemnation” was needed.

It’s always stunning when the Post, which so energetically lobbied for the U.S. invasion of Iraq under the false pretense of eliminating its (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction, gets its ire up about another country acting in response to a genuine security threat on its own borders, not half a world away.

But the Post’s editors have never been deterred by their own hypocrisy. They wrote, “Mr. Putin’s likely objective was not difficult to figure. He appears to be responding to Ukraine’s overthrow of a pro-Kremlin government last week with an old and ugly Russian tactic: provoking a separatist rebellion in a neighboring state, using its own troops when necessary.”

The reality, however, appears to have been that neocon elements from within the U.S. government encouraged the overthrow of the elected president of Ukraine via a coup spearheaded by neo-Nazi storm troopers who then terrorized lawmakers as the parliament passed draconian laws, including some intended to punish the Russian-oriented regions which favor Yanukovych.

Yet, besides baiting Obama over his tempered words about the crisis, the Post declared that “Mr. Obama and European leaders must act quickly to prevent Ukraine’s dismemberment. Missing from the president’s statement was a necessary first step: a demand that all Russian forces – regular and irregular – be withdrawn … and that Moscow recognize the authority of the new Kiev government. … If Mr. Putin does not comply, Western leaders should make clear that Russia will pay a heavy price.”

The Post editors are fond of calling for ultimatums against various countries, especially Syria and Iran, with the implication that if they don’t comply with some U.S. demand that harsh actions, including military reprisals, will follow.

But now the neocons, in their single-minded pursuit of endless “regime change” in countries that get in their way, have taken their ambitions to a dangerous new level, confronting nuclear-armed Russia with ultimatums.

By Sunday, the Post’s neocon editors were “spelling out the consequences” for Putin and Russia, essentially proposing a new Cold War. The Post mocked Obama for alleged softness toward Russia and suggested that the next “regime change” must come in Moscow.

“Many in the West did not believe Mr. Putin would dare attempt a military intervention in Ukraine because of the steep potential consequences,” the Post wrote. “That the Russian ruler plunged ahead shows that he doubts Western leaders will respond forcefully. If he does not quickly retreat, the United States must prove him wrong.”

The madness of the neocons has long been indicated by their extraordinary arrogance and their contempt for other nations’ interests. They assume that U.S. military might and other coercive means must be brought to bear on any nation that doesn’t bow before U.S. ultimatums or that resists U.S.-orchestrated coups.

Whenever the neocons meet resistance, they don’t rethink their strategy; they simply take it to the next level. Angered by Russia’s role in heading off U.S. military attacks against Syria and Iran, the neocons escalated their geopolitical conflict by taking it to Russia’s own border, by egging on the violent ouster of Ukraine’s elected president.

The idea was to give Putin an embarrassing black eye as punishment for his interference in the neocons’ dream of “regime change” across the Middle East. Now, with Putin’s countermove, his dispatch of Russian troops to secure control of the Crimea, the neocons want Obama to further escalate the crisis by going after Putin.

Some leading neocons even see ousting Putin as a crucial step toward reestablishing the preeminence of their agenda. NED president Carl Gershman wrote in the Washington Post, “Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents. … Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.”

At minimum, the neocons hope that they can neutralize Putin as Obama’s ally in trying to tamp down tensions with Syria and Iran – and thus put American military strikes against those two countries back under active consideration.

As events spin out of control, it appears way past time for President Obama to explain to the American people why he has collaborated with President Putin in trying to resolve some of the world’s thorniest problems.

That, however, would require him to belatedly take control of his own administration, to purge the neocon holdovers who have worked to sabotage his actual foreign policy, and to put an end to neocon-controlled organizations, like the National Endowment for Democracy, that use U.S. taxpayers’ money to stir up trouble abroad. That would require real political courage.

Posted by: ProPeace | Mar 3 2014 10:15 utc | 83

ProPeace (78)

With all due respect: We can read and we are able to click on a link.

I perceive your endless mega quote as a) utterly disturbing and in effect spam and b) lacking the many embedded links in the original.

Kindly, in the future simply give us a link, along with a short "teaser"/summary. But do *not* again spam this blog with full mega-quotes.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 3 2014 10:25 utc | 84

a third force in the Kiev Maidan?
Acts on Maidan third force, which provokes both parties, their representatives and shoot at protesters. This opinion was expressed by former Head of Intelligence Skipalsky Alexander in an interview to "Kommersant-Ukraine" .
"MIA actually pretends not to notice how under his nose are criminal groups agreed with certain authorities. Therefore, most law enforcement officers who work on the Maidan, disoriented and not fully understand what is happening. And" maydanovtsy "too, apparently, do not understand that a third force operating here, which provokes both sides.'s this third force, and there are terrorists in the full sense of the word. Because they work in order to intimidate the population," - he said.

He said that under the "third force" refers to the mercenaries.

"It bandits who shoot for the money people. SBU and MIA should detain them, but they, unfortunately, do not ... I think it's mercenaries," - said the former head of General Intelligence.

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 10:39 utc | 85

As part of the "cost" Obama promised Putin, the US's moved to exclude Russia from the G7(formerly known as G8). They're now making effort to isolate Russia from WTO. Anyone with a little brain knows these feel-good organizations are a US creation - no surprise there.

Gentlemen, this is where Europe is being proper f*cked. The US's managed, quiet successfully, to Push the EU into a war with Russia. This is the same EU that's struggling with their collective economies and heavily dependent on Russia for energy.

A little word of advice to the EU, DON'T CRAP WHERE YOU EAT!!! Russia's got a massive market in China. And the Chinese, given what the same agitators in Kiev are brewing in China's Xinjiang, will ultimately back Russia.

Never go to war with a divided house. You may very well loose the house in the end..The US never cared about the EU anyway. So, as Victoria Nuland will say, "F*ck the EU"!!!

Posted by: Zico | Mar 3 2014 11:03 utc | 86

For those of you who are interested:

There are, of course, real sniper rifles designed and produced in Russia.
Funnily, while Russian sniper rifles (typically Lapua cal., 0,2 - 0,5 MOA) are doubtlessly among the Top 10 in the world, the Russian 0.50 large cal. anti-materiel sniper rifles look quite mediocre (ca. 1 - 1,5 MOA). Actually this is simply due to sometimes quite different strategies. While americans *love* the idea of killing enemies from very large distances of more than a mile, often citing counter-sniping as excuse, Russians consider sniping as something that is done to eliminate high value human targets at up to sth like 1.000m and anti-materiel is something quite different with a larger 12,7 cal. against material (like cars) only so that even 2 or 3 MOA are more than good enough.
This is also a good example for the strict and omnipresent credo of americans in quantity and massive (whatever. More is always better for them). Russia on the other hand is more on the "the right tool for a job" side, having designed sometimes weird (in western eyes) guns like silenced sniper rifles for distances of 300m or even just 100m or (by the way very well working) underwater guns.

Some examples (excl. the classical Vintorez and similar):

SV 98 (7,62, typ. 300m, ca. 0,5-0,7MOA)
Lobaev SVL (Lapua or .408, long range, 0,3 MOA or better)
Orsis T 5000 (Lapua or 7,62, medium range, ~ 0,5 MOA)
OSV 96 (anti-materiel, 12,7mm, medium range, ~ 1,5 MOA)

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 3 2014 11:03 utc | 87

Wonder if some of the support for a deal with Iran reflects the desire of some in the ruling class to free resources for a new anti Russian crusade.

Posted by: Andoheb | Mar 3 2014 11:09 utc | 88

#81 This probably explains why Le Monde is for once strikingly more moderate than the BBC on the Ukraine story: on the new prime minister of Crimea, not especially a "pro-Russian" to start with

And in Afghanistan, even Karzai is pissed off with the Americans..

Posted by: Mina | Mar 3 2014 11:11 utc | 89
In the above video, a Ukrainian Member of Parliament says that NATO snipers appear to have shot at both sides during the recent events in Ukraine.
(shades of Venezuela 2002, Syria 2011 egypt 2013 etc)

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 11:11 utc | 90

Truth about situation in Ukraine shared a link.
about an hour ago · Edited

The Chief Investigation Department of the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation initiated a criminal case against the leader of the Right-Wing Sector Dmitry Yarosh based on the essential elements of crime as provided by part 2 of article 205 of RF Criminal Code and part 2 of article 280 of RF Criminal Code (public call for terrorist and extremist activities, made through mass media).

The investigators believe that in the speeches made by the head of the ultra-nationalist Ukrainian organization Right-Wing Sector Dmitry Yarosh is openly calling anti-Russian forces to start extremist activities and terror on the territory of Russia.

Shortly the investigators are going to apply for a permission for a restraint by arrest to be provided in absentia of Yarosh, after which Yarosh will be put on the international wanted list.

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 11:19 utc | 92

manufacturing documents
EuroSavant ‏@EuroSavant Feb 25
DR Smoking gun: #Yanukovych document found in which he plans2 employ snipers, tanks 2kill 1000s on #Maidan Square

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 11:31 utc | 93

Brown moses has moseyed across to Ukraine to ...lend a hand

Brown Moses ‏@Brown_Moses Feb 23
Translated - Captured Conversation Between the Snipers on the Roofs above Maidan in Kyiv Ukraine

anything he handles is tainted

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 11:33 utc | 94

Mina @ 86

Why wouldn't he resign? He's made a fortune on the Syrian file. The dude will get a massive handshake in addition to his retirement package for "trying" to bring peace (whatever that means).

He knew full well he couldn't deliver but the money's too good to refuse. At least, Kofi Annan had some decency to see through the BS. As per NATO, the war's not meant to end in "peace". They want Assad to go!

Of course, reality is different.

Posted by: Zico | Mar 3 2014 11:43 utc | 95

Holy shit, I did get the date wrong. They were banned from entering the US less than a year ago and now they're handed control of the country.

Ultranationalist Ukrainian political party leaders banned from U.S.

@J. Bradley: Thanks

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 3 2014 11:52 utc | 96

Feeling a threat from the new central government of questionable legitimacy, a number of regions stood up against it. Thousands of people across eastern and southern Ukraine are flooding the streets of major cities, urging local authorities to disobey Kiev’s orders. The local population is calling the government in Kiev illegitimate and demanding that their local governments refuse to take orders from it.

when the followers lead, the leaders will follow

Posted by: brian | Mar 3 2014 12:02 utc | 97

I'm surprised that OCCUPY didn't step in this wonderful opportunity for a debate on the nature of democracy.
Would love to hear Kerry and Cameron's comments.

#88-89: Syria redux.

This whole hysteria cannot be only about pumping up anti-Russian feelings in the West. It has to do with "feed the masses with more panem and circenses" after the official "failures" in Iraq, Syria, Sudan, the economy...

Posted by: Mina | Mar 3 2014 12:13 utc | 98

@Zico 81
You need to understand that the EU governments has been occupied for some time already by the global criminal elite, who in the past organized a number of terror campaigns against European population to force it into submission. The most famous one was GLADIO (there is a very good BBC documentary from the 1990s on that subject) - of which the current events on Ukraine are partially a continuation. Other more recent subversive special ops/mercenary terror operations include BREIVIK, London 7/7, Madrid 2005, Toulouse (Mehra), Bulgaria (Jewish tourists on a bus). A year ago or so there was a package with explosives found on a Berlin train station - that was a warning.
The main obstacle for Europe to stand against those evil, anti-human, globalist forces and join the EurAsian Union with Russia and China is the abysmal awareness of the populace of the facts and context of the events I mentioned above.

Posted by: Propeace | Mar 3 2014 12:22 utc | 99

@ Pragma 79 I'd seen such long quotes before here and hadn't seen any objections that's why, also being in a hurry I decided to paste the whole thing. I guess some people may prefer it done this way thus being able more easily to glance over the text without being forced to click for the source. I know many people who, like myself, do not like clicking and opening new tabs/windows.
I do not plan in the future to post such long articles in whole.

Posted by: Propeace | Mar 3 2014 12:34 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.