Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 27, 2014

Ukraine: Government Attack In Breach Of UN Resolution

The federalists fighting in east Ukraine seem to be in trouble. The Ukrainian army and "volunteers are attacking in size and tries to cut the federalist held area into two by pushing from two sides into the direction of Torez.

The map shows the rough plan, not actually progress, as presented by the Ukrainian government side.


bigger

 

Torez, the center of the push, is the area where flight MH-17 came down. With this push to the crash side the Ukrainian army infringes on the July 20 UN Security Council resolution where point 7:

Demands that all military activities, including by armed groups, be immediately ceased in the immediate area surrounding the crash site to allow for security and safety of the international investigation;

Dutch investigators planned to visit the site today but had to stay away while fighting occurred in the area. From the Ukrainian plan above it is obvious that the Ukrainian attack, not the federalists, is responsible for the fighting and the coup-government of Ukraine for impeding secure access to the site. Why is it so urgent right now for the Ukrainian government to get control of the crash site?

As part of its all-over attack today the Ukrainian army indiscriminately used Grad multiple rocket launchers to shell (vid) the surrounded city of Gorlivka which is in the hands of a few federalists. There are reports about several dozens of civilian casualties from this attack including a mother and her young child (photo).

Earlier Human Rights Watch had condemned such use of Grad rockets by the Ukrainian government:

The use of indiscriminate rockets in populated areas violates international humanitarian law, or the laws of war, and may amount to war crimes.

How long will it take for the "west" to express outrage over this breach of an UN resolution by the Ukrainian governments and its indiscriminate killing of "its own civilians"?

Posted by b on July 27, 2014 at 16:28 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Posted by: Demian | Jul 29, 2014 12:29:05 AM | 100

All they need to do is insist on a cease fire. They don't even do it for the crash site.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 4:53 utc | 101

This comment here makes sense

Europe's Nightmare Coming True: America vs. Russia...Again

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 5:02 utc | 102

Russian Spring

Donetsk. 07/28/2014-20:57

Strelkov:

Today, the combatants were engaged in fierce battles at sites of cities Shakhtersk, Torez, Snezhnoye, heights Saur-Mogila (Saur-Burial) and 198.3, settlements Marinovka and Stepanovka. These battles were characterized by exceptional relentlessness. The opponent, by striking from south and north, aspired to conclude encirclement of the Donetsk combatant forces. At the moment, the combat is under way just between Shakhtersk and Torez. The combatants are attacking the opponent to dislodge it from strategically important block-post number 20 at the T-intersection between Torez and Shakhtersk.

I can say that the opponent fights the battles with unusual quantity of military equipment. Possibly 200 units, or 250. It is difficult to be precise what was the amount of mechanized equipment engaged.

In the course of obstinate battles, most of the opponent attacks were repelled. Under Marinovka, three officers of the Ukrainian forces were captured. One tank and two carriers were destroyed. In settlement Stepanovka the opponent was also defeated. Stepanonka remains ours.

At the moment, the heavy combat for Saur-Mogila continues. Saur-Mogila also remains in the hands of combatants.

Also repelled were attacks for hight 198.3 south of settlement Dubrovka, which remains in our hands as well, and which lies 200 meter from the territory of Russia. During this combat 4 tanks and 4 carriers were destroyed. All of them had burned. There are mercenaries of Negro race among the killed. A commander of local combatant unit is prepared to show for filming the corpses of killed, which so far remain on battlefield intentionally undisturbed…
This is not first time we note those seating in motorized armored hardware hermetically sealed are the mercenaries. Finally, the opportunity has come to demonstrate you. If you are brave to drive there, you are welcome to take pictures.

Further on, as I have said, between Shakhtersk and Torez was a heavy battle. Overall, we destroyed 7 or 8 units of armored equipment – difficult to say how many at this moment – and a great number of soldiers of the opponent. Our casualties consist of 30 killed and wounded, regretfully - most are wounded. The battle there continues. Before the dusk, we plan to restore communication between Shakhtersk and Torez: as attack comes from both directions, the opponent is seemingly backing down. Also, it has backed from Saur-Mogila.

Fierce battles continue for settlement Gorlovka. At the moment, the situation there is not available .


Posted by: Fete | Jul 29 2014 5:04 utc | 103

@somebody #101:

Good points.

Anyway, it seems that everyone is in agreement that things are coming to a head.

FWIW, I think that what we're seeing here is the beginning of the endgame of the collapse of the Empire or, at any rate, its losing its hegemonic position.

US elites became obsessed with the US maintaining its position of hegemon even before the collapse of the USSR, with all the talk one had in the 1980s of the US losing its "economic competitiveness" to Japan. The purpose of the Kiev coup was to prevent the reemergence of Russia as a second "pole", thus ending the post-Cold War monopoler world order. So the reason the US keeps on throwing mud at Russia is that it cannot face the new reality of no longer being the world hegemon.

Posted by: Demian | Jul 29 2014 5:12 utc | 104

And this description of how to get people to do civil war, too.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 5:37 utc | 105

@somebody #105:

Thanks for that link. Very informative article for a mainstream US news site.

This is how Ukrainian liberals think now (quoting from the article):

Irina Bekeshkina, director of the Democratic Initiatives Foundation in the Ukrainian capital, no hardline advocate of military action, told me [civil war] was just unavoidable. “This is a war Ukraine fights against Russia. If we don’t remove this poisonous Novorossia tumor now, it will cover the entire country with metastases and Ukraine dies,” Bikeshkina said. She was a pacifist by nature, but in this particular case the blood spilled in Donetsk was preventing more blood, she insisted. …

when the [Novorossian] activists traveled to Kyiv and spoke with officials, they were told the most painful words—that the war was needed to renew the nation.

If the idea of a Ukrainian nation is so weak that it needs to be "renewed" by war, and the Novorossian idea is so strong that if the Novorossians are not exterminated, "Ukraine dies", why is the imaginary land called the Ukraine worth preserving in any form at all?

Posted by: Demian | Jul 29 2014 6:28 utc | 106

Posted by: Demian | Jul 29, 2014 2:28:27 AM | 106

It is not worth the life of people.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 6:48 utc | 107

Hungary.

This is a watershed.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said he wants to abandon liberal democracy in favor of an “illiberal state,” citing Russia and Turkey as examples.

The global financial crisis in 2008 showed that “liberal democratic states can’t remain globally competitive,” Orban said on July 26 at a retreat of ethnic Hungarian leaders in Baile Tusnad, Romania.

“I don’t think that our European Union membership precludes us from building an illiberal new state based on national foundations,” Orban said, according to the video of his speech on the government’s website. He listed Russia, Turkey and China as examples of “successful” nations, “none of which is liberal and some of which aren’t even democracies.”

Orban, who was re-elected in April for a second consecutive four-year term, has clashed with the EU as he amassed more power than any of his predecessors since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, replacing the heads of independent institutions including the courts with allies, tightening control over media and changing election rules to help him retain a constitutional majority in Parliament.

Orban, a former self-described liberal, anti-communist student leader in the 1980s, has championed relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leaders of China, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan since 2010 to boost trade.
NGO Crackdown

The Hungarian prime minister is distancing himself from values shared by most EU nations even as his government relies on funds from the bloc for almost all infrastructure-development financing in the country.

Orban said civil society organizations receiving funding from abroad need to be monitored as he considers those to be agents of foreign powers.

“We’re not dealing with civil society members but paid political activists who are trying to help foreign interests here,” Orban said. “It’s good that a parliamentary committee has been set up to monitor the influence of foreign monitors.”

Hungary used to be the most anti-soviet in the soviet block. Poland not coming close.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 7:16 utc | 108

Honestly, I think that Germany and France joining Russia in making a public announcement that Washington and Kiev were responsible for the downing of MH17 would be a more effective way of stopping a hot war.

Not going to happen, Demian. Why? because Europe is 'all in' in this game of poker, and there are powerful financial actors inside govts that deeply desire plundering Russia, not to speak of Ukraine.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 29 2014 7:23 utc | 109

somebody, Orban is simply trying to impose fascism "officially" as he's been imposing it unofficailly since he came into office 5 years ago. I think the "paid political activists" he's referring to are various groups from the Commission and the Council who have been assigned the task of trying to get him to 'moderate' his extreme anti-democratic leanings.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 29 2014 7:31 utc | 110

@somebody #108:

Hungary used to be the most anti-soviet in the soviet block.

Isn't today's equivalent of Soviet, Atlanticist? So Hungary is behaving consistently here, so far as I can tell.

Posted by: Demian | Jul 29 2014 7:50 utc | 111

okie farmer

ARe you from hungary or what about your anti-orban comments? What fascism!?

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 29 2014 8:20 utc | 112

first push back against the war propaganda in German media - Stern -

Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 29, 2014 3:31:56 AM | 110
Agree on both points - 109/110 - Hungary is an example of the new right and left wing pro-Putin convergence.

"Europe" has been working for this scenario for a long time, some of the actors under-estimated the potential of Russian push back (and Russian counter-strategies as Russian are not blind and deaf)
As is sanctions now are completely self defeating
- Russia exports resources - Europe only has more expensive alternatives
- Russia imports manufactured goods - a market with much more potential than indebted Ukraine's - sanctions punish European industries

I still cannot find out what Europe's "tough" sanctions of this Tuesday will be - my guess is they will be cosmetic.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 8:41 utc | 113

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 29, 2014 4:20:01 AM | 112

You are correct. Orban's party is considered national conservative not fascist though sometimes there are only shades of grey between those definitions.

The intriguing fact is that Orban and his party are members of the European People Party, same as Angela Merkel and her party.

Hungary becoming pro Russia is a big deal.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 8:56 utc | 114

Katzenjammer

Britain's The Telegraph

Grandstanding over MH17 punishes us more than Putin Sanctions on Russia after the downlng of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 will be ineffective and end up damaging the City of London

Yes,we knew that before - same as we know too much drinking will end with a hangover.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 11:59 utc | 115

how will historians of the future, if any, write up this war? how will NATObe written? how Putin?
let alone the Junta...
Journalism is no longer the first draft of history...that was only true when journalism was reasonably honest

Posted by: brian | Jul 29 2014 12:30 utc | 116

@116 NATO like many organizations without careful oversight and ill-defined goals turns into an operation to beget itself. In many ways, NATO should be dissolved and replaced by a better Interpol, but anyone connected to NATO is threatened. Naturally, they will find needs for NATO in the most bizarre places to win over domestic populations.

Regardless of the character of Rasmussen and Obama and friends, this is how historians will judge this. In many ways, Bill's aggressive and politically driven expansion will be cited as the point where NATO lost its way.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jul 29 2014 13:23 utc | 117

somebody @113 thanks for the STERN link - worth reading for who ever understands German.

Posted by: Fran | Jul 29 2014 13:27 utc | 118

Dozens of civilians killed by kiev junta, but west-MSM dont mention just that!

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 29 2014 13:42 utc | 119

@119 actually today the German FAZ reported on the victims in Donezk. Up to now it was pretty much silence, but maybe the others will follow.

Posted by: Fran | Jul 29 2014 14:26 utc | 120

Posted by: Fran | Jul 29, 2014 10:26:02 AM | 120

New York Times begins to notice that Ukrainian civilians are dying, too.

Loads of photographs on the internet with MH17 cockpit doors showing holes that seem to be caused by bullets/shrapnel from both sides.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 29 2014 14:42 utc | 121

I wish I thought the press were "waking up" to the humanitarian crisis, but I suspect they simply "smell blood" in the air, after all that's what Kiev has promised. I initially thought (ever the optimist) that Kiev's refusal to cease-fire to facilitate the crash investigation might be creating some cognitive dissonance. I suspect it's just a matter of "if it bleeds, it leads." The trove of accumulated documentation of the assault on the civilian populations may get some interest, but generally the widespread acceptance of what is considered "inevitable" collateral damage is shocking. The Geneva Conventions appear forgotten, discarded and/or discredited, like so many international bodies, if not controlled by the United States, simply ignored or deliberately bypassed.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 15:45 utc | 122

Now they've got "satellite images" from a private- PRIVATE- corporation showing Russia is shelling Ukraine from the Russian side of the border. Is it desperation or out of control hubris and power madness? - Colinjames at 40.

Both. Very worrying. Even more alarming, is the take up of such stuff by Gen. Dempsey:

http://tinyurl.com/pavjnr3 = short

Dempsey was known as a ‘moderate’ (Syria for ex.)? Now he’s infected with war fever? Or is this just some glitch?

Putin outlined the general situation in 2011, in a speech in Germany, not specifically about Ukraine at that time. Note Nuland and McCain in the audience. Part 1, eng. subs. other parts follow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr5GxN3C8uw

good for historical catch-up for some… / Russia’s position/ Putin’s analysis and official position/ etc.

Posted by: Noirette | Jul 29 2014 16:07 utc | 123

Now they've got "satellite images" from a private- PRIVATE- corporation showing Russia is shelling Ukraine from the Russian side of the border. Is it desperation or out of control hubris and power madness? - Colinjames at 40.

Both. Very worrying.

Even more alarming, is the take up of such stuff by Gen. Dempsey:

http://tinyurl.com/pavjnr3 = short

Dempsey was known as a ‘moderate’ (Syria for ex.)? Now he’s infected with war fever? Or is this just some glitch?

Putin outlined the general situation in 2011, in a speech in Germany, not specifically about Ukraine at that time. Note Nuland and McCain in the audience. Part 1, eng. subs. other parts follow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr5GxN3C8uw

good for historical catch-up for some… / Russia’s position/ Putin’s analysis and official position/ etc.

Posted by: Noirette | Jul 29 2014 19:05 utc | 124

If anyone believes that the escalating charges against Khodorkovsky were not Putin at his most despotic and over-reaching, and even petty, I haven't found them, although punishing the oligarchs -- by whatever means necessary -- appears to play well in much of Russia … - Susan at 79

Putin more or less ‘got rid’ of the oligarchs - that is those who acquired State industry, property, etc., at minuscule or no cost under Yeltsin, and proceeded to bilk everyone. (For about 60 - 90% of State industry, property, land..yes that much..) Putin was at first quite conciliatory - keep what you have but pay taxes properly, we can work things out.

Then as things developed, a stand-off between the Gvmt (Putin) and some oligarchs evolved. What you certainly don’t know, is that the oligarchs first supported Putin, Yeltsin endorsed him (he announced Putin as his successor, etc.), and the oligarchs even supported his re-election. But things went bad, and Putin more or less managed to get rid of .. say Berevosky amongst *many* others.

This is all standard, conventional, uncontested, history.

The main movers in all this history was Chubais (if no eng, lang biography exists, time to publish, the main manager, it would be fascination’! - see wiki for basic info..) oh and one other figure. No matter, ..

Khodorkovsky scared the PTB (Putin) because he was young, so had time to fight, was charismatic, determined, and incredibly rich, and a ‘resistor.’ He was the last of the oligarchs and was willing to go to jail - most of the others exposed and targeted left Russia or retired into obscurity.

K. could buy up the press, a TV station, etc. What ‘crimes’ he committed is not possible to say, as all that changes with different legislations, on the financial end. (Murders and the like one can say nothing about, no evidence ever.)

What is usually omitted from this kind of history is that one of Putin’s main aims was to get rid of the profit-sharing agreements for oil and gas (Shell first, others ..), that deprived Russia of the revenue of its resources.

Putin junked those agreements and brought back FF revenues to Russia, it took about 2-4 years, and the W has *never forgiven.* - bold that twice.

Which permitted Putin to increase social spending and pensions and so on, as the oil/gas revenues were now flowing into Russia’s coffers. Some may think, hey, the poor ppl, got money so they supported Putin? As if that was a trivial 'socialist' thing? How would susan feel if the oil fields in Texas were run by IRANOIL?

Heh, look up the revival of the flax industry for example. Or other light industry (Russia) which provides jobs, no doubt something Americans are in favor of but maybe not for Russians ..or the starving in the US. Heh cheap dig but deserved.


Posted by: Noirette | Jul 29 2014 19:27 utc | 125

I still don't know what to think of Khodoroksky except that he's an interesting fellow and certainly worth keeping an eye on. It was his ability to successfully form a group/consortium that was then able to win Yukos ultimately seems to have been his downfall.
There's a documentary on him available on Netflix (that some say is too sympathetic) that made me realize the degree to which all sides are creating their own version of his story.

As I understand it, Yukos won the bid because significant priority was given to it going to Russian ownership and Mr. K was neither a dissident or "owned" the United States. Theirs wasn't the highest bid but he and his group were the most attractive group as "parteners." He/they weren't particularly "anti-communist" or anti-Soviet. However the anti-K camp often suggests that he somehow "stole" Yukos and then further stole all of the (dubiously) claimed unpaid taxes.
Where Putin became a "despot" in this case was that the charges were politically and personally motivated, after Mr. K. "broke his word" about staying out of politics and engaged in Soros-like (inspired, influenced, in league with?? I don't know or remember the allegations) "pro-democracy" organizing, which Putin took as public political criticism (from a prominent sources) and personal betrayal.
I was mostly intrigued by the legions of Western top-tier financial big-wig "bad guys" who came out in support of Mr. K and was then surprised by the documentary to find out how "nationalistic" Mr. K appeared to be. He seemed unlikely to "give away the store" as so many American vultures might have hoped. The documentary really paints an almost mystically nationalistic person, an unlikely person for American/Global interests to champion and someone with too much money to be bought -- so my curiosity continues. That he was willing to go to prison, rather than flee (as was probably expected and desired) makes him compelling figure, however, his "bedfellows" give me pause. His future, from Switzerland, as far as I can tell is unknown, not even hinted at.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 20:08 utc | 126

Oh, forgot to mention, that yes, O agree Putin's success at pulling Russia's economy out of the ditch and putting it back on the rails is almost totally ignored or made smaller than it was. There are still plenty of problems, quite a number of which appear to be universal, but I absolutely understand the older-generation's veneration of the man who staved off the hideous post-USSR "austerity" ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 20:14 utc | 127

As I understand it, Yukos won the bid because significant priority was given to it going to Russian ownership and Mr. K was neither a dissident or "owned" the United States.

Mr Kordorkovsky was owned by Jacob Rothschild - he was merely a front man for Rothschild's stake in Yukos

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:22 utc | 128

You make it sound as if Rothschild were Lucifer incarnate. From wiki:

One of the commercial banks contending for Yukos was banking group Bank Menatep, chaired by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a past president of the Investment Promotion program for the Ministry of Fuel and Energy.[verification needed] Menatep became the owner of 78%[12] of Yukos shares following the series of auctions and Khodorkovsky became its CEO. At the time, Yukos, like most other Russian energy companies, was badly affected by the economic recession in the 1990s. Yukos recovered very quickly and, in the course of the next few years, became one of Russia’s largest oil companies and one of the world's largest non-state oil companies, and a leader in Russian corporate governance reform,[14] At the peak of its success, Yukos was producing 20% of Russian oil—about 2% of world production. In 2004 Yukos pumped 1.7 million barrels of oil a day.[15]

Khodorkovsky was widely seen as a pro-democratic reformer. Yukos had five Americans on its board, and Khodorkovsky's charity "Open Russia" listed Henry Kissinger and Lord Rothschild as chairmen.[16] In April 2003, Yukos agreed to a merger/takeover[16] with Sibneft, to create the fourth largest private company in the world,[16] although this merger was soon undone in the aftermath of the October 2003 arrest of Yukos' CEO Khodorkovsky.

On quick look, I don't find Rothschild connection to Menatep, but that level of financing is certainly incestuous, still Rothschild is British -- perhaps they wanted a change after years of American Armand Hammer's heavy hand. I personally find Kissinger more odious, but I'm not big on "guilt by association" and I'm not sure the significance you are placing on Rothschild's association to Yukos or Khodorovsky.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 20:39 utc | 129

Oh, and since Yukos was bankrupted prior to Mr. K. going to prison, I'm not sure that that proposed transfer of power/shares ever occurred. It was an emergency contingency plan that may have become irrelevant when Yukos imploded. Similarly, as I posted yesterday, I found no association between Rothschild and the holding group that won the Yukos victory yesterday. Again, that doesn't mean there is none, but there's no money yet attached to that "win" -- just another decade or more of legal fees. Deep pockets to pay for lawyers, perhaps, again, not "sinister" to me.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 20:42 utc | 130

Wiki? really? You're gonna treat wikipedia as a reliable source? really?

prior to the revelation that Rothshild was actually the beneficiary of the Yukos shares held by Mr K no one knew about Mr K's connection to Mr Rothschild until Mr K was losing control of Yukos, so I'm not surprised Wiki has no mention of him in relation to menatap

I seriousy doubt Wikipedia had any info on Rothshild links to Yukos either, before it was revealed by Mr K having admit that those shares weren't really his.

So why any sane person would expect to find Rothschilds name there now, in relation to Menatep is a bit of a mystery

I'm not sure the significance you are placing on Rothschild's association to Yukos or Khodorovsky.

Oh well - some people just can't be helped, eh?

You can lead a hoss to water but you can't make it drink

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 20:50 utc | 131

Curious that people like you like to go around mentioning the elusive 1%, but when anyone actually points out one of the premier 1% clans to you, you suddenly go all coy and start saying silly things like

    "You make it sound as if Rothschild were Lucifer incarnate"

WTF are the 1%-ers other than the modern day versions of "Lucifer incarnate"?

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 21:09 utc | 132

Isn't that the whole point of the "1%" meme?

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 21:10 utc | 133

Wiki doesn't even mention in the body of the Yukos article that Mr K's shares were in fact held on behalf of Rothschild

the only mention in the body of the article is of Rothschild being chairman of Khodorkovsky's "charity" (ha!) called "Open Russia" [***] and a link at the very bottom of the article, a footnote essentially titled "Arrested oil tycoon passed shares to banker Jacob Rothschild – (The Washington Times)"

So Wikipedia is clearly not a reliable source on this subject

=====

[***] Soros also uses the Title "Open" for a lot of his destabilisation front-groups - curious that Rothschild frontman Mr K should also choose "Open" in the title of his "charity" - maybe that's what all the Rothschild frontmen were doing at the time: setting up destabilisation front-groups with the word "Open" in their title? ;-)

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 21:21 utc | 134

Maybe current Oligarch and Rothschild frontman Oleg Deripaska will soon set up a "charity"/destabilisation front-group with the word "Open" in the title

just for a laugh, likr

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 21:30 utc | 135

The 1% exist because the government allowed itself to be bought and changed tax codes and various incentives that vastly favored those already in possession of accumulated wealth. It's not individuals or the money that's "evil" ... it is and has been the willing, even eager corruption of our "government of, by and for the people" by monied interests on a scale not seen, well, almost ever. In the current scheme of things, the working class and middle class are the "Peter" who is being robbed to pay "Paul" in which accumulated capital is gaining in value while the public service coffers are being starved of revenues and industry placed the paying of dividends to stockholders over reinvestment in their companies and/or communities.
In the energy sector, yes, the same names come up frequently, but -- for better or worse -- these titans have many fingers in many pies. I don't find it surprising that Mr. K looking for a "godparent" for Yukos should it be orphaned (which does not seem to have happened prior to it being dismantled), would chose someone who had the massive administrative infrastructure to handle such as task, looking after a newly orphaned multi-billion dollar baby.
If Kodorkovsky were truly "owned" by Rothschild, back in the day when he was acquiring Yuko, I sort of doubt that that would be a secret that could be kept ... nor am I sure that being so "owned" would have been considered a negative, hence, so your assertion puzzled me. Neophytes having a sugar-daddy or guardian angel is not unusual nor are hidden or secret backers ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 21:51 utc | 136

If Kodorkovsky were truly "owned" by Rothschild, back in the day when he was acquiring Yuko, I sort of doubt that that would be a secret that could be kept . . . . Neophytes having a sugar-daddy or guardian angel is not unusual nor are hidden or secret backers ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29, 2014 5:51:48 PM | 136

Now you are just contradicting yourself

On the one hand you say

    "If Kodorkovsky were truly "owned" by Rothschild, . . . . I sort of doubt that that would be a secret that could be kept"

and then shortly after you claim

    "Neophytes having a sugar-daddy or guardian angel is not unusual nor are hidden or secret backers"

If it wasn't a secret then Rothschild couldn't have ever been a "hidden or secret backer", now could he?

It remained a secret until Mr K was losing control of Yukos - only then was the secret connection to Rothschild revealed.

BTW: statements like "I sort of doubt that that would be a secret that could be kept" are nonsense.

The whole thing about secrets is that, until they are revealed, they ARE kept, otherwise they wouldn't be secrets, now would they? :)

History is full of examples of secrets that were kept for years/decades - and I'm only talking about the ones that were later revealed.

It stands to reason that there are tons of secrets that have NOT yet been revealed and remain secrets to this day

The 1% exist because . . . .

The 1% exist because a 1% have ALWAYS existed -

we just had different names for them before. Their membership might now be drawn from different groups, but there was always a 1%

But your reaction to my naming one of the premier 1% clans is still quite amusing nonetheless

And it appears that Rothschilds ain't just sugar daddy to a mere ONE Oligarch - they appear to be Sugar Daddies to several - several of the largest and ostensibly more powerful ones to boot

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 22:14 utc | 137

No, I don't think it's surprising or shocking that a member of the elite financial circle had some sort of relationship with Mr. K. I'm not sure what significance you are attaching to this putative relationship. Wikipedia does document Rothschild's support for Mr. K's democracy promotion efforts, along with Mr. Kissinger.
I'm still waiting for some evidence that this alleged relationship was unusual, much less "determinative" thing.
Yes, mathematically there is always a 1% (just like there is always a median); however, the amount of the economy they control varies. Some of the greatest American philanthropists made their fortunes as robber barons. Much corporate generosity is done in the name of tax write-offs. This wildly off-topic. Enough.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 29 2014 22:35 utc | 138

I'm not sure what significance you are attaching to this putative relationship.

like I said - you can bring a hoss to water but you can't make it drink

Wikipedia does document Rothschild's support for Mr. K's democracy promotion efforts, along with Mr. Kissinger.

Now you're being deliberately disingenuous, to put it politely, because I never said anything about Wiki NOT documenting Rothschild's chairmanship of Mr K's destabilisation front-group "Open Russia". so your attempt to pretend that I did is frankly bizarre

What I clearly said was that Rothschild connection to YUKOS via Mr K does not appear in the BODY of the Yukos article on Wiki. The body of he article is where it SHOULD have apeared if wiki were a reliable source, but it didn't. Your attempt to pretend that I said something else is just silly, and childish tbh.

Some of the greatest American philanthropists made their fortunes as robber barons.

What you label 'philanthropy' others more correctly call "Social Engineering"

Many of the "Open"-type destabilisation front-groups are financed by these very same so-called "Philanthropic" Foundations you refer to, which it now apears were set up by the descendants of these Robber-Barons.

Ford Foundation, Rausing Trust, Getty Trust, Rockefeller Foundation, Mellon Foundation etc etc

You'll find their name behind these destabilisation front-groups that have popped up all over the world in the last few decades


Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 23:02 utc | 139

I was very clear in what I said - "

    "Wiki doesn't even mention in the body of the Yukos article that Mr K's shares were in fact held on behalf of Rothschild"

So either you have some severe english comprehension issues or you have decided to deliberately misrepresent what I have stated for reasons known only to yourself.

Though tbh i suppose it's a little foolish of me to expect too much in the way of honesty from someone that chooses to describe an ostensible Kordorkovsky financed Russian-registered "charity", chaired by Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger, as a "democracy promotion effort"

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 23:11 utc | 140

No, I don't think it's surprising or shocking that a member of the elite financial circle had some sort of relationship with Mr. K

No body said it was surprising or shocking - those are your words not mine.

I'm not at all surprised by it.

I'm actually a little surprised that you are pretending on the one hand that "It's all just normal business" while on the other hand pretending that there really is nothing to the connection at all

2 completely contradictory arguments being put forward by you in an attempt to downplay the obvious once-secret YUKOS connection between Kordorkovsky and Rothschild

Posted by: Priceless | Jul 29 2014 23:26 utc | 141

So Kiev has violated the UN resolution and the 40km zone Poroshenko promised. It's been reported on Ria Novosti that Donbass militias believe the OSCE is complicit -- the OSCE has been using their presence to shield the regime's forces from attack, all the while claiming they can't get to the crash site because of fighting. Thus, Kiev has pushed well within a 20km radius - declaring a new "cease-fire" which will allow Kiev to regroup and resupply their forces.

Any thoughts?

Posted by: Far North | Jul 30 2014 8:11 utc | 142

It's all unfolding like a knock-off Costa Gravas movie, specifically Z ... but without the subtlety or the noble truth-seekers ... it's part of today's "pragmatism" that everything is shamessly and overtly used to political ends. No one appears willing to stand up and venture even words of protest. Another victory for the "war on terrorism" in affirming the power of the state to break the law, break the rules, break the understanding when dealing with "dissidents" -- shades of Goldwater's "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" or as GW Bush said, reportedly though hard to verify, "I don't give a god damn, I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way. Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a god damn piece of paper!" ...

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jul 30 2014 12:48 utc | 143

News action on sanctions - Russia closes boarder for Polish fruit and vegetables. Turkey jumps in and offers to deliver instead, as they are not participating in the sanctions.

According to Der Spiegel Iraq is buy wapons from Russia worth 750 million euros. This won't make the USmic happy.

Posted by: Fran | Jul 30 2014 14:36 utc | 144

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.