|
Video thanks to DONI News
Vince Dhimos Yesterday I sent out a reminder of who actually rules the US (call it the Deep State, the Shadow Government, Corporate America, the Establishment, or whatever). I have seen one or two of the listed groups blamed for the mess the US and hence the world is in, but never a complete list. So I compiled one. Did I miss anything? Let me know. One of the groups on my list was think tanks, and I mentioned the Atlantic Council, the mouthpiece of the unindicted mafia NATO as an example. I was reminded of NATO recently when South Front, the indispensable news source for world conflicts, suggested that the UN had just passed a resolution demanding that Russia leave Crimea and with a little digging, I discovered the possible source of this demand, namely, an Atlantic Council propaganda hit piece by red-eyed Neocon Roman Sohn, making the exact same demand, addressed to Donald Trump. (BTW, I did a search with the search term get tough on Russia and found, unsurprisingly, that no one on either side of the proverbial aisle was suggesting an actual shooting war with Russia (they’ve figured out this would put paid to planet earth)). Sohn writes: “In September, the United States should propose a UN resolution demanding the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Russian forces from all of Ukraine’s territory, including Crimea. The obvious obstacle is that as a permanent member, Russia will undoubtedly veto such a resolution in the UN Security Council. But there is a way around this problem.” Further “Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine as well as the act of international terrorism by shooting down flight MH17 in 2014 should provide enough cause [there was no proof that Russia was involved and no plausible motive given]. The United States should lead on this issue. If there is UNGA backing for a tougher position on Russia, a very restrictive global sanctions regime will become just a step away. Once in place, Russia will face truly damaging costs for its aggression that could finally reverse Kremlin’s behaviour, if not by external international pressure, then by internal pressure from within Russia. [my highlighting] No sooner said than done. The administration of the president who was elected by the people to maintain world peace, was overridden by an unelected think tank that essentially forced him to introduce a provocative UN resolution that was then passed by a majority thanks to US pressure on its partners (“you’re either for us or against us,” as GW Bush famously said. Otherwise, we have arms to use against you including sanctions and regime change tools). The UN resolution states, among other things, on the official UN web site: “Resolution A/73/L.47 of 17 December 2018 The General Assembly today adopted a resolution urging the Russian Federation to withdraw its military forces from Crimea and end its temporary occupation of Ukraine’s territory without delay...” The list of demands includes the text: 2. Demands that Russia unconditionally ceases all forms of aggression, immediately withdraws all of its forces from Ukraine's territory, ends its occupation, and rescinds the annexation of Crimea. Now before I go on, there may be confused readers who see nothing wrong with any of this heavy-handed approach to a fellow nuclear power, who may see itself cornered and feel the need to threaten a military response. So let’s analyse this. Normally, before punitive or coercive action is taken against anyone in any court of law, including international arbiters like the UN General Assembly, a hearing is held between the sides to hear all pertinent arguments and, having heard the arguments, the jury (in this case, the UN signatory countries), will deliberate among themselves in debate, raising various arguments pro and con. However, this draught resolution was sprung on the world unexpectedly before Russia and its supporters could prepare a defence in the court of public opinion. In fact, the draught resolution, almost as proposed verbatim by the fanatical Neocon Roman Sohn of Atlantic Council – the mouthpiece of the infamous criminal organization NATO that killed between 1 and 5 thousand innocent civilians from the air in Serbia in 1999 and perpetrated an illegal bombing of Libya that led to the murder of sovereign head of state Muammar Ghadaffi in 2011, plunging the country into chaos and terror that persists today – was foisted upon a US administration, which in turn pressured other countries politically to introduce and pass it at the UNGA. Below is our translation from an article in TASS titled “The UN General Assembly approved a resolution on the Crimea, calling Russia an ‘occupying power.’" The first part covers mostly just the story of the UN resolution to force Russia to give up Crimea, as roughly outlined above. The last part is a rebuttal of the claims made by Kiev to promote the resolution. Comments by Vince Dhimos are in [square brackets]. BEGIN TRANSLATION Attempt to divert attention As stated by the deputy representative of the Russian Federation, the Ukrainian delegation, “by drawing a false picture of the situation in the Russian Crimea,” is trying to “divert attention from numerous systematic violations of human rights at home.” He pointed out reports of "torture, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, discrimination, political persecution, violation of freedom of expression," as well as impunity in burning dozens of Odessa residents alive in May 2014. [this refers to known human rights violations by the Kiev regime] As Zagainov noted, these assessments are confirmed in the reports of the UN mission on monitoring the situation in the field of human rights deployed in Ukraine. [It is interesting that if you do a search for ukraine violates human rights almost all of the returned titles refer instead to supposed violations of rights by the Russians, notably in Crimea. Violations by Ukraine are almost all either scrubbed from the web or never made it to the web in the West. It was not until I did the search in Russian that I found the information I was looking for.] According to him, the resolution approving Kiev’s actions in relation to the Crimea looks “frankly hypocritical,” especially given the blockade of the [Crimean] peninsula. He called Ukraine’s requirement to provide education in the Crimea in minority languages as “cynical mockery.” According to Zagainov, schools and classes with the Crimean Tatar and Ukrainian languages of instruction continue to function on the peninsula. “At the same time, a scandalous law was adopted in Ukraine in September, depriving hundreds of thousands of children of opportunities to receive education in their native language [Russian]. Examples of double standards and outright disinformation that the project abounds, and more examples could be listed,” the diplomat said. He stressed that the adoption of the resolution sends "a false signal to Kiev that, under the guise of his anti-Russian propaganda, he can continue the policy of discrimination and violations of human rights." Referendum Results After the coup d'état in Kiev in February 2014, the authorities of Crimea and Sevastopol decided to hold a referendum on reunification with Russia - more than 80% of eligible voters took part in the vote on March 16 of the same year. 96.7% and 95.6% of residents of the Crimea and Sevastopol respectively voted for reunification with the Russian Federation. On March 18, the Russian president signed an agreement on the accession of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol to the Russian Federation, and on March 21 the document was ratified by the Federal Assembly. Kiev refused to recognize Crimea as part of Russia. END TRANSLATION One key reason for this trumped up anti-Russia UN resolution is that the entire West is now forced to back Kiev’s false accusations of Russian “human rights violations” because the US, via institutions like USAID, the State Department – with Neocon Victoria Nuland as the official face of State admitting that the US had spent $5 billion promoting the Maidan coup – and a Soros foundation (not to mention various European leaders falsely promising Ukraine membership in the EU) – wholeheartedly backed the illegal and violent coup in Kiev that led to the eventual impoverishment and failure of Ukraine today. (President Poroshenko recently admitted his country is the poorest in Europe. Before the coup it had a significantly higher GDP, thanks to cooperation with Russia). Let me go a bit beyond the rebuttal by the Russian official. Russia says the referendum in Crimea that led to the peninsula’s accession to the RF was legal, and that is essentially so, although it would be safer to state that it was not illegal. There are several opinions on how and under what circumstances a people may separate from the political body to which it is attached. The strongest case is a colony, which has the best chances of being legally recognized as separate if it decides to leave the union by referendum. Crimea was not a colony at the time of the referendum and accession to the RF. However, a people that is mistreated also has a chance of legal separation. This is where a case can be made. At the time of the referendum, Ukraine had just introduced a new language law and Crimea, which was essentially a Russophone (Russian speaking) region, had a legitimate concern that its educational and other institutions would be forcefully modified so as to change the culture and language of the region. Another point that favours secession is when the region in question was once independent. In fact, at the time of the separation, Crimea was an autonomous republic and that gave it a higher degree of independence than other provinces. Thus the accession of Crimea to the RF had 3 points in its favour. (Sources on legal theory of secession are found here, here and here) As for the mistreatment and discrimination, it was already apparent in the Russophone parts of Ukraine that Russian speakers would be mistreated and subject to discrimination. Russian speakers had been burned alive in a crackdown in Odessa in 2014. The Ukraine military has shelled and still shells, residential areas in the separatist republics in Donbass (see viedo at top of first page). Further, there were, and still are, attempts to deny Russian speakers the use of their language in public. There is also a strong movement to break the ties of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine to Moscow. Some Orthodox churches in Western Ukraine have been vandalized, razed or burned. In Lvov, speaking Russian is a taboo that can, at least unofficially, trigger punishment. This is a phenomenon best described as Russophobia, a hatred and fear not of a political idea or movement but an irrational sentiment akin to racism – a phenomenon seen in the US as well, where a Russian girl, Maria Butina, now sits in solitary confinement for joining the NRA and advocating for gun rights. She has been accused of being a foreign agent just because she may have received funding from a Russian private company. This is crass hypocrisy because AIPAC, a foreign lobby that illegally refuses to register as such, receives millions from a foreign country, operates freely and in fact meddles openly in US presidential elections and even legislation, having had a major role in the last election and also lobbying for wars that do not concern the US public. There could be no better example of a double standard. Thus, while one could technically debate whether Crimea is legally a part of the RF, the bottom line is that the West’s refusal to recognize it as Russian is a result not of any sort of rational deliberation but an extension of US Russophobia, which is not a product of American grassroots thinking at all or of a real perception of any threat to the American public but a rigid political attitude foisted on Americans by a small coterie of activists with too much power and no legitimacy to represent the people. This is why I maintained in yesterday's analysis that there is nothing resembling a government of the people, by the people and for the people in the United States of America, and hence no legitimate government at this time. In fact, what most call the “US government” is in fact an occupying power, which does not name itself, though some call it the Deep State, the Shadow Government, Corporate America, the Establishment, the Elites, the Oligarchy, etc. It doesn’t matter what you call it, but you must stop calling it “the government” and stop thinking of it as legitimate. If you are an American, you do not help shape events or make and enforce laws or policies. This coterie of billionaires owns you and, to a great extent, your mind. By extension, virtually every other US-aligned country is also a vassal whose people have no real power of self-determination. The entire West is a captive and a slave. Finally, why is this UN resolution dangerous? Previously, sanctions on Russia had been unilateral and easy for countries other than the US to ignore. They could blame them on Trump. Now that is no longer the case. They will feel obliged to join the US in its anti-Russian sanctions. If these sanctions become enough of a burden for Russia, there may come a time when the RF begins to seriously ponder a military response. One thing is certain: Russia will not back down and pull out of Crimea. The US, the UN and the fools who voted for the resolution should have known that from the start. They played Russian roulette but they forgot something: Russia owns the gun. Relevant, on freedom, why you are not free, why there is no democracy Freedom is not at the pinnacle, it’s in the climb. The freedom candy is poison http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news--analysis/the-freedom-candy-is-poison How you can know the truth in 4 excruciatingly difficult steps http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/opinion/how-you-can-know-the-truth-in-4-excruciatingly-difficult-steps
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|
