|
New video evidence (below) has been added to the already-conclusive video evidence which shows that the U.S. Government was the controlling power behind the extremely violent and illegal 18-27 February 2014 Ukrainian coup, which overthrew the democratically elected and never legally removed-from-power Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.
This new evidence proves, even more than before (if that were even possible to do), that the current regime in Ukraine is definitely illegal - but that's not all.
Even after fake 'democratic' elections, it's the same illegal regime in Ukraine that the U.S. imposed at its February 2014 coup, because no nationwide vote has occurred in Ukraine throughout that country's expanse after the American coup.
It's still just a rump-Ukrainian Government, not one representing the residents either in Crimea or in Ukraine's far east (neither of which regions participated in Ukrainian elections after the coup) - and yet this illegal violent coup-imposed (below video) Ukrainian regime (and the U.S. that imposed it, and even the EU that sheepishly backed it) nonetheless demand (against all legalities) that this blatantly illegal U.S.-imposed Ukrainian Government must control those areas, which reject this nazi imposed Government - that the residents in the regions that had voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych don't have the right to self-determination, but must instead accept a coup that goes exactly against, and even has gone so far as to overthrow, the Government for which the residents in those regions had overwhelmingly voted.
This was a violent takeover of the Ukrainian Government, by profoundly racist anti-Russian nationalist Ukrainians (below video), who were in the pay of the U.S. Government.
And, it sparked such terror into the hearts of Russians and of Ukraine's minorities (who were especially large a proportion of the Crimean population), so that, first, Crimea broke away and declared its no longer being a part of Ukraine (it would return to Russia, of which it had been a part from 1783-1954, almost its entire modern existence).
Then, starting on May 9th of 2014, a Ukrainian civil war broke out when the U.S.-installed Government of Ukraine actually invaded the regions (other than Crimea) that rejected it; and the United States oversaw and sent even more mercenaries to this extremely bloody ethnic cleansing campaign to get rid of the residents in the specific region (called "Donbass" and shown in dark purple on this map) of Ukraine that had voted 90% for Yanukovych.
This was the first outright nazi action ever undertaken by any American President. Ever. That's how bad it is, as a historical precedent for this country.
It is being carried out by proud racist fascists (nazis), who are specifically admirers and followers of Adolf Hitler's Nazis, which were the first, the original, nazi political party, and which are the pattern for Obama's operatives in Ukraine - the perpetrators of this coup and its subsequent (also totally illegal) ethnic-cleansing campaign.
(For examples: all these firebombings that Obama's forces are doing to the residents in Donbass are against international law.)
These Ukrainian nazis even send their children to nazi schools (below video) where kids are trained to hate Russians.
Obama uses these people; he found this extermination of pro-Russians in Ukraine to be necessary; so as to get rid of the voters whose votes had made Yanukovych President.
In Donbass, 90% of the voters had voted for Yanukovych; so, this was the prime area to be ethnically cleansed (below video - and sometimes they're driven at night to the countryside and shot at the edge of a ditch).
If those voters were ever again allowed to vote in Ukraine, then a pro-Russian government could again be elected in Ukraine, and Obama's action in that country (his turning it rabidly anti-Russian in its policies) could thus turn out to have been a mere waste for him - just a temporary matter.
The strategy here is carefully thought-out, and this is also one reason why it has the support of almost every member of the U.S. House and Senate (even though 67% of the American public oppose it).
A similar strategy would be as if Obama were to firebomb and otherwise lay waste Utah because it had voted in the 2012 election 73% for Romney and only 25% for Obama, and so killing the residents there would increase the future chances of electing a Democratic President in the U.S.
But in Donbass, Yanukovych had actually won 90% of the vote, not a mere 73%.
Besides, nobody in the U.S. and its allies is even so much as criticizing Obama's exterminations of the residents in Donbass (the people that Obama's Ukrainian Government calls "terrorists" for simply living there), but instead Vladimir Putin is being criticized in the West for his "Russian aggression," because he helps those forlorn people defend themselves from the Obama team's firebombs, clusterbombs, bullets, and other killing-machines.
(And here's one of the Obama team's fire-bombings of the city of Donetsk just a few days ago.)
The nazi United States Government today is ideologically, by its nazi actions, at war against the democratic United States that, by its democratic actions, had fought and shed blood to defeat Hitler's Nazis in World War II.
(And - unlike the firebombing of Nazi Dresden in February 1945 - Donetsk and the Obama team's other Donbass targets are anti-nazi; the U.S. is this time the nazi invader, via its local Ukrainian surrogates. This is not to say that any firebombing should be allowed, but just to say that America has ideologically switched sides since then, which is atrocious.)
Of course, there have been nazis in America even before Hitler came to power in Germany; but they were not running the U.S. Government until now; and, now, for the first time ever, the U.S. has itself a nazi Government, which is backed up by nazi American think tanks and media, etc., the entire panoply of political horror.
The chief difference from Hitler's (other than that this nazi government hasn't yet gone as far toward its ultimate objectives as Hitler's did) is that this one hates and seeks to destroy mainly Russians, whereas Hitler's focused mainly against Jews.
However, this one seems to be just about as obsessive about eliminating Russians as Hitler's was about eliminating Jews. In fact, Obama's hatred of Russia explains not only his Ukrainian policy but also his Syrian policy.
Furthermore, Iran is also allied with Russia, and American policy there too might partly be a reflection of Obama's bigotry against Russia - it should instead be a reflection of strictly U.S.-Iranian issues.
Understanding Obama's foreign policies without recognizing his vicious (and until fairly recently, secret) anti-Russian obsession, which is proven by his actions (not his rhetoric, which is basically dishonest and should simply be ignored except as his PR) can't be done: it produces only misunderstanding (which is the real purpose behind most of his rhetoric).
So, this new item of evidence (below video), which was posted to youtube on 27 January 2015, shows a courageous member of the "Rada" or Ukraine's parliament, Oleg Tsarev, on 20 November 2013, and you can see the video's (broken) English translation transcript, by clicking there on "More."
This is a parliamentary speech, in which he says (and I've cleaned up the translation here, only to make it easier to understand):
Wikipedia's "Timeline of the Euromaidan" starts on 21 November 2013, the day after Tsarev's speech. It says there:
Of course, Yatsenyuk was the person who, in a 4 February 2014 phone-conversation (below video) between Victoria Nuland of Obama's State Department and Mr. Geoffrey R. Pyatt of her Kiev Embassy, she told Pyatt was to be selected by him, as the head of the coup-Government that would become installed during the coup, which extended from 18-27 February 2014.
(In other words: the coup started two weeks after that phone-conversation in which the new leader had already been selected.)
The CIA edits wikipedia articles, and so the title of the Wikipedia article on the coup is "2014 Ukrainian revolution," not "2014 Ukrainian coup." Also because of the CIA's editing, the date of Yatsenyuk's official appointment to head the Government is buried, instead of being featured in that article (as it should be). The day-by-day account given there starts on 18 February, and ends on 21 February.
Then comes: "Deal's Aftermath."
Then, after yet 9 more such sections, comes "Lustration," which mentions the new leader's appointment only in passing:
In other words: the appointment, and the official installation, of "Yats" to run the new Government, isn't even so much as mentioned in that article.
If one clicks there on "Yatsenyuk government," then one comes to an article that opens:
Nothing is said there about the new Government's domination by nazis (who were selected by Victoria Nuland's man "Yats").
The rest of the article is just as deceptive, in the standard way: by avoiding to state the things that are the most important to state in order for a reader to be able to understand or interpret the given matter accurately. In other words: It's written for deception.
The time when this speech was delivered by Tsarev is also extremely significant: The very next day, Yanukovych rejected the EU's deal.
On 21 November 2013, the reporter for Britain's Guardian headlined online, "Ukraine suspends talks on EU trade pact as Putin wins tug of war," and he reported that,
What Tsarev was saying on November 20th was that the U.S. had geared up long before that decision by Yanukovych, to overthrow him if he didn't cave to the pressures from the U.S. and its allies, and that the "Euromaidan" demonstrations which immediately thereafter became stage-setting for America's coup against him, were extremely well planned in advance, and constituted only the 'democratic' cover for the coup and would be nothing more than that - which turned out to be the case.
Oleg Tsarev, the man who warned parliament one day prior to the start of the Euromaidan demonstrations, was subsequently, in mid-May of 2014, phoned by the oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, a friend of the Obama White House, and he was told to leave Ukraine or else he would be killed because some unnamed individual(s) had placed a million-dollar price on his head.
Tsarev didn't comply. (His courage was remarkable: he had already survived a beating by a nazi crowd on 15 April 2014.
Speaking truth to power was his characteristic way.) Instead, Tsarev became elected to the parliament in one of the two breakaway new republics constituting Donbass.
On 19 December 2014, Tsarev wrote that the Ukrainian Government was failing miserably all Ukrainians, not only in the areas that had left Ukraine; and he also mentioned, in passing, that, in one of Kolomoysky's businesses, "Kolomoysky delivers cheesy vests for the price of gold chain mail."
Here's what that passing reference meant: On 11 August 2014, "Life News" in Russia had headlined, "Ukrainian Ministry of Defense spent $ 3.5 million on substandard body armor" and reported that, in a no-bid deal with Ukraine's army, the insider Kolomoysky had sold to the army substandard fake bulletproof vests, which they couldn't use, and which were moreover priced at twice the going rate for real bulletproof vests.
Kolomoysky then stole one of the Tsarev family's own businesses, but there was no legal recourse, because Kolomoysky had been appointed by Obama's people as the local governor in the region where that business happened to be located.
So: Obama is treated as if he is a respectable person, while Putin is treated as if he had been the aggressor in all this.
But there was once a time when the differences between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were ideological, and the U.S. was an authentic democratic nation, and the U.S.S.R. was an authentic communist dictatorship; and, in that time, and specifically back in 1962, it was the U.S.S.R. that was seeking to place nuclear missiles near to us (in Cuba), not like now, when the dictatorial U.S. is instead trying to place nuclear missiles near to democratic Russia (inside Ukraine).
Did America's major news media, back at that earlier time, think that what the U.S.S.R. was trying to do to us was tolerable, and should be permitted? Of course not!
So: why their double standard now? Or is today's U.S. instead a totally different country, an outright nazi one now, against Russia?
Even if Russia were a dictatorship (and it's probably less so than the U.S. now is), what America is trying to do to it is disgraceful. And what the U.S. Government is trying to do to the residents in Donbass is absolutely outrageous, and should be presented to the International Criminal Court for war-crimes trials.
(Maybe that's why the U.S. has refused to sign to the Court's jurisdiction; maybe G.W. Bush and Obama were intending to commit international war crimes.)
America (and its client Ukraine) is the aggressor; Russia (and its client Donbass) is doing what it needs to do in order to defend themselves from the U.S. and its allies: there are 27 of those other nations in the U.S.-run Russia-hating club; it's called NATO, and it needs to be disbanded immediately, because its constructive function ended when the Soviet Union did
And, afterwards, it's just nazi, and is a huge threat against the entire world.
This new evidence from Tsarev, piled on top of all the other evidence that already proved the assertion by the founder of the "private CIA" firm Stratfor, that the overthrow of Yanukovych was "the most blatant coup in history," simply cements the reality, that all of the sanctions against Russia, and all of the "me too" statements supporting Obama's coup and ethnic cleansing in Ukraine, by David Cameron, Stephen Harper, and Obama's other co-nazis, are abominations, which should be loudly condemned by all decent persons in all countries.
The aggressor here is Obama, not Putin; and NATO must end, now: all decent nations should quit it ASAP.
(War crimes trials against Obama and his agents should follow. After all: these people are bringing the world closer to a nuclear war than has been the case since 1962, and there is no decent reason for it.)
Here was Professor Francis Boyle, the most internationally prestigious authority on such matters, summing it all up:
It's still not too late for the condemnation by the entire decent world to come down upon the leading nazis and force them to stop, before they blow the entire habitable world up with their evil.
Never before in the history of the world have the proofs of perfidy come so voluminously and so much in current time, as has now happened here, in the Age of the Internet.
One doesn't have to wait for places like Auschwitz to open up to the world before the evil is laid bare for all to see: it already has been, well before things get that far.
Thus, what's desperately needed now is action: the condemnation, by the publics, in all countries, against those nazis.
The time for the collecting of evidence is already past. The evidence is already here. There are already international war crimes enough, and so no need exists for us to await the ultimate one - a totally unnecessary nuclear war - before finally acting.
To start with: the sanctions against Russia must end - immediately. They are crimes that can end fast. And they must, in order for the prosecutions against the perpetrators to start, and in order for this nazi cancer upon humanity to be removed before it's too late to be able to do that.
The patient might already be in the emergency room.
|
