Don’t Talk to Me About the Rule of Law. Ever Again.

Uncle Volodya says, "In the west, every rainbow ends at an empty pot of gold and the chalk outline of a dead leprechaun. "

Uncle Volodya says, “In the west, every rainbow ends at an empty pot of gold and the chalk outline of a dead leprechaun. “

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”


An interesting poll review came out last year in The Washington Post. It will surprise no one, I’m sure, to learn that confidence by the American people in their government is in, as the article puts it, “used-car salesman territory”. I’m sorry I can’t show you the original article, but its link results in a server error – this is a reprint, and you can’t actually see the chart they describe. But the statistics discussed are clear enough, and an impression that people have always sort of thought the government was comprised of liars and cheats would be exactly wrong. Back in the 1960’s, more than 70% of Americans thought the federal government could be trusted to do the right thing “just about always” or “most of the time”.

That social trend collapsed, likely as a result of the Vietnam War and Nixon’s resignation after Watergate, from 53% in 1972 to 36% in 1974.  In 2010 that figure was 19%, and I can’t think of a reason it would be higher today. Moreover, trust in government is globally at historic lows – public trust in government has fallen to 14% in Spain, 18% in Italy and 20% in France, and is below 50% in 22 of 27 countries surveyed.

Why is that, do you suppose? It wasn’t always that way, obviously. Once people trusted government, broadly, to do what was right. But people can hardly be bothered to turn out to vote any more. The World Policy Institute has a possible explanation: “Measuring a democracy solely by voter participation can be deceptive and yield false results. Low election turnouts can signal a lack of confidence in the electoral system—but may also signify apathy or satisfaction with the status quo. Meanwhile, strong voter turn out may hint at a vibrant democracy, but it could also indicate intense propaganda, authoritarian rule, and false reportsas seen in Turkmenistan, where voter turnout topped an unbelievable 96 percent for the 2012 presidential election.”

Show of hands, please – how many think low voter turnout in western democracies signals satisfaction with the status quo? Uh huh. That’s what I thought.

I have a counter-proposal. People no longer have any faith – any faith at all – that their government will do what is right because they have seen government, time and time again, act in its own interests or in support of allies who are blatantly engaged in wrongdoing. And because governments casually, on a daily basis, break the laws they themselves make, because they consider regulation to be for Joe Six-Pack, while elites are above the law and are moved by a higher level of play in the cut and thrust of global politics.

The law is the law, ladies and gentlemen. For everyone, exalted and humble, rich and poor, the wise and the blindingly stupid. Alternatively, as Bumble says in Oliver Twist, “The law is an ass – an idiot”. We can’t have it both ways. If the mighty are disposed to ignore or break the law at their pleasure, what compels us to obey it?

Let’s start out in the big leagues – International law. Der Spiegel reported that American former private security company Blackwater – now called Academi – has 400 mercenaries in Ukraine, fighting for Kiev and assisting the new Chocolate King with his “anti terrorist campaign”. Their source is the BND, the German Federal intelligence Service. Is the supplying of private paramilitary forces to foreign governments legal? It sure as hell isn’t. According to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, 4 December 1989;

Article 2: Any person who recruits, uses, finances or trains mercenaries, as defined in Article 1 of the present Convention, commits an offence for the purposes of the Convention.

Article 5:2: State Parties shall not recruit, use, finance or train mercenaries for the purpose of opposing the legitimate exercise of the inalienable right of peoples to self-determination, as recognized by international law, and shall take, in conformity with international law, the appropriate measures to prevent the recruitment, use, financing or training of mercenaries for that purpose.

The USA, loud and proud when it comes to long-winded statements about the value of the rule of law but coy when it comes to agreeing to be bound by laws which might restrict its effectiveness in meddling in coups and government overthrows and hobbies of that nature, is neither a signatory or state party to this protocol. But Ukraine is.

You would think international law was clear and straightforward and not riddled with loopholes, but in fact it contains any number of clauses and exceptions which would likely allow the USA to write off its mercenaries as “technical advisers” or something of that nature. When you write the laws, you customarily include escape clauses for yourself.

The complete and utter contempt of the west, at government level, for international law was on show when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry – looking increasingly like the vampire undead he actually is – announced during a House hearing in September last year that the Arab nations (Saudi Arabia and Qatar) had offered to pay the entire cost of a U.S. military strike on Syria. And he didn’t mention it in the context that they should be despised for offering to hire the world’s biggest mercenary state to do their dirty work, either: who can forget the embarrassment of his pleading to be allowed by the UN to whack Syria “just a little“? That haggling for an opportunity to open the door to mayhem and bloodlettting which would be subject to the usual mission creep into full-scale war was shared by his fellow war criminal, British Foreign Secretary William Hague.

Nor should the UN be regarded as an observer of international law – my, no. Anyone who thought it would be a gentler and kinder world if run by Venus rather than Mars should inform themselves by some practical examples, such as that of the UN Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, who said in a recent report that “armed groups in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk should stop taking themselves, and the people living in their regions, down this dead end, which is leading simply to misery, destruction, displacement and economic deprivation”, and “The time has come to put down the guns and talk. Peace and reconciliation, and long-term solutions are certainly attainable.”  When Yanukovch was still in power, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security, Baroness Ashton of Upholland, squealed angrily at Kiev to “show utmost restraint” when police raided opposition offices looking for evidence to support a criminal investigation. “These latest events seriously risk to derail the process. I call on the Ukrainian authorities to exercise utmost restraint and refrain from any further use of force, in order to give space for a negotiated solution out of the current political stalemate” , she cried. “Restraint” and “use of force”, however, meant quite a different thing and it was fuck the negotiated solution, as they say in the EU, when Lady Ashton praised the new Kiev coup government for its “remarkable restraint” and “right to defend its territorial integrity” – as the Grads and BTR’s rolled eastward on a punishment mission against Ukrainian citizens who were labeled “terrorists” despite having not threatened Kiev or any other regions at all, only refused to obey. When a Sukhoi SU-25 ground-attack fighter of the Ukrainian Air Force shot up downtown Luhansk with rockets and 30mm cannon, both weapons which are forbidden by international law in attacks where civilians are present because they are unguided and indiscriminate, Kiev denied any part in the attack and the west let it. Despite both CNN and the OSCE agreeing the attack was carried out by a military aircraft, and only one side has military aircraft conducting operations in Ukraine.

But here’s what Lady Ashton said about the actions of the Syrian government, which evidently has no right at all to defend its territorial integrity; no, “Assad must step down, it’s time for him to go” said Ashton. Pillay was no more circumspect, reporting that an inquiry had produced “massive evidence” that “war crimes in Syria were authorized in Syria at the highest level“. None of this evidence ever got a public airing. Both these unlikely Valkyries for Justice rely for their casualty figures in Syria upon the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which – as I have pointed out so many times I am tired of pointing it out – is one anti-Assad partisan shopkeeper in England who operates out of his house while running a clothing business and who gets all his numbers over the telephone from activists in Syria; the one or two attempts to verify these numbers ended in complete failure. In Ukraine, nobody seems to be keeping a count of the casualties at all, and neither Washington nor Brussels has yet issued any sort of condemnation of civilian deaths. Nor has a UN condemnation of the Odessa massacre, in which somewhere between 50 and more than 100 unarmed pro-Russia demonstrators were lured and driven into the Trade Unions Building in Odessa and brutally murdered, after which the building was set on fire in hope the evidence would be destroyed, been forthcoming.

Western governments lean hard on international law when it suits their purposes, and ignore it when it does not. Since the nature of law compels that all who signify their willingness to be bound by it must obey it, there is apparently no reason for anyone to pay attention to international law, while the only law that applies on an international scale is the law of the jungle.

This was exemplified in the refusal of the western democracies to support a UN resolution condemning the attack in Ukraine on the Russian Embassy in Kiev, just as the west has swatted aside Russian proposals for a resolution to stop the violence against civilians in eastern Ukraine by suggesting Moscow can stop it anytime it likes, since it is Moscow who is causing it. As usual, there are claims of abundant evidence, but the little bits which have leaked agonizingly out have been swiftly exposed as poor fabrications, while U.S. Secretary of State Kerry begged incoming Ukrainian Chocolate Buddha Poroshenko for something, anything he could use to confront Russia. It is plain the west has nothing.

However, the UNSC was quick to condemn “in the strongest terms” the attack in 2011 on the U.S. Embassy in Damascus, although nobody was hurt. And the attack on the American consulate in Herat, Afghanistan, in which the UN announced angrily, “Council members also condemned acts of violence against diplomatic and consular representatives, which endanger or take innocent lives and seriously impede the normal work of such representatives and officials.” Unless those representatives and officials are Russians, apparently. The UNSC likewise had no problem condemning the attack against the British Embassy in Tehran, which “resulted in intrusions into the diplomatic and consular premises and caused serious damage.” Ambassador José Filipe Moraes Cabral of Portugal, who held the presidency at the time, read out an emotional statement which “recalled the fundamental principle of the inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises, and the obligations on host governments to take all appropriate steps to protect diplomatic and consular premises against any intrusion or damage, and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of these missions or impairment of their dignity.” Unless, of course….but why bother?

Nor is Ukraine any better on a national level. Use of the military against civilians is strictly forbidden in the Ukrainian Constitution of 2004, which was quickly re-adopted in 2014 to erase amendments Yanukovych had made to it in 2010. According to article 17, which says, in part;

The Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations shall not be used by anyone to restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens or with the intent to overthrow the constitutional order, subvert the bodies of power, or obstruct their activity.

It also specifically forbids the formation or use of privately-funded mercenary armies such as that raised and directed by Ukrainian oligarch Igor “Benny” Kilomoisky, to wit;

The creation and operation of any armed formations not envisaged by law are prohibited on the territory of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, the state has no higher responsibility than to the lives, well-being and dignity of its citizens, as detailed in Article 3;

The human being, his or her life and health, honor and dignity, inviolability and security are recognized in Ukraine as the highest social value.

Human rights and freedoms and their guarantees determine the essence and orientation of the activity of the State. The State is answerable to the individual for its activity. To affirm and ensure human rights and freedoms is the main duty of the State.

Is it permissible to legally exercise self-determination in Ukraine? Sure is: Article 5;

The people are the bearers of sovereignty and the only source of power in Ukraine. The people exercise power directly and through bodies of state power and bodies of local self-government.

The right to determine and change the constitutional order in Ukraine belongs exclusively to the people and shall not be usurped by the State, its bodies or officials.

All just high-minded horseshit, apparently, because all of it went straight out the window as soon as Turchynov got a big lip on because the easterners did not cheer his “victory”, and turned over to his fascist underlings the responsibility to bring them to heel. But what articles in the Ukrainian Constitution are the only ones the coup government’s western backers know? Article 2:

The sovereignty of Ukraine extends throughout its entire territory.

Ukraine is a unitary state.

The territory of Ukraine within its present border is indivisible and inviolable.

Meanwhile, here are some juicy soundbites from the west on the rule of law in Russia:

“But there is not enough law with a capital L in Russia. There is not, for the most part, a legal culture.” The Wilson Center, Professor Jeffrey D. Kahn. No “legal culture” like the culture that exists in the west, where international law is revered, he means. “One need only to look at the trials of dissidents, from Oligarchs and investors to punk rockers, political opponents and business challengers, to see the arbitrary and capricious use of the legal system in Russia by the political elite.Andrew Bowen, InterpreterMag. Arbitrary and capricious use of the legal system: that’s ringing a bell in my brain, but I can’t think what it means – oh, yes; let us whack Syria, a sovereign nation, and the Arabs will pay for it. “Whereas several trials and judicial proceedings over the last few years, such as the Magnitsky, Khodorkovsky and Politkovskaya cases, have cast doubt on the independence and impartiality of the judicial institutions of the Russian Federation; whereas the high profile cases cited above are merely just the most well-known cases outside Russia of what amounts to a systematic failure of the Russian state to uphold the rule of law and to deliver justice to its citizens“; The European Parliament. The same legal body which prohibited the use on restaurant tables of olive-oil jugs and dipping bowls, which – with the addition of balsamic vinegar, is the traditional way to enjoy bread Italian-style – despite not a single person in the EU dying from olive-oil-based disease while an  average 1000 die annually in the UK alone from falling down the stairs. Stand by for an upcoming EU Parliamentary ruling which will state all housing in the EU shall consist of single-level ranchers.

Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour … If at my convenience I might break them, what would be their worth?” So said Charlotte Brontë  in “Jane Eyre“. That low-pitched grinding noise is her, spinning in her grave.


This entry was posted in Corruption, Economy, Government, Law and Order, Military, Politics, Rule of Law, Russia, Terrorism, Ukraine, Western Europe and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1,047 Responses to Don’t Talk to Me About the Rule of Law. Ever Again.

  1. Warren says:

    Disenchanted With Home, Many Russians Seek New Life In Ukraine

    Why would a businessman, a scientist, and an IT developer pull up stakes in Russia and move to neighboring Ukraine? RFE/RL’s Russian Service spoke to professional Russians who say frustration with political repressions and a hostile business climate at home have sent them looking for better opportunities in a country they say is capable of real change.

    • Jen says:

      Because they’re the sort of people who, if they were living in the US, would have cashed in their jobs in academia, IT or commerce and gone to work for Goldman Sachs dreaming up financial models to bedazzle stockmarket investors, or selling packages of deadbeat mortgages to pension funds? To put it more succinctly, these guys think they can bleed money out of desert stones.

    • marknesop says:

      Excellent! I’m sure these Moskaly will be welcomed with open arms by their fascist Russia-hating neighbours. Or maybe Ukraine will pretend to love them as part of a PR campaign – see! Ukraine is the way of the future. I have no doubt these activists and dissidents will see “real change” in Ukraine, and although some of them say they know the next couple of years will be hard, I wonder if they have any concept of how hard they will be.

      I don’t think this handful of self-loathing liberals, who will probably pretend to be Ukrainian-born and quickly adopt Ukrainian so they can wash themselves clean of their Russian-ness, are much in the way of competition for the tens of thousands who have left Ukraine for Russia. But of course someone wants to step on that narrative right away, and provide an alternative so the Harf-Psaki Comedy Hour can offer “real evidence” that in fact the flow is the other way, and Russian refugees are flocking to Kiev’s promise.

      • kirill says:

        I would argue some of these “self-hating Russians” aren’t even ethnic Russians. May the door not hit them on the way out.

    • yalensis says:

      All these guys they interviewed are liberasts and white-ribbon dissidents. A fascist Banderite Ukraine is the perfect place for these types, who donned the white armband of the Galician politsai. The murderous pro-IMF Poroshenko government represents everything they attempted to achieve in Moscow, with their aborted colour revolution in 2012.

      Their political leader, Navalny, himself would most likely emigrate to Kiev, were he not under house arrest in Moscow.

      • yalensis says:

        Plus, what Jen said.
        They hope to make a pile of cash.

      • Warren says:

        “Russian” liberals should do themselves and everyone else a favour, and kill themselves as they hate being “Russian” so much.

        • kirill says:

          If they leave for their assorted promised lands that would be enough. No need to create yet another mess in Russia.

          BTW, Maidanut wannabe Navalny has Ukrainian roots. He should rediscover them and move to Kiev. Russia does not need Banderite vermin posing as Russians.

    • Southerncross says:

      Every time Australia gets a Tory government, certain leftish types curse the public and the nation and vow that they’ll move to New Zealand.

      Thank God they never do.

      Get over yourselves liberasts. You’re not going to move to Ukraine.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        Mention of migration between Australia and New Zealand always make me smile as it causes me to recall New Zealand Prime Minister Robert Muldoon’s comment as regards complaints about the number of Kiwis who had left for Australia because of economic recession in their home country: “New Zealanders who leave for Australia raise the IQ of both countries”.

        As a matter of fact, Muldoon took his quip directly from one allegedly uttered in the 1930s by the US wit, former cowboy, actor and social commentator, Oklohama born member of the Cherokee Nation Will Rogers, who said: “When the Okies left Oklahoma and moved to California, they raised the average intelligence level in both states”.

        Some, however, say it was Mark Twain that first said this.

        Two of Rogers’ aphorisms are as relevant to the present day USA as he thought they were when he first said them over 80 years ago:

        “Our foreign policy is an open book—a checkbook”;

        “Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘nice doggie’ until you can find a rock”.

        • Southerncross says:

          If you were to see what kind of people are moving from NZ to Aussie these days…..

          These emigrants may be raising the IQ of NZ, but they sure as Hell aren’t doing the same for Australia.

          • Moscow Exile says:

            That’s exactly the cynical point that Muldoon was making: the lowering of the number of dimwits in NZ accordingly raises the average level of the IQ nationally, whereas even the abysmally low national IQ of Australia enjoys an increase thanks to the immigration of New Zealanders, even though they are stupid, albeit that by any standards the Aussies generally remain stupid in comparison with the smarter Kiwis.

            I should make it clear that I do not agree with any of this: it’s just funny in its inverse complimentary type of way.

            Anyway, Aussie IQ enjoyed a quantum leap when my kinfolk emigrated there years ago.


            • Southerncross says:

              And it was an apposite observation when Muldoon made it.

              But nowadays… I’m not exaggerating when I say the that typical emigrant might as well be a Jersey Shore character.

              Not even your kin could balance that out. If you’re unconvinced, have a gander at this:


              • Moscow Exile says:

                Australia missed a great opportunity of improving its gene pool when I was refused immigration there because of – irony of ironies – my criminal record.

                If I had been sent down in 1835 instead if 1985, I should have been given free passage there – one-way, of course.


                • Southerncross says:

                  Australia or the gallows.

                  A sane man would choose the gallows.

                • marknesop says:

                  I was only in both places once, but I liked both very much. I was favorably impressed by both Auckland and Sidney as very clean cities for their size, and I did not notice any pervasive stupidity. But then, you know what they say – if you can’t spot the idiot, it’s you.

    • Fern says:

      One could challenge the use of the word ‘many’ here. Dictionaries define this along the lines of a large number/scores of/crowds of/hordes/a multitude/numberless/untold numbers etc. What they don’t define it as is 6 which is what we have hear – 6 blokes moving to Ukraine. Two are ‘civic activists’ so I’d guess they are on a western payroll somewhere or, at least, enthusiastic wannabes, another is a businessman impatient with bureaucracy, then we have a ‘social network creator’ who wants to blog (both he and the businessman seem to be associated with Russian political parties or factions), followed by a science guy who’s had a falling out with an academic body and finally a journalist who was already in Ukraine and doesn’t want to return to Russia now his paper’s closed. He’s probably hoping for a job at the Guardian.

  2. Al says:

    Did anyone read the actual URL to the Daily Mail article posted earlier juxtaposing Kiev’s attack in the East with what the Nazis did? Here’s the link again and read the URL itself carefully!

    American military advisers masterminding Ukraines surge against pro Russian seperatists bid expand NATO east.

    But none of what is in the link name is addressed in the article. Curious. I wonder if there was in fact another post exactly about US advisers but it was pulled and this new post simply used the old URL.

    • Al says:

      The Kiev post intro to this Daily Mail story runs with

      ” America is masterminding Ukraine’s military surge against pro-Russian separatists in a bid to expand Nato further east, it was today claimed. Military advisers have flooded into the country and are now embedded with Kyiv’s forces, according to one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top security experts.”

      Then here posted at the democratic underground gives more:

      “America is masterminding Ukraine’s military surge against pro-Russian separatists in a bid to expand Nato further east, it was today claimed.

      Military advisers have flooded into the country and are now embedded with Kiev’s forces, according to one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top security experts.

      They are reportedly attempting to crush insurgents in a game-changing move, which involves encouraging Ukraine to join Nato in a threat to Russian interests.

      ‘It is quite apparent that this is one of the goals,’ said Russian Deputy Security Council Secretary, Yevgeny Lukyanov.

      Speaking after a meeting with the Kremlin leader, Mr Lukyanov alleged that U.S. mercenary fighters are also on the ground in Ukraine.”

      Have I gone totally blind or are those five paragraphs missing from the Daily Mail piece?


      “America is masterminding Ukraine’s military surge against pro-Russian separatists
      in a bid to expand Nato further east, it was today claimed.

      Military advisers have flooded into the country and are now embedded with Kiev’s
      forces, according to one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top security experts.They
      are reportedly attempting to crush insurgents in a game-changing move, which involves encouraging Ukraine to join Nato in a threat to Russian interests.’It is quite apparent that this isone of the goals,’ said Russian Deputy Security Council Secretary, Yevgeny Lukyanov.

      Speaking after a meeting with the Kremlin leader, Mr Lukyanov alleged that U.S. mercenary fighters are also on the ground in Ukraine.

      ‘We could say without a doubt that we’re not just talking about American
      mercenaries, but also intensive activities on Ukrainian territory by
      so-called advisors from Washington,’ he said.’I am referring to U.S. specialists in the reconnaissance field and law enforcement bodies.'”

      It looks like the Daily Mail have changed it for sure. There’s nothing on the Internet Way Back Machine. Here again there is stuff not in the current article:

      Found it! Here’s the original. They’ve completely changed the bullet points!

      American military advisers ‘masterminding Ukraine’s surge against separatists’

      -“Advisers are embedded with Kiev’s forces, claims Moscow security expert
      -They are ‘masterminding Ukraine’s surge against pro-Russian separatists’
      -Also reportedly encouraging the country to join Nato in threat to Russia
      -Yevegeny Lukyanov made comments following meeting with Vladimir Putin
      -Today, Ukraine is continuing ‘massive artillery and air offensive’ on rebels
      -It comes amid unconfirmed claims of heavy casualties among insurgents

      America is masterminding Ukraine’s military surge against pro-Russian separatists in a bid to expand Nato further east, it was today claimed.

      Military advisers have flooded into the country and are now embedded with Kiev’s forces, according to one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top security experts.

      They are reportedly attempting to crush insurgents in a game-changing move, which involves encouraging Ukraine to join Nato in a threat to Russian interests.

      Claims: America is masterminding Ukraine’s military surge against pro-Russian separatists in a bid to expand Nato further east, Yevygeny Lukyvanov (left), one of Vladimir Putin’s (right) top security experts, claimed today

      ‘It is quite apparent that this is one of the goals,’ said Russian Deputy Security Council Secretary, Yevgeny Lukyanov.

      Speaking after a meeting with the Kremlin leader, Mr Lukyanov alleged that U.S. mercenary fighters are also on the ground in Ukraine.

      ‘We could say without a doubt that we’re not just talking about American mercenaries, but also intensive activities on Ukrainian territory by so-called advisors from Washington,’ he said.

      ‘I am referring to U.S. specialists in the reconnaissance field and law enforcement bodies.’

      Conflict: Military advisers have flooded into the country and are now embedded with Kiev’s forces, said the Russian Deputy Security Council Secretary. Above, a pro-Russian APC in Donetsk, eastern Ukraine, yesterday

      Victim: Yesterday, the streets on Donestk were deserted and gunfire filled the air as rebels besieged the Interior Ministry building. They left the dead body of an undercover police officer outside (pictured)

      Today, Ukraine is continuing its ‘massive artillery and air offensive’ against rebels in Donetsk and Lugansk regions amid unconfirmed claims of heavy casualties among insurgents.

      But separatists have already claimed to have shot down a Sukhoi Su-27 over Luganskaya village in Lugansk region.

      Yesterday, fighting resumed in the country after Kiev President Petro Poroshenko refused to extend a shaky ten-day ceasefire in the conflict with rebels, vowing: ‘We will attack’.

      At the same time, Putin claimed he could not dictate to the pro-Moscow insurgents to lay down their arms, with his spokesman declaring: ‘Russia’s influence on the militia should not be overestimated.’

      Devastated: A group of men grieve over the body of the policeman shot during the assault in Donetsk yesterday

      Shortly after Poroshenko ended the ceasefire, a five-hour gunbattle erupted in eastern Ukraine’s largest city, resulting in the Interior Ministry headquarters falling to pro-Russia separatists.

      The cease-fire had given European leaders 10 days to search for a peaceful settlement, and its end raised the prospect that fighting could flare with new intensity in a conflict that has already killed more than 400 people since April.

      In Donetsk, the capital of Ukraine’s eastern industrial heartland, streets were deserted and gunfire filled the air yesterday as rebels besieged the Interior Ministry building.

      The rebels eventually captured the compound, leaving the body of a undercover police officer on the street outside.

      Damage: A woman examines her house after shelling in the city of Slovyansk, Donetsk Region, on Monday

      Fire:L A fireman tries to extinguish a burning house after Slovyansk came under shelling from the government

      ‘I was driving and some people appeared with automatic weapons,’ a man named Vitaly, who said he was too fearful to give his last name, told the Associated Press.

      ‘They put me and my girlfriend on the ground and then they said: “Run away from here!”

      ‘I don’t know who is fighting whom. We are standing here. We are afraid and shaking.’

      It was not clear what prompted the rebel attack on the Interior Ministry headquarters, which houses regional police, who have peacefully coexisted with the rebels even though they still officially answer to the central government in Kiev.

      Announcement: Fighting has resumed in Ukraine after Kiev President Petro Poroshenko refused to extend a shaky ten-day ceasefire in the conflict with rebels, Above, Poroshenko ends the ceasefire yesterday

      Today, foreign ministers of France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine are set to meet in Berlin to continue searching for a settlement.

      In Brussels, the European Union’s 28 governments decided yesterday they were not ready to hit Russia with a new round of sanctions over Ukraine.

      They have put off a decision until Monday, according to an EU official.

      WTF is going on? Why did they change it? Is this an active intervention by the British government????

    • yalensis says:

      Dear Al:
      Yes, I did notice that discrepancy when I posted the link.
      At first I thought I might have posted the wrong link (my intention being to post the link to the Nazi comparison), as the title of the URL didn’t match the content. So I went back and double-checked, just to make sure I was posting the piece I intended.
      Curious, but probably not a great mystery, most likely a clerical error.
      I was just so thrilled to see an English tabloid posting an actual story about Ukraine, that I could forgive them a clerical error or two.

  3. yalensis says:

    Pavel Gubarev on 4 July makes a strong and very emotional video appeal to the Banderite enemy:

    :”I am addressing you subhumans, fascists and Banderites, murderers and butchers. You beasts, who are conducting open genocide against the Russian people…. using heavy artillery and aerial bombings… killing women, children, the elderly…. attempting to wipe off the face of the earth entire villages and towns… using casette bombs [image of guy holding up cassette bomb], chemical weapons against the peaceful population…
    Every one of you creatures will receive the punishment you deserve, for what you have done… the murder of children…(…) [images of people fleeing burning home]….[images of people fleeing, ,and more destruction]
    Thanks to your bombs, people have been literally torn into pieces… Yesterday a little girl was killed, only 5 years old… [image of men trying to bring hoses to put out fires]…[images of fire and smoke] [image of refugees cowering in cellars] — this is now 2 minutes in..
    “We see the systematic annihilation precisely of the peaceful population, based on their territorial and ethnic composition… This is genocide. We see the resurrection of fascism in the heart of Europe. [image of fascist thugs] [image of Azov battalion insignia with glaring black swastika in the middle] Europeans pretend not to notice what is going on, and we do not count on their integrity one bit. We don’t pay attention to their claims that they support human rights…. (etc.)
    [3 minutes in now] Leaders of Europe and USA are bloody hypocrites. No… we count only on our own forces. We are defending our own land, our own language, our culture, and our history.
    Our heroes – are Suvorov and Zhukov. NOT Bandera and Shukhevich. Our history is the history of magnificent accomplishments and great victories. [image of an older soldier poking inside a blown-up tank] …
    “In our veins flows the blood of our ancestors who were able to defeat each and every enemy on the field of battle, and defend their land. Now it is OUR turn to prove that we are worthy of our ancestors, who defeated the fascist vermin during Great Fatherland War.
    [at 4 minutes now] “…and once again these fascist cockroaches are coming at us [camera back on Gubarev] , but we know how to deal with them, these Ukrainian fascists, who have swarmed onto our soil, to kill Russian people. We will deal with them in the same way as did our grandfathers.
    We will destroy and burn their tanks and armour, their aviation, and their artillery. As we do on a daily basis. We are destroying these punitive brigades of Banderites, which the Kiev junta uses like cannon fodder. They chase you like sheep into the battle. Sometimes we even have the impression that in Kiev they are trying to get rid of inconvenient nationalists, by hurling you at us
    [at 5 minutes now] They did their business on the Maidan, replacing one clique of oligarchs with another. (….)
    “So I want to say to you Banderites: You are even stupider and dumber.than your predecessors. Your ideology, your followers… you always used others as tools to achieve your political goals. For example, the West. [repeats that they are being used like sheep, as cannon fodder].
    “My advice to you: Return to your homes, to your own cities. Overthrow the usurpers and oligarchs. Start to build the kind of society that you have dreamed about. You have everything you need to do that. The only thing you don’t have is a brain. [up to 6 minutes now]
    Here in Donbass, we already overthrow our own oligarchs. And now we are building a true democracy here. The kind you can only moo about on your Maidan. The type of revolution that you, Banderites, are pathologically incapable of pulling off. You are, and have always been, just tools in the hands of others, for their own goals….
    “In conclusion, stop poking your noses onto our land, our Novorossiya, our motherland.
    Bandeites: stop believing those politicians in Kiev. They are betraying you for their own crass purposes. They are tossing you like meat onto our weapons and our positions….
    [the rest of Pavel’s speech is just an uninteresting rant about SBU agents and provocateurs…]

  4. Moscow Exile says:

    Pardon me, sir, is that the Simferopol choo-choo?

    Direct train route Moskva-Simferopol starts this August:

    Поезд “Москва-Симферополь” запустят в августе

    Here’s the same story from

    «Прямые» поезда в Крым начнут курсировать в августе

    The picture in the above-linked article is of the main railway station at Rostov-on-Don. That’s the Don in the background.

    The train will go to Port Kavkaz via Rostov, thence by ferry to Kerch in the Crimea and then onwards to the province capital, Simferopol.

    The Russkaya Gazeta article states that this route was utilized in Soviet times but stopped during Gorbachev’s perestroika days, when trains were routed through the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic that some claim became a sovereign state in 1991.

    According to the Head of Crimea Railways, there have already been trial runs.The ferry can carry at least nine carriages with passengers. There will be railway carriages of all categories – deluxe, coupé (that’s a 4-berth compartment – deluxe is 2-berth with toilet and shower) and economy class. The price of tickets for a reserved seat will be about 2.8 thousand roubles, in a compartment – 5.2 thousand rubles. That’s for a journey of about 1,000 route miles: the direct way by road through the Ukraine is about 870 miles. (See route map)

    Alas, I am not going to the Crimea this summer: her indoors will have none of it. So tomorrow all 5 of us set off for Anapa again on a 36-hour train journey in two coupés. Oh what larks that will be: two nights on board with 3 kids!

    As a matter of fact, our route to Anapa is Moskva, Ryazan, Lipetsk, Voronezh, Rostov-on-Don and thence to Anapa.. That’s the same route as the new Moskva-Simferopol service as far as Rostov.

    The trains shown in the article above are state-of-the-art, brand-new, air-conditioned ones with vacuum operated toilets as on board an aeroplane. They are exactly as the ones we travelled on to Anapa from Moskva last year and back. They have the new Russian railways livery with the logo ржд (российская железная дорога – literally “Russian Iron Road” ) emblazoned on the rolling stock.

    Here’s a video of Anapa shot in 2013.

    As you can see: a typical 3rd-world Russian dump that all are very knowledgeable about in the West, to say nothing of the fact that the country in which Anapa is situated is a loathsome place ruled by a despicable tyrant and where all yearn for freedom.

    When there last year, we lived about 10 minutes walk from that lighthouse shown in the video, whence we gazed westwards every evening at the sun setting over the Black Sea horizon whilst we dreamed of liberty and democracy and of just doing one’s own thing in a truly free society …

    I think I’ll kill myself.

    • yalensis says:

      Great news about the choo-choo train, and also great excuse to post vid of my favorite (and cutest) person of all time, Ladies and Gentlemen, meet Miss Dorothy Dandridge!

      • yalensis says:

        Along with the famous tap-dancing Nicholas Brothers, it goes without saying…
        God, wouldn’t that be something, to board a train to Simferopol, and find them all on it, along with Glenn Miller and his band!

      • Moscow Exile says:

        About 30 years ago I bought a job lot army surplus spats dirt cheap in hopes of the day when they come back into fashion, as they most certainly will, and then I shall make a killing on my paltry investment.

        I’m still waiting.

        • Oddlots says:

          I will take a pair:

          • Moscow Exile says:

            You do realize that you wear spats over shoes or, preferably, ankle-boots, don’t you?

            Wearing them over sandles is pointless as spats (splatterdashes really) are intended to protect footwear, not sandalled feet.

            • marknesop says:

              And human hair is not normally purple or iridescent green. But anything goes in Pride parades, which though billed as a celebration of sexual freedom are designed to shock. Spats and sparkly slippers? Whyever not?

              I knew someone who once spray-painted the lower part of his legs and the tops of his feet black. But he was not gay; just desperate because he was on inspection parade and had forgotten to bring in any black socks. He hoped it would appear to the casual eye that he was wearing them, given that only a bit of ankle would be visible, and his ingenuity was rewarded.

        • marknesop says:

          Well, I was going to suggest you pitch them streetside in Kiev just in time for the Gay Pride Parade, where they would probably have been a hot seller. The gay folk are known to favour bright primary colours and incongruous combinations – for instance, I can see these spats featured with sparkly slippers and turquoise leotards. Just for Pride parades, though – I must say that outside of exhibitionist events, gay men typically display a fashion sense I can only dream of.

          Anyway, all elementary now: Klitschko ruined what might have been the moneymaker of the year. But if you sell out in a big way at some future Pride event, I hope you will remember it was my idea, and see me right.

  5. Was away for three days and it seems that the situation in eastern Ukraine is still the same. junta forces are gaining and the seps are losing ground. Three high commanders of the seps jumped to junta side. More civilians dying and fleeing to Russia. More infra destroyed. The Western MSM being completely silent about the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Russians in eastern Ukraine. And Russia still doing absolutely nothing to stop the genocide and ethnic cleansing.

    • What will happen to the popularity of Putin and his regime if Novorussia is destroyed and it’s population either killed or ethnically cleansed? How will the Russian public swallot it, knowing that Russia could have stopped all this by intervening at the beginning when the junta was still weak and disorganized? If Banderistan wins, is Putin done?

    • And another question: What will happen to CIS and Eurasian Union if Russia allows Banderistan to win?

      I see that Lukashenko kept a first ever public speech in Belorussian language just yesterday. Both Belarus and Kazakhstan have refused to put tariffs on Ukrainian products even after Ukraine lifted off duties for EU products.

      Russian Eurasian allies are smelling the Russian weakness and slowly starting to switch to the winning side (which is the West).

      • Moscow Exile says:

        Thanks for reminding us all of Russia’s deserved perdition and of its inevitable vanquishing by the ever victorious and truly righteous West.

      • marknesop says:

        More Russian failure. They might as well just surrender and ask the west for terms – perhaps they will be merciful.

        I’m keeping track of all this angst, Karl. Just so you know. If Russia is triumphant in the end, as I feel confident it will be, you are going to be sent to the grocery store wearing a speedo, flippers and a dive mask to buy a pound of oranges. In February. For your sins.

        Did you happen to notice the explanation? Kazakhstan is trying to join the WTO, and is most conscious of the fact that WTO member Ukraine could veto it. Quite apart from Lukashenko and Putin strongly disliking one another on a personal level – that’s how you know what kind of country you’re dealing with where Russia is concerned; if the west does not like a leader, it grows a dissident movement and has him overthrown – Belarus has a lengthy border with Ukraine. It would be practically impossible for Belarus to stop the ingress of Ukrainian goods even if Lukashenko were of a mind to do so, while the Belorussian economy would take an unnecessary hit. Both will change their minds if it begins to affect trade between themselves and Russia, although it will hopefully not come to that since it would open the Eurasian Union up to mockery for trade restrictions.

        Meanwhile, managing to cow Belarus and Kazakhstan is not a very significant accomplishment in real terms. Despite all the chatter about the EU being Ukraine’s biggest trading partner, that simply was not so in 2012 – pretty much the last year that can be considered “normal” for Ukraine’s relationship with the rest of the world, and if it is true in 2014, the reasons are both obvious and hardly cause for busting out the bubbly in celebration. In 2012, 32.4% of Ukraine’s imports came from Russia. Those will doubtless now be replaced with EU goods, and much good may it do them. However, only 6% of their imports came from Belarus, and even less – 1.8% – from Kazakhstan. The imbalance was nearly as lopsided in exports: Russia took 25.6% of Ukraine’s goods (compared with 24.9% sold to the EU), while trade with Belarus was only 3.3% and Kazakhstan only 3.6% of Ukrainian goods sold. Ukraine’s former trade with Russia was nearly four times as much as Ukraine’s trade with both other countries combined.

        However, Belarus does 47.5% of its trade with Russia, as compared with 29.1% for the EU, the next-closest. Kazakhstan runs a large trade surplus with the EU, selling more than 3 times as much to the EU as it buys from the EU. To whose advantage is that? Nearly all of what Kazakhstan sells to the EU is fuels. Would it be hard to sell fuels to someone else? Kazakhstan’s largest trading partner by far is the EU, and it does almost no trade with Russia. What is a mystery is what Kazakhstan is doing in the Eurasian Union.

      • patient observer says:

        The West actually “won” back in the 1990’s but those pesky Russians (you know, the genetically inferior mud people) had the audacity to fight back. So, in effect, the West retreated, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Now the West is on Plan B or is it C or maybe its Plan 9 from Outer Space?

  6. yalensis says:

    Note on above gay-parade comment:
    I was wrong, it turns out there WAS supposed to be a gay parade in Kiev, actually tomorrow (5 July).
    But then it got cancelled.
    Junta said this “wasn’t the right time”.

  7. yalensis says:

    Meanwhile, a document got leaked to the press. This is a genocide project worked out by Rand Corporation on behalf of the Kiev junta.

    Tallying up the pluses and minuses of a “crackdown”,, the plus side of the ledger includes the following bullet points:

    – Activists of a pro-Russian political movement get decimated, pro-Russian voters get disorganized.
    – Ukraine’s coal industry is destroyed. Rand considers this a plus, because they believe the coal industry is wasteful and subsidized.
    – Donbass industries get shut down, this is also considered a plus, because when the economy tanks, it brings gas consumption down.

    and so on, in this vein…

    • kirill says:

      Total bollox. Donetsk was the leading region for Ukrainian exports and not by some marginal percentage. Add to it Lugansk and Ukraine has taken a major hit in its export capacity. Last time I checked exports were considered a direct contribution to GDP. Imports consist of deductions and contributions depending on what type of imports (e.g. industrial machinery vs. disposable consumer junk).

      If this document is real, then it shows how demented and stupid US elites are.

    • ucgsblog says:

      If this document is real, then Western Ukraine is headed for an epic fail. Who writes this stuff? A bunch of second graders? The analysis is just atrocious. My eyes hurt. “If we piss off almost everyone in the DonBass and isolate the only Oligarch who can help us, we shall have great success!”

  8. Another Russian border post hit by Ukrainian military:

    • Apparently there were no casualties because Russia had evacuated it’s border posts (LOL) but the infrastructure was damaged. In all likelihood Russia will again say nothing and do nothing.

      • marknesop says:

        Obviously it is deliberate, since it never happened for months and months and now it happens on an almost daily basis. What could be the purpose of this? To continue upping the ante in an attempt to draw Russia into war? I would say that was the safe bet.

        I wish Ukraine would just throw caution to the winds and invade Russia. Then nothing of the Ukrainian army would remain. But its western advisers are careful and skilled. They coach Ukraine to keep up the provocations, even increase them, but not to go too far. This is also why the western media is blind and deaf to the Ukrainian army’s predations in the east – because if the west took notice, these provocations would have to stop before the ethnic cleansing of the east was complete. After it’s all over, there will likely be some shit thrown at the western media by the government, just to cover itself, and the media will accept a little shit just for form’s sake but will counter with all that blather about no independent verification of the reports, no reason to believe they were true, bla, bla.

  9. yalensis says:

    RT just did a piece on the Rand Corporation genocide plan for Donbass. RT is reputable, so they must have double-checked the story, before deciding it wasn’t a fake.

    Rand plan calls for, among other things, internment of all adult males (in this geographical region) aged 18-60. Only children under 13 and people older than 60 are considered safe enough to let them live outside of internment camps. They will be moved into specially equipped facilities that are considered “ideologically safe”, i.e., indoctrinated by the Nazi racist ideology.

    Document was leaked by an organization called Before it’s news .

    Will be interesting to follow this story tomorrow and see if Chocco denies this.
    (Also, if that American comedy duo “Jen and Marie” will deny it.)

    Actually, this is all starting to make sense now. When Chocco cancelled the truce, he started implementing this Rand blueprint for genocide. He has followed this plan pretty much to the letter, except for moving in infantry behind the armour. (Because the infantry don’t want to go in.)

    • If this is true and if it actually happens we can expect two things

      1. The Western MSM and politicians will ignore or downplay the ethnic cleansing. Any attempt for Russia to condemn the junta atrocities in the UN will be vetoed by the US, UK and France.

      2. Russia will not step in militarily because the Russian government cares more about the glow of gas and oil money and the oligarchs’ bank accounts than these people.

      As a result an ethnic cleansing (with concentration camps) will be carried out in the heart of Europe in 2014 with no official UN condemnation and with a minimal media coverage or a total media blackout. Russian media will be the only one covering it but it will be labeled as propaganda in the West. Nothing is really happening, all move along.

      With a decision not to intervene Putin will lose a big portion of his support and the Russian nationalists start to gain more support. As a result Putin will deal with the nationalists harshly and their leaders will be imprisoned, which will cause the nationalist movements to go underground and they start to plot a coup/revolution in Russia.

      They manage to persuade many army generals and high ranking officials on their side who were angered by Putin’s greed and cowardice when he willingly let the ethnic cleansing of Novorussia happen.

      Putin’s government manages to put down the coup (mainly because the Russian nationalists don’t have western support and a strong militant wing like the Ukrainian nationalists did before Maidan revolution), but the coup attempt weakens Putin further, because this was the first time when he had to use military force against Russian citizens (save Chechnya in 1999).

      • Southerncross says:

        Clearly significant change in Russian foreign policy is needed. American policy in eastern Europe is entirely militarised, whereas Russia pursues its aims chiefly through commerce and diplomacy. Maidan has made the limitations of this course brutally obvious. In November it seemed that Russia had won – conventional diplomacy and commercial reality had forced Yanuk’s government to follow the Russian vector.

        The Americans managed to turn this defeat into victory (possibly Pyrrhic – we shall see) by playing the military card. Whatever Russian diplomacy could accomplish, the ultra-nationalist paramilitaries could undo. The only thing that could have stopped Maidan was an opposing paramilitary force with stern political leadership behind it. The Oplot organisation was the closest thing there was. but Oplot was vastly inadequate both for Maidan and the onset of the Ukrainian military attack (evinced by the organisation’s expulsion from Kharkov).

        Russia’s basic mistake was doing what its enemies have always accused it of not doing – treating Ukraine as an independent country. In the immediate future, Ukraine must be treated as an enemy. Russia must abandon diplomacy and focus on developing loyal paramilitary assets on Ukrainian territory that will attack the Ukrainian state and destroy its ability to function at all levels – i.e., the courts do not function, the police do not leave their stations, no taxe are collected, the Kiev-loyal press are intimidated and unable to spread their propaganda. If anti-Russian nationalists are willing to take direct action against the Ukrainian state, Russia must not hesitate to aid them as well. Most of all, Russia must reject the idea the Ukraine has the right to an independent course. Enemies have no such rights. The only acceptable government is an entirely pro-Russian one – no more deals with shifty dimwits like Yanuk who promise their voters one thing and then do another.

        Putin is probably not the man to do this. He is a white rider who has gone about as high he can.

        • I partly agree but Russia has already lost the whole Ukraine. Galicia is hostile and can never be part of Russia in a peaceful way. Kiev is mostly hostile and is lost for Russia forever (which is sad because Kiev was the birthplace of the Russian nation).

          Russia could have still saved southeastern Ukraine (Donetsk, Lugansk, Kharkov, Odessa and maybe Dnepropetrovsk) if Russia had matched the West’s military plan for Ukraine but Russia chose not to do so. Russia would have had the resources to help southeastern Ukraine to victory over Kiev.

          I agree that Putin is not the man to do what you suggest. Putin is all economy, all oil&gas, all diplomacy type. What he did in Crimea was pretty impressive, but for whatever reason he has changed his course since the Geneva meeting. Maybe he was threatened or blackmailed, who knows. But the current Russian methods of foreign policy don’t work against the Western methods.

          • Southerncross says:

            No part of Ukraine is necessarily lost forever, but it would need vigorous, and above all, harsh leadership to bring them back to the fold. Glazyev, or Rogozin or some such person might have the nerve.

            I would doubt that Putin’s actions are down to blackmail or threats as such. More likely he has written off Ukraine as a lost cause, and unworthy of further attention now that the vital Crimea base is secured. Probably he judges that Russia will get the rest of what it needs from Ukraine in the form of refugees (including Antonov personnel). Aside from that Ukraine is to be left to rot while Russia pursues the Asian pivot.

            I can respect the reasoning, and maybe time will show him to have been the wiser, but instinct tells me that this is low and callous behaviour that Russia will regret later.

            • Russia will surely regret it later. It was first and foremost a moral defeat. Russia willingly let millions of Russian people lose a war that was fought against an inferior enemy (compared to Russia) just across the Russian border. I don’t see any other major power in the world let this happen if they were in Russia’s place. Russia’s declaration of protecting “compatriots” in it’s near abroad has now been proven to be nothing more than a bluff. Baltic nations are free to repress their their ethnic minorities even further now. There is nothing to fear.

              This was also a geopolitical defeat. What image have the events in Ukraine given about Russia to the rest of the world? I have one word: weak. Russian border posts are shelled almost daily with no Russian response. Russia is taking tens of thousands of refugees in without even trying to stop the refugee flow by giving them military support. Nobody wants to be friends or allies with a weak.

              By showing that Russia is unable or unwilling to stop Maidan-type violent revolutions in it’s near abroad Russia further encourages the West and western-backed movements in other FSU countries and maybe even Russia itself. The next target will be either Belarus or Kazakhstan. Maidan will be harder to do in those two countries than in Ukraine because they don’t have thousands of crazy militarized Russia-hating nationalists, but I’m sure the Western NGOs are working overtime in these countries like they did in Ukraine before.

              • Moscow Exile says:

                “It was first and foremost a moral defeat.”

                What has morality to do with it?

                • Morality has a lot to do with it if you let a bunch of Nazis win a war against your own people (not citizens, but people) if you could defeat them if you wanted to.

                • marknesop says:

                  “Morality has a lot to do with it if you let a bunch of Nazis win a war against your own people (not citizens, but people) if you could defeat them if you wanted to.”

                  I’m having a hard time reconciling this statement with your open admiration for the west’s strength and power, given the fact the USA was a covert supporter of the Nazis even while it was officially fighting them and is an open supporter of fascism now.

                • Moscow Exile says:

                  I should have imagined that practicalities override moral questions when determining whether a state should wage war against another.

                  Das heißt “Realpolitik” auf deutsch.

            • marknesop says:

              Oddly enough, the west is touted for its energy and dynamism although it betrays allies time after time – where’s the judgment? Russia owes Ukraine nothing solely because some of its people speak Russian. Perhaps Russia has a moral imperative to act, but the west has misused the moral imperative again and again with complete impunity, and there’s still no shortage of believers that it is a beacon of freedom and democracy. Why is Russia finished if it does not sacrifice itself on the altar of eastern Ukraine, invoking the land battle the west hungers for? Does anyone imagine, after the bellicose rhetoric on show when Russia wasn’t even doing anything but was being blamed for every problem in Ukraine, that the first tanks across the border would not invoke a scream of anguish and finger-pointing and see-it’s-just-like-we-said? It is too much to think there would be no reaction beyond screaming and wailing.

          • Moscow Exile says:

            Galicia only became part of the USSR in 1939, as did Transcarpathia and those territories (formerly known as Bessarabia) that Moldova and the Transdniester Republic now form part of.

            The Crimea, as did the whole of the former Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic seaboard, including the founded by Tsaritsa Catherine II city of Odessa, became part of the Russian Empire in 1783 and then of the Soviet Union until 1991, when the so-called state of the Ukraine claimed the Crimea as its own after the gorvernance of that peninsula had been transferred in 1954 from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to the UkSSR – but it ain’t part of the Ukraine no more nor ever will be!

            The Russian Black Sea Fleet base is in the Crimea, at Sevastopol, not in the Donetsk, Lugansk or Kharkov provinces of Eastern Ukraine, nor is it at Odessa.

            So what has Russia “lost” exactly?

            How can Russia have “lost” territory that has been independent of it for the past 23 years?

            What has Russia gained?

            Something that Russia never really “lost” in the first place – the Crimea, which was re-united with Russia in 2014; at the point of a Kalashnikov, as the lying scum in the West says.

    • marknesop says:

      I imagine they will want to re-think (maybe that’s what RT stands for) their stance on supporting this ridiculous piece of nonsense. At least until they establish a bit more credible source than this, because Before It’s News is little better than the Weekly World News or the National Enquirer, with their stories like “Bat-Boy Leads Cops on 3-State Chase“. You probably don’t think that is a serious news story. Millions and millions would agree. Look at some of the other hard-hitting pieces from “Before It’s News” – hmmm…. “Joan Rivers makes Bombshell Claim that Barack is Gay and Michelle Obama a Transvestite”. You think? How about, “Newly-Spotted Frozen World Orbits In A Binary Star System”? Come on – Before It’s News has that one, but nobody from the grownup press thinks it’s an important story? These people have been eating paint chips.

      • kirill says:

        I don’t know. What is effective in a propaganda war? Academic adherence to truth or the seizing of opportunities to plant doubt and false narratives in people’s heads. The western media clearly applies the latter methodology. Russia cannot fight the propaganda war with verified facts. It has to fight it with impressions and this piece of crap does the job. The truth is for nerds.

        • marknesop says:

          Russia cannot fight a propaganda war with information published in sources that make everyone in the west laugh. It’s tempting to believe Before It’s News because they supply fantastic information that nobody else seems to get, but they also apparently believe Michelle Obama is a transvestite. I don’t know about you, but that sort of causes me to question their judgement a little. Considering she must have decided to go girly back in 1978 even though she was really a boy, and managed to successfully conceal it from the whole world since that time, until those wily ferrets at Before It’s News outed her. Come on. Of course proof the west is steering the whole destabilization-of-Ukraine thing would be great to have, although I don’t think anyone here really doubts that. But it’s not so tempting for me that I’m going to believe something fronted by a bunch of delusional flat-earthers.

        • yalensis says:

          If I could insert my two kopecks here…
          Lying is almost always wrong.

          Even in big propaganda war, I think the “good guys” have to report strictly only verified facts, or at least adhere to “journalistic” standards as much as possible, even if they are not journalists. If they report something they are not 100% sure about, they can add a disclaimer.
          I don’t think lying is ever acceptable. (with only very rare exceptions, like military disinformation, some deception is okay on the battlefield).

          One of the reasons I respect Colonel Igor Strelkov is because he has unvariably (as far as I can tell) been truthful. He tells it like it is. Everyone can trust him as a source, which is why I have no compunction from translating, or quoting from, his daily briefings.

          Igor is like a male version of Victor Hugo’s Sister Simplice. He is incapable of lying, even when it might suit his purposes to do so.
          This is why he has become a national hero to the Russian people.

      • yalensis says:

        Well, who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?
        Here is actual video of Joan Rivers calling Michelle Obama a tranny:

        • yalensis says:

          P.S. – take into account that “Before it’s News” reported that Joan CALLED Michelle a tranny; not that Michelle actually IS a tranny. Hence, I don’t see any lying here.
          Although I will have to check out the story about the frozen star.., not so sure about that one…

          • marknesop says:

            I am not disputing that she said it. Joan Rivers is a nut who has spent her entire life on talk shows. She will say anything to stimulate controversy and gain viewers. The gay community reported it as Rivers’ “testing out new joke material”. The press which considers itself “serious” did not report it at all.

            I am saying I do not believe this “memo” originated with the Rand Group – nutty as they are – or that it represents an actual American plan for the east of Ukraine. I believe RT has fallen for a provocation designed to undermine its credibility, as it is gaining readership and viewers.

        • Moscow Exile says:

          Oh my gosh!

          Another bloody Lady Ashton!


          • yalensis says:

            P.S. – if it turns out that Michelle Obama IS a transgender, then that doc did a heck of a job on her. Much as I despise Berserk O’Bomber, I have to admit that he has a hot wife .
            To be sure, she grows less attractive as she ages, but that is unfortunately true with everybody. And to her credit, she takes care of herself and stays in shape.

            And P.P.S., some of the photos show her as a little girl, so they would have had to operate on her when she was very young.
            And P.P.P.S. if she was a tranny, she wouldn’t have been able to bear children. Modern medicine can create a fake vagina, but is not capable of creating an artificial womb. You can tell that Michelle is the biological mother, too, because the younger child looks exactly like her. (whereas the older one looks more like Barack.)

  10. kirill says:

    The murder of three police officers in Donetsk is being blamed on the rebels by the usual NATO drones in the Ukraine thread at militaryphotos. Just how retarded are NATO drones? What possible motive could the rebels have in killing *some* police out doing their jobs. If they were going to purge Kiev loyalists they would have done so weeks ago. It seems like the typical NATO booster apologist does not actually apply logic and just twists facts into some ridiculous and totally inconsistent theory of reality. These drones probably think that two shots to the back of the head can happen in suicide cases. It’s pure magical thinking.

  11. ucgsblog says:

    Putin better watch out, because according to the New York Times, a Chinese invasion of Siberia is just a matter of time:

    “‘A land without people for a people without land.’ At the turn of the 20th century, that slogan promoted Jewish migration to Palestine. It could be recycled today, justifying a Chinese takeover of Siberia. Of course, Russia’s Asian hinterland isn’t really empty (and neither was Palestine). But Siberia is as resource-rich and people-poor as China is the opposite. The weight of that logic scares the Kremlin.”

    Can’t you see it guys? Putin’s terrified! Siberia’s actually the place where Nazis executed Chinese, who lived in Siberia a millennia before, only to be led by Moses-san to modern day China after facing persecution from the Goa’uld, who also have a couple of Pyramids in Siberia.

    “Moscow recently restored the Imperial Arch in the Far Eastern frontier town of Blagoveshchensk, declaring: “The earth along the Amur was, is and always will be Russian.” But Russia’s title to all of the land is only about 150 years old. And the sprawl of highrises in Heihe, the Chinese boomtown on the south bank of the Amur, right across from Blagoveshchensk, casts doubt on the “always will be” part of the old czarist slogan.”

    Damn, Russian title to the land is “only” 150 years old. Of course America’s title to California is less than 170 years, and it’s totally valid. But you see, 150 just doesn’t have the “it” required. 170 totally does! China better hurry up, they only have 20 years until the Russian title on Siberia is “old enough”. Also, are people in Imperial Beach doubtful that it’ll be a part of California, with Tijuana casting a shade over it? Just asking!

    “Siberia – the Asian part of Russia, east of the Ural Mountains – is immense. It takes up three-quarters of Russia’s land mass, the equivalent of the entire U.S. and India put together. It’s hard to imagine such a vast area changing hands. But like love, a border is real only if both sides believe in it. And on both sides of the Sino-Russian border, that belief is wavering.”

    Yep, borders are like love. Crimea no love Ukraine anymore. Although I don’t see how that love’s wavering, considering that Russia and China signed a border treaty, setting the border between them in the proverbial stone. Oh, I get it! You see, once a border, like love, is set in stone, then… I’m sure there’s an analogy between borders and love floating somewhere.

    “The border, all 2,738 miles of it, is the legacy of the Convention of Peking of 1860 and other unequal pacts between a strong, expanding Russia and a weakened China after the Second Opium War. (Other European powers similarly encroached upon China, but from the south. Hence the former British foothold in Hong Kong, for example.)”

    Actually the border issue started with the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689, and ended in 2008. During said time, both Russia and China were fairly equal. They also faced the Mongols together, and Nazis/Imperials in WWII, and… but that link’s for only people who like facts. If you think that borders are like love, that link ain’t for you. Seriously, borders and love? Who makes those comparisons?!

    “The 1.35 billion Chinese people south of the border outnumber Russia’s 144 million almost 10 to 1. The discrepancy is even starker for Siberia on its own, home to barely 38 million people, and especially the border area, where only 6 million Russians face over 90 million Chinese. With intermarriage, trade and investment across that border, Siberians have realized that, for better or for worse, Beijing is a lot closer than Moscow.”

    First, the numbers don’t particularly matter. There are more Americans than Mexicans, and yet, immigration’s kind of a one way street. Second, apparently we’re supposed to worry about intermarriage, so let’s take Krasnoyarsk, a Siberian city. It’s 92% Russian, 2% other Europeans, 2% Caucasians, 2% Asians and 2% others. But you better watch out for those intermarriages! And yes, Krasnoyarsk is closer to Beijing than Moscow, provided that you get on a horse and cross the Central Asian steppes. Should you opt to travel by train, it’s just easier to get to Moscow.

    “The vast expanses of Siberia would provide not just room for China’s huddled masses, now squeezed into the coastal half of their country by the mountains and deserts of western China. The land is already providing China, “the factory of the world,” with much of its raw materials, especially oil, gas and timber. Increasingly, Chinese-owned factories in Siberia churn out finished goods, as if the region already were a part of the Middle Kingdom’s economy.”

    Yep, China now totally runs Siberia! Let’s take Khabarovsk Krai, where China controls all 4% of foreign investment. Russia better watch out, China might grave 0.5% of the economy of Khabarovsk Krai! It’s practically China!

    “One day, China might want the globe to match the reality. In fact, Beijing could use Russia’s own strategy: hand out passports to sympathizers in contested areas, then move in militarily to “protect its citizens.” The Kremlin has tried that in Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and most recently the Crimea, all formally part of other post-Soviet states, but controlled by Moscow. And if Beijing chose to take Siberia by force, the only way Moscow could stop would be using nuclear weapons.”

    Yeah, China’s gotta hand out passports to sympathizers, (which don’t exist,) and then move in the military to protect the nonexistent sympathizers! It totally worked for the US in Grenada! Although here China might run into several problems, considering that Russia’s a wee bit bigger. Just a tad. I could also point out that in each region listed, (except Abkhazia,) at least 3/4ths of the population want union with Russia, and the Abkhaz want independence. Also, considering the nature of the border and the ability of Russian missiles, most notably the Iskanders, how exactly is China going to mass and maintain logistics for their forces? Siberia isn’t exactly tank country; it has those things called mountains.

    “There is another path: Under Vladimir Putin, Russia is increasingly looking east for its future – building a Eurasian Union even wider than the one inaugurated recently in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, a staunch Moscow ally. Perhaps two existing blocs – the Eurasian one encompassing Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – could unite China, Russia and most of the ‘stans. Putin’s critics fear that this economic integration would reduce Russia, especially Siberia, to a raw materials exporter beholden to Greater China. And as the Chinese learned from the humiliation of 1860, facts on the ground can become lines on the map.”

    Facts on the ground cannot become lines on a map, since they already are lines. On a de facto map. Also, the SCO is the Eurasian Bloc plus China. Furthermore, the raw resources of Siberia are going to be used for the benefit of Siberians. And China’s ok with that, since they’d rather have a peaceful border and the ability to improve their economy even more. The real lessons of the 1860s is that empires crumble, but quality investment in the land stays.

    Also on the subject:

    • Fern says:

      There are some very good comments on this NYT article challenging the history supplied by the author of this piece, including one asking the key question – “whose interests benefit from trying to fuel paranoia between Russia and China?’. Gimme a “U’, gimme an ‘S’, gimme an “A”.

    • Southerncross says:

      East European Russophobes always expect foreigners to solve their problems for them. The Americans, the Chinese – never a thought that maybe other people aren’t in hurry to throw away their money or their lives just to cure Poland’s chronic case of national penis-envy.

      China has no huddled masses yearning for land. Here’s why:

      Population growth: 0.47% – the 159th highest in the world.

      Overall TFR: As of 2010, 1.18, with 0.88 in the cities – which by the way, more and more of the population resides in.

      And, by 2020, 11.8% of the population will be over the age of 65.

      Uncle Satan should be more worried about the American South-West.

    • marknesop says:

      The west is boringly predictable, and when it finds a formula that yields success it does everything the same way – like colour revolutions – until it doesn’t work a couple of times in a row. It has had pretty good success at making Ukraine and Russia enemies where they were once pretty cordial allies, and Russia and Ukraine certainly got along better than Russia and China have. There’s nothing but potential gain for the west in trying the same trick with Russia and China, and where an alliance offers the potential for reliable energy supplies, the U.S. is posing the question of what might the situation be like if China simply took it?

      Neither China or Russia is likely to be fooled by this, and it is not likely to have any effect. China is nothing if not a careful planner, and it is likely to have examined the possibility of seizing Russian resources for itself long before now, as well as the question of a Sino-American alliance, and not liked the numbers in either of these alternatives. Recommended reading in this subject also is Anatoly Karlin’s “Why Russia and China Won’t Fight“, from way back in 2010.

      • yalensis says:

        The West reminds me of a psycho boss I once had (was forced to endure).

        This guy got his rocks off by pitting his underlings against each other: Turning friends into enemies, etc. He did this through a combination of (temporary) favoritism, using office spies, power plays, and also employing an “office wife” to spread gossip about people behind their back.
        It was very effective: in the end, nobody trusted anyone, everybody hated everybody, the whole team became completely dysfunctional because people would rather root for others’ failures than try to achieve something themselves; hence, nothing ever got done, and some very talented brains were completed wasted with this intrigue and B.S.

        In concusion, this is exactly what America does, on the world stage. Instead of being true leaders, they just poison everything they touch.

    • Jen says:

      The NYT article may be aimed at a bourgeois Chinese audience alienated by the Chinese government in some way whom the US might hope to cultivate as a liberal opposition in the same way it tries to cultivate a liberal opposition in Russia with Alexei Navalny as its leader.

  12. cartman says:

    How Bulgaria’s Bank Run Affects Ukraine’s European Dream

    “About 40 percent of Bulgarians support their country’s membership in the EU, according to an opinion poll conducted by Alpha Research agency in Sofia on April 23-26 among 1,024 people. That’s down from as much as 70 percent when Bulgaria first entered.”

    There is so much pro-EU propaganda in the Ukraine that have give people such wild expectations that will never be filled. The same with pro-NATO propaganda. There is no anti-NATO propaganda and no discussion on the negative sides of either.

  13. Moscow Exile says:

    Poroshenko mouthing his orders from on high via the US Embassy, Kiev:

    Порошенко: «Никакого одностороннего прекращения огня больше не будет»

    Poroshenko: There shall no longer be any more unilateral ceasefire

    At a meeting with the leaders of political factions in the Supreme Rada, the President of the Ukraine ruled out the possibility of a resumption of a peace agreement in the Lugansk and Donetsk regions…

    “There shall no longer be any more unilateral ceasefire”, he said.

    The President also informed the parliamentarians about his telephone conversation with the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the President of France, Francois Hollande, during which they discussed a settlement of the situation in the East of the country.

    “European leaders have stressed the need for a continued dialogue between the presidents of the Ukraine and Russia. In this context, Poroshenko noted that the continuation of negotiations is possible only under the condition of an obligatory observance of the peace plan provisions made by all parties” – UKrainian Presidential Press Service.

    What is this ceasefire he talks about?

    Has there ever been one?

  14. Several Twitter feeds are saying that Sloviansk has fallen and separatist fighters are fleeing the city.

    • Southerncross says:

      Others are saying that a detachment broke out and another contingent has stayed behind.

      All of this could have been avoided if the Russian government had ordered an intervention in April, but I suppose Washington’s hollow threats were just too frightening for words.

      • Yeah, it’s over now: Poroshenko has ordered the Ukrainian flag to be raised over Slavyansk.

        Hopefully Strelkov and other brave men who fought for these people will manage back to Russia without being captured.

        • Moscow Exile says:

          So everyone in the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts will now start chanting “Slava Ukraini! Heroyam slava!”

        • marknesop says:

          What has Poroshenko accomplished, really? He has had to throw the entire might of the Ukrainian Army and Air force against a city whose population at its peak, all in, was less than 120,000. Slavyansk had been expected to fall for weeks, by defenders and attackers alike, and that it has lasted so long is a testament to the energy and determination of its defenders. Mariupol fell to Ukrainian control weeks ago, and it has 4 times Slavyansk’s population. I didn’t hear any wails of anguish when it was “made Ukrainian” again, it did not appear to dampen the enthusiasm of the resistance, and it does not seem particularly pro-Kiev now. The defenders of Slavyansk could have abandoned it a long time ago, then retaken it as soon as the “victors” departed – Ukraine does not have the resources to garrison every “conquered” city, and unless its victories result in a change of heart by the inhabitants it has won nothing.

          Poroshenko, by contrast, has raised his victory flag over a smashed and empty city that is of no value to anyone, which was reckoned to be “strategic” only because it had become symbolic in its refusal to submit. It would have to be completely rebuilt before it could be “colonized” with fascist westerners, even if that were possible, and it isn’t. If Poroshenko manages to ethnically cleanse the east of Russian-speakers and drive them all to Russia, what purpose will that serve? He will be as bereft of Ukrainian taxpayers as he would be if he just let them have their independence – does he imagine they will continue to pay Ukrainian taxes from Russia? As Kirill has argued compellingly, he needs the easterners to pay taxes in order to borrow the massive amounts from the IMF that he needs to stave off economic collapse. If they are no longer part of Ukraine for whatever reason, the result is the same. The IMF will modify the loan package accordingly, and there won’t be enough to prevent abject poverty for those who remain but are not oligarchs.

          Meanwhile, the resistance has not died at all, and as I said, it took the combined weight of arms of the nation to overthrow a small hamlet. Ahead lies Donetsk, a city of nearly a million. I have not so far heard it offer to surrender because of the grim example of Slavyansk.

  15. Moscow Exile says:

    I suggest that those who advocate Russian intervention in East Ukraine and whose hearts allegedly bleed because of the infamous way in which Russia is treated by the “International Community” peruse this.

    (Earlier posted mistakenly on previous thread.)

    • He makes the following conclusions:

      1. In Crimea Russian intelligence covertly conducted polls and found out that support for Russian intervention was even larger than Russia had thought. This was a big reason why Russia intervened. in Donetsk Russia might have conducted similar polls and might have found out that support for Russian intervention in Donbass is not large enough to justify Russian military intervention. Most of the Donbass people are still unaffected by Ukraine’s military campaign in the east.

      2. Russia should not be the one paying for the reconstruction of the cities that Ukraine’s military has destroyed. By annexing Novorussia Russia would have to pay all the reconstruction costs.

      3. By destroying Ukrainian military Russia would also destroy what is left of Ukraine’s order. The rest of Ukraine (minus Novorussia) would be ruled by extremists like Yarosh and Kolomoisky.

      • marknesop says:

        And I agree strongly with the first two points, while I am surprised at the insight and vision of the third because it did not occur to me even remotely.

    • vKontakte poll from yesterday:

      Those who support Putin’s non-interventionlist policy: 39%
      Those who support direct military intervention: 61%

      • Moscow Exile says:


        • Moscow Exile says:


          From VKontakte:

          Those who support Putin’s non-interventionlist policy: 39%

          Those who support direct military intervention: 61%

          Are you suggesting there should be government according to social network opinion polls?

          • Moscow Exile says:

            Кто готовит майдан в России?

            Who is preparing a Maidan in Russia?

            Published 4 July, 2014

            In Russia, both amongst the elite and sections of the population, there is a tendency to present the catastrophe in the Ukraine as a regional conflict that concerns first of all its own inhabitants. In their opinion, interference in the confrontation may lead to the involvement of Russia in a war with both the Kiev junta and with the West, which would lead to both human and material as well as a variety of other losses to the country. “We cannot allow this to happen, so we will wait until the Ukraine is dismantled by the Ukrainians themselves, and the West will realize that the world is a better place without any kind of war” – thus can their position be described.

            In like manner, could the slight political successes of the Russian authorities in Europe (the conclusion of an agreement with Austria on the construction of the gas pipeline “South stream”; the latest negotiations between the heads of the Russian, German, Polish and Ukrainian foreign offices) give hope that this policy will have this effect and an open conflict might be avoided? There are running in parallel, however, processes which suggest that there are many forces that do follow this line of thinking.

            Oh yes! And the vKontakte poll notwithstanding, Putin’s popularity still stands at 80%.

            Could Putin’s popularity be so high amongst Russians for the very reason that Russia has chosen not to intervene militarily in East Ukraine?

            Could it be that some of those who proselytize Russian intervention do so simply because a military adventure in the Ukraine, no matter how “moralistic” an argument be put forward for its implementation, would most certainly not be in Russia’s best interests?

            On the other hand, such an intervention undertaken by Russia would be like manna from heaven for Washington.

            • kirill says:

              Russia will have truly failed if it keeps the economic status quo vis a vis Ukraine and NATO. Any subsidy would be pure treachery. Since Russia cannot take the military option, even one as limited as a no fly zone without actual movement of troops and armour into Ukraine, it has to take the economic option. NATO should lose access to Russian fossil fuel development and ready sales. Western oil majors need to be excluded from Russia. Right now they are the only thing that keeps major sanctions from being imposed, but those sanctions are total BS. Russia’s GDP does not depend on foreign markets and is driven by domestic consumption, just like China’s. It is Ukraine that will enter a super depression from losing exports to Russia. Russia must make sure that Ukraine loses Russian markets for EVERYTHING. It can use the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement as a pretext since it actually limits Ukrainian exports to the EU.

      • ucgsblog says:

        It’s entirely possible to support some of Putin’s policies and oppose others, while supporting Putin, and vice versa. Because of Putin’s stabilization policies, Caucasian policies, economic policies, etc, I support him. Do I want to see an intervention in the DonBass Republic? Yes. But I’m not going to stop supporting Putin if he doesn’t do what I want. And I think that I probably 80% of the people here share that logic, but guys, please correct me if I’m wrong.

        If there’s anyone in the West hoping that nonintervention in Ukraine will decrease Putin’s popularity beyond 70%, then they are utterly inept idiots. A single issue isn’t going to be a deal breaker for Putin.

        • yalensis says:

          After Crimea was reunited with Russia, Putin looked into his magic mirror and asked:
          “Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the greatest Russian leader of them all?”
          Mirror replied: “With a popular approval rating of 90%, it’s got to be Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin!”

          [Putin smirks: Of course!]

          Some weeks later, Putin looked into his mirror and repeated:
          “MIrror, mirror, on the wall, who is the greatest Russian leader of them all?”
          Mirror replied: “You’re still popular, Vova, but that Strelkov guy is starting to trend… And, let’s face it, he IS a handsome bastard…”

    • yalensis says:

      Saker’s piece is extremely good, makes a lot of valid analytical points on both sides of the ledger: Pro and Con Russian military intervention.

      Having taking all that into account and I totally do see the “dove” side of the ledger, and why it is a valid position; yet I would still place myself among the “hawks” on this issue.
      So, if there was a vote, yea or nay, dove vs. hawk, then I vote hawk.

      Personally, I think Russia should have gone in with guns blazing and brought down the Kiev regime while Turchita was still in power. I agree with Saker that “limited” options are not really an option. It’s a binary decision: all or nothing.

      Arguments: In the long run, Russia cannot endure a very militantly ideological Nazi NATO state so close to Russian borders. Also, Crimea will never be completely safe for Russia unless there is some kind of buffer-zone. For example, Ukes have already declared that they will permanently cut off the water to Crimea.

      I agree most with Saker’s final paragraphs on Russia always being too moderate; to some it often seems that Russian leaders go into a state of ostrich-like denial at the start of these crises, and in this respect Putin is no different from Stalin, or any other of the Tsars and leaders who preceded them. (Except for Lenin: I think Lenin was the only one who really liked to take the bull by the horns.)

      So, anyhow, here is the quote from Saker with which I most agree:
      Russia tried to ignore the Wahabi crazies in Chechnia and they proved Russia wrong. Russia also tried to ignore Saakashvili and his crazies, and they proved Russia wrong. Now Russia is trying hard to ignore the Nazis in Banderastan, and I don’t see any reason believe that this time around this will work. But also please notice this, Russia did not really intervene in Chechnia until the Russian public opinion was fully and totally supportive for such an intervention. Russia did not intervene in South Ossetia until the Russian public opinion was fully in favor of that operation too (although that is harder to prove, considering that Russia did only wait 24 hours before deciding to really go after Saakashvili rather than just protect or evacuate the Russian peacekeepers). It might well be that Putin and his advisers have already come to the conclusion that an overt intervention is inevitable, but that they are waiting for the public opinion in Russia and even in Novorussia to really back that option.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        And there’s the rub: I do not think there has ever been a majority for separatism in the Lugansk and Kharkov provinces and most definitely not in other parts of trans-Dniepr. East Ukraine. That’s why Kiev has successfully spun this line of Russian “terrorists”: the majority of East Ukrainians, be they russophones or not, do not want a civil war. I see letters from russophone Kharkov citizens in the press here that decry the actions of the “militia” whilst at the same time abhorring the “government” in Kiev.

        • kirill says:

          This is likely the key to explain Russia’s policy. If eastern Ukrainians don’t want help, then they don’t deserve it. But they need to know that the good old days (no matter how bad they perceive them to be) are over. All these waffling idiot easterners, who are too stupid to even realize that Nazis are hunting them down and will continue to do so even after the rebels have disappeared, should be left out of their jobs producing for Russian markets. They can go to Lviv and beg in the streets.

          • marknesop says:

            And you see, this is unfortunately the attitude I am talking about, which has been the biggest jewel in the west’s crown – the fostering of enmity against Ukraine which will push it into the arms of the EU. Moscow has tried its best to prevent this by giving Kiev lots of leeway and putting up with its absurdities without comment for the most part, but slowly there is a hardening against Ukraine outside the east from many, when the blame mostly belongs to its leaders and their sneaky western enablers. Now Ukraine and Russia are so solidly enemies that mistrust of Ukraine will persist even if an obviously pro-Russian leader took over at some time in the future. I am as guilty as any other, wishing for a lightning bolt to strike Lviv and wipe it off the face of the land although there are doubtless people in that city who deplore the violence and the triumph of radicals. Sadly, this has been a complete success for the west, and it is a past master of “divide and conquer” politics. It’s the same vicious mentality that makes homeless men fight each other for the price of a cheap bottle of wine, for the entertainment of those who have a pocketful of money and like “a bit of sport”.

            This is my primary reason for my personal belief that the west has seen its glory days, and is struggling against inevitable decline – because it has become cruel and totally self-absorbed, and now thinks only of its own comfort and pleasure.

            • kirill says:

              I am still hoping that most Ukrainians will get over the thrall they are under as cold, hard economic reality starts to bite. They have been promised the Moon and nobody is going to deliver on that promise.

              If I ignore all the problems facing advance economies, e.g. peak oil, then the US behaviour in Ukraine is almost hard to believe. Do they want WWIII (it could happen even if there are no plans for it)? Perhaps the hubris is a form of denial about the shifting ground beneath the feet of the developed world and its leader USA. A new world order is coming and it ain’t no American century, it is nobody’s century. No amount of wishing is going to create reality.

      • ucgsblog says:

        “I agree most with Saker’s final paragraphs on Russia always being too moderate; to some it often seems that Russian leaders go into a state of ostrich-like denial at the start of these crises, and in this respect Putin is no different from Stalin, or any other of the Tsars and leaders who preceded them.”

        I disagree. The trigger for the Second Chechen War was the Wahhabi Invasion of Dagestan, which occurred before Putin came into office. After news spread of the Wahhabi Invasion of Dagestan, most Russians were in favor of it.

        In terms of Ossetia, (something I know rather well,) Putin simply waited for August 8th. He figured that if Georgia started the war on August 7th and Russia entered on August 8th, there was no way that Russia would be dubbed the aggressor. Putin was wrong about that, but it was the horrendous coverage of the Ossetian War in the West that enabled Putin to destroy the West’s soft power in Russia.

        The Nation highlights this frustration: “Under normal circumstances, this would be a classic Russian guilt trip. But it was clear even to us, even though we weren’t positively disposed to a Russian handler, that Sasha’s frustration was real. It was as if the Kremlin was so excited that for once in Putin’s term, the Russians lucked into being on the good guys’ side of a major news story, and it made no sense that the “free Western media” (which the Kremlin takes much more seriously than its own cowed media) wouldn’t see the truth, that they’d do the Russian thing and twist reality into propaganda. What was so shameful and embarrassing to me, an American journalist whose own Moscow-based newspaper, The eXile, had just been driven out of existence by these same Kremlin bastards, is that Sasha was rightly frustrated. A Kremlin minder right and the Western journalists wrong? What has this world come to when the Kremlin has a better grasp of the truth than the free Western media?”

        Granted, it should say “took” instead of “takes”, but the point remains. Regarding Ukraine, it’s too early to tell, but Crimea was brilliant.

        Additionally, some of the Csars should not have rushed to war. For instance, Csar Alexander the I should not have repeatedly engaged Napoleon. Instead, it should’ve been a Franco-Russian Alliance, cemented by marriage, an alliance that would truly enlighten Europe, while keeping Tradition in the proper role. Also there’d be no Hitler, no Nazis and no rabid racist dogs. We might’ve even had a colony on Mars, or two.

        • yalensis says:

          Good historical points. I agree Alexander I should have married Napoleon instead of goading him, then they could have allied against the English and jointly ruled Europe together. And yeah, if that had happened, then we’d be living on Mars and flying around in our own individual jetpacks.

          Barring that, I believe Nikolai II should have allied with Kaiser instead of declaring war against him in 1914.
          Gross strategic errors on the part of several Tsars.

          And that’s not even mentioning the worst example of a faulty Russian “rush to war”, which was Prince Igor Sv’atoslavich Seversky, when he declared war against the Polovtsi, even though none of the other Russian princes backed his campaign.

          As a result Khan Konchak ate Igor’s army for breakfast, Khan Gzak burned the town of Putivl to the ground; Prince Volodimir Igorevich switched sides and joined the Khans; and Rus suffered her worst military defeat ever.

          Oh well, shit happens, live and learn…

          • colliemum says:

            Very interesting – I was thinking along those lines myself, recalling that Bismarck, who knew a thing or two about politics, answered the question what the secret was: “Make good treaties with Russia”.
            But then came Willy II – and as you say, shit happens …

          • ucgsblog says:

            I thought that Kalka, 1223, and Kiev, 1240, were the worst defeats. Or was there an even worse one?

            I’m ok with the German alliance, but 1801 – France – should’ve done it. Russia and France could’ve jointly ruled the World and slowly merged into one country. As for the UK, how long would it really have lasted? Napoleon was hell bent on taking London and I doubt the Russians would’ve refused a liberated Scotland and Ireland. Napoleon would take England and Wales. And to celebrate this, Irish potato production would increase 😛

            And then it’d be onto the rest of the World. After London’s defeat, who’d stand up to the Franco-Russian Armed Forces? Napoleon would be off to Africa, the Russians chasing after the Ottomans.

            Plus there’d be the whole marriage thing, and Napoleon offered to one of the Russians. Imagine their kid, inheriting two empire. As for having two capitals, that’s nothing new for Russia. I should blog about alternative history when I get the chance 😛

            • Jen says:

              We have to get the infant United States on board with the Franco-Russian forces. In the event of Napoleon I’s routing of Britain and taking England and Wales while Russia takes Scotland and Ireland, remnants of the British govt would have to flee somewhere. The best place for the British to go and try to regroup would be eastern North America north of the St Lawrence River where those Americans loyal to King George III would have fled after the US War of Independence. France, Russia and the US would form a joint alliance to ensure the British don’t try to form a new power base in that part of the world.

      • marknesop says:

        That might be true, but I am betting also that Putin will find a good use for all the money that was poured into shoring up a struggling Ukraine all those years, which is now unnecessary expenditure. That is now the EU’s tarbaby. What do you suppose EU taxpayers are going to think about the big new millstone their leaders have hung round their necks?

    • marknesop says:

      Here the Saker and I fundamentally disagree, although I respect his analysis. I believe a Russian intervention, no matter when it took place, would have been instantly spun with that “the bear is loose in Europe and will smash everything” rhetoric to justify a massive and existential effort against Russia, and an assumption made that it would not go nuclear. Whether or not China would intervene in Russia’s behalf is debatable, and I would guess not because the west would have thought of that and would have placated it to inaction with soothing promises that its energy supply would not be interrupted – perhaps even parts of it would be given into Chinese control upon western triumph. That’s all just assumption, but we can all see for ourselves how eager the west is to bring Russia to battle. You don’t do that when you believe you’re going to lose, or when you have no plan for what to do if it happens. So it follows that the west has a plan. We just don’t know what it is.

  16. Russia suspends the transfer of weapons from Crimea to Ukrainian army as a retaliation against the war in eastern Ukraine.

    I guess this means that until now Russia has been actually providing Kievan junta with weapons from Crimea.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      Russia allowed the Ukrainian armed forces formerly based in the Crimea to take their equipment with them. No secret about that. Train-loads of obsolete Yukie tanks etc. were transported out of the Crimea with the “invaders'” blessings. There was junk (such as grounded warplanes and warship “rust-buckets”) that they left behind. Now the Yukies cannot have them back even if they should wish this.

    • yalensis says:

      For the same reason that, after reuniting with Crimea, Russia bent over backwards to make sure Ukropy soldiers, property and equipment in Crimea were treated well, allowed to leave, even the Ukie flags and unit banners and insignia were folded properly and treated with respect, instead of just trompled into the mud or tossed in a heap before the walls of the Kremlin Mausoleum. (As in past wars.)

      Hey, even that one rustbucket of a Ukie submarine was shipped back to Kiev, even though Russia could have just taken everything there as loot and trophies.

      But that’s all in the past. From now on, it’s “No more Mister Nice Guy.”

      • “But that’s all in the past. From now on, it’s “No more Mister Nice Guy.””

        Why do you think so?

        • yalensis says:

          Because you yourself “reported” that Russia stopped sending the rusty weapons back to Kiev. Even though they are technically Ukrainian property. Now Russia will just bury them in a junkyard somewhere in Crimea. As a “retaliation” against Kiev’s bad behavior.

          It’s like in a divorce: At first it’s civilized, and you try to do the right thing, you let your ex-wife take all her stuff back in nicely packed boxes. But then she does something really rotten to you, and you lose your temper, and you just run out and toss the rest of her clutter and nick-nax into the dumpster out back.

          (not that I would know anything about any of that…)

    • marknesop says:

      I don’t see how this would affect us; I don’t store anyone’s personal information. I can find out certain things about you if I want to look, such as where your internet server is, but that only tells me what country you’re sending from and that could even be an anonymous VPN that deliberately bounces your message to a random country of origin. That in itself would tell me something, because such transmissions rarely originate from the same place twice. I have everyone’s email address, because WordPress demands it in order for anyone to comment – that’s part of the criteria that keep you out of the spam filter. But other than that, nothing, and those are not stored in database form; I would have to go back and look for them.

      But this is a good idea, if it can be implemented. It will be unpopular if Russians cannot do business online or book travel, but there is no reason for those venues to store your personal information anyway; perhaps a time limit can be agreed upon. For instance, of course an airline has to know who is on board for current flight manifests. But there’s no reason for them to still have that information months later, unless it is for national security purposes. And there’s no reason Russia should submit all its citizens to the national-security interests of another country, especially an enemy.

  17. Moscow Exile says:

    Губарев: ополченцы из Славянска передислоцируются в Донецк и Горловку

    Gubarev: militias from Slavyansk redeployed in Donetsk and Gorlovka

    DONETSK, 5 Jul – RIA Novosti. So that they can focus on the defence of Donetsk and Horlivka, suffering minimal losses the militia escaped at night from Slavyansk in East Ukraine, having found themselves surrounded by Ukrainian law-enforcers, said on Saturday Pavel Gubarev, one of the leaders of the self-proclaimed Donetsk national Republic.

    • yalensis says:

      Один из лидеров самопровозглашенной Донецкой народной республики Павел Губарев заявил, что решение оставить Славянск принял Игорь Стрелков. По его оценке, это позволит ополченцам выиграть время, пока украинская армия и Нацгвардия “передислоцируют личный состав и расчеты артиллерии”.

      One of the leaders of the self-proclaimed Donetsk Peoples Republic Pavel Gubarev declared, that the decision to leave Slav’ansk was taken by Igor Strelkov. According to his (Strelkov’s) analysis, this will permit the insurgents to buy some time, while the Ukrainian army and National Guard have to relocate their men and artillery equipment.

      This is a good tactic, IMHO. My respect for Strelkov grows with leaps and bounds.
      I was worried he might be tempted to toss out a futile “Charge of the Light Brigade” type gesture, with everybody fighting to the last man, and heroically committing suicide to prove a point.

      Tactical withdrawal is better. Even Kutuzov knew how to retreat, on occasion. Or, shall we call it a “tactical withdrawal”, rather than a retreat.

      And, by the way, the fact that they WERE able to break out of this encirclement is even more proof of Strelkov’s talent as a military commander. A “Dunkirk” type competent tactic.

  18. kirill says:

    Hilarious drivel. It is the brazen bias and lying-through-omission and lying-through-repetition-of-Kiev-regime-press-releases that is undermining global support for the BS western propaganda narrative. This is the usual schizophrenic thinking that afflicts butthurt western analysts: they claim that backwards, technically incompetent Russians can make perfect video and audio fakes when some of the west’s precious leaders are exposed. One day Russia is a 3rd world toilet, the next it is the ultimate threat.

    • yalensis says:

      Check out the commentary, though. The commenters make a lot of valid points, see especially the bit about “America having committed cultural suicide” in Russia. As commenter Smoothie says, “Never in my 50+ years long life did I see such a unanimous rejection by Russians of American media, American political system, cultural institutions as it is happening right now. ..”

      Smoothie also makes other good points about American “Russia experts” being incompetent morons who grew up on the works of Solzhenitsyn and know nothing about actual Russian history. Which would be fine, if they were botanists or plumbers, but they intend to make a living as “Russia experts”, advising American policy makers.

      And some of the other comments are really good, too.
      I get the feeling that “National Interest”, albeit mostly a rag, is read by some intelligent people.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        Yeah, that Smoothie X12. commentator knows what he’s on about:

        Try to read US media assessments of Russia’s Armed Forces based on the conclusions of Pavel Falgenhauer–a clown with degree in biology from Moscow State who goes in US under the title “Russian military expert”. But Pavel is politically correct–he hates Putin and is the part of the same dumpster as Eidman, Nemtsov, Kasparov and likes. That is the ticket to a big time. The fact that he is incompetent hack doesn’t deter anyone here in the US. I tried to offer myself as an expert on neurosurgery to CNN and Fox–didn’t work out for some reason. Damn it. Should try the position of the Wall Street “analyst” at MSNBC.

        He just might be a Russian immigré: noticeable absence of articles in what he has written.

      • kirill says:

        Smoothie used to post at militaryphotos a few years ago before he was, of course, banned. He lays it out like it is. You also, have the standard NATO shill liar posting the BS about hordes of Russian trolls attacking precious western media websites. I find this NATO propaganda to be pathetic. A troll does not contribute any useful information. Clearly Smoothie has posted relevant content and a valid opinion. The term “troll” is deliberately misused much like “Godwin’s Law”.

        • yalensis says:

          Dear Kirill:
          A non-troll (like you or I) generally posts both opinions and content.
          My definition of a troll is somebody who (1) ONLY posts opinions, never content, and (2) said opinions consist of simple cliches and mantras.
          A good example of a troll in above piece is a guy named Wolf Sullivan who posted this comment:
          This article is nonsense. Yes, Putin has manufactured tons of propaganda lies about the Ukraine crisis he is responsible for. But I have not read any of his lies. The ones I have noticed as headlines turned my stomach because Putin is a billionaire fascist dictator who murdered and cheated his way to power. Apparently only Russians take Putin seriously. Many have compared his tactics to Hitler and Putin will meet same fate as Adolf.

          I don’t consider Wolf a troll because I disagree with his opinion.
          I consider him a troll because his comment is about 99% just cliches, e.g., “Putin is a billioniare fascist dictator”, the allusion to Hitler, etc., the empty threat that “Putin will end the same way that Hitler did.”

          Well, to be sure, I haven’t read any of Wolf’s other comments, maybe they are better than this one, and maybe he was just having a bad day.

          In conclusion, “troll detection” is more of an art than a science. As beauty is in the eye of the beholder, one man’s “troll” might be another man”s “great thinker”.
          And besides, we live in an Idiocracy now, where every person’s opinion is just as good as anybody else’s, regardless of intelligence, education level or factual knowledge of issues.

    • marknesop says:

      What a crock. Igor Eidman is another of those self-professed “Russia Experts” like Alexei Bayer, and like Bayer, lives abroad – in Eidman’s case, in Germany. Listen to him throw around liberal buzzwords like “bourgeois commercial imperialism” and red meat like the bag-o’-tropes “total state propaganda, official patriotism, the cult of personality of an authoritarian ruler, repression against those who disagree and the rebirth of the cold war.” There’s a guaranteed liberal orgasm, right there. He’s a frequent guest star at and Window on Eurasia with gobblin’ Paul Goble.

      Using pretty girls and suggestive situations to promote the news is “atypical for most news channels”, is it? No, it isn’t.

      We can only hope the western audience believes ideological kooks like Eidman and Goble and Benjamin Bidder. It contributes to gross underestimation of Russia as just another tinpot dictatorship which will fall over with one good nudge from the righteous. That impression has allowed Russia to make up a lot of ground unimpeded, and it is likely to continue to do so.

  19. Uki flag was raised in Slavyansk:

    I wonder how many people will the junta murder in that city now that they are doing their “clearing operations”. All males between 15 and 60 will be targets.

    • And Ukraine continues to shell Russian territory:

      This is a big victory day for the junta. They captured Slavyansk and are in a position to shell Russian territory with impunity.

    • kirill says:

      The fact is that Russia is weak. The NATzO juggernaut that is goading it into a trap will mess up Russia badly. Russia is not prepared for a nuclear war with NATO over Ukraine. Any non-nuclear engagement will achieve nothing but the deaths of many more than will die by not intervening.

      The population of NATO is over 700 million and its GDP is over $33 trillion. Clearly a military approach is a dead end. What Russia needs to do is to apply the energy weapon in a slow and steady fashion. This starts with not discounting any of its natural gas sales and making no long term contracts, just one year contracts with a $400 per tcm price floor (i.e. no speculative $200 prices). Ukraine should be dropped completely in NATO’s lap. So far NATO’s leaders are hoping that Russia keeps on subsidizing Ukraine. This has to stop now.

  20. Moscow Exile says:

    And for the first time in days – more than a week, in fact – an article in the Grauniad about events in East Ukraine.

    It’s about the fall of Slavyansk, of course.

    And comments allowed too!

    Heroyam slava!

    • Moscow Exile says:

      Ukrainian troops have regained control of the key eastern city of Slavyansk from pro-Russian rebels in what could mark a turning point in the country’s three-month battle to maintain its independence.

      Classic Grauniad shite!

      So the Ukraine is fighting for its independence?

      May one ask from whom?


      A breach of the rules?

      Criticizing the professional integrity of a Grauniad employee, you say?

      Blocked account?

      • kirill says:

        And then western pundits moan about Russia winning the propaganda war. If Germany tried to incorporate Austria by force, would that be Germany defending its independence? Austrians are the same ethnic group as Germans. There are 10 million ethnic Russian in the Frankenstein state concocted by the Bolsheviks. Those 10 million never freely chose to be part of Ukraine. If the eastern Ukrainian rebels were shelling Lviv or Kiev then perhaps one could talk about the regime fighting for its independence.

        I am beginning to get tired of the failed state Ukraine and its retarded problems. Any country that can be so easily manipulated by foreign powers does not deserve to exist. Now this Banderastan will try to harass Russia 24/7/365. It is good for nothing else.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        “The worst part is that the Guardian mentioned nothing about civilian casualties for one week and suddenly reports the victorious Ukraine army.”

        Comment to the Grauniad article on Kiev’s victory.

      • marknesop says:

        This is not going to be any “turning point”. But of course the optimistic assessment will be forgotten in the weeks to come.

  21. yalensis says:

    Riding high on thier victory in Slav’ansk, Ukrainian regime is now turning attention back to Crimea, which they have sworn to re-conquer.

    Regime announces that they forbid all international vessels from docking in Crimean ports of Eupatoria, Kerch, Sebastopol, Theodosia, and Yalta. Without express permission from Kiev regime.
    Otherwise, captains and vessels are subject to confiscation, imprisonment, and fines.

    I seem to recall that Saakashvili tried something similar, forbidding people to dock in Poti, after Abkhazia won independence from Gruzia.
    This is typical American/NATO gambit.

    So, this is something that Russia will have to deal with. It’s like I was saying: Crimea and Crimean commerce can never be secure while there is this hostile regime in Kiev.

  22. Strelkov today (english subtitles)

    I feel great sympathy for this man. It is a great injustice that those sick Nazi monsters in Kiev will triumph over this man. We live in a bad world.

  23. yalensis says:

    Here are more details about Strelkov tactical retreat from Slav’ansk, and moving his HQ to Kramatorsk:

    On the morning of 5 July, Strelkov evacuated his HQ, in a convoy consisting of three “KamAZov” trucks, 3 tanks, and several automobiles. Breaking through the defenses of Ukropy army, the column entered Kramatorsk. Some scattered platoons of insurgents did remain behind in Slav’ansk to conduct rear-guard action, while others have also proceeded from Kramatorsk to Donetsk. Currently there is a battle going on near the Donetsk airport.

    First photo in piece shows ex-Mayor of Slav’ansk, V’acheslav Ponomarev. Under Strelkov’s orders, Ponomarev had been under house arrest in that crazy “Fawlty Towers” type house in Slav’ansk, where Strelkov had stashed a lot of people he had issues with. However, Ponomarev was evacuated along with the other insurgents; along the way he gave a press conference and said he was back in good graces now and would probably be heading back into battle. Igor had demoted him to simple soldier, so he will either fight as simple soldier, or he will get his captain stripes back and lead a unit.
    It was not said what happened to several other inhabitants of Fawlty Tower, namely Nellie Shtepa and Irma Krat. Presumably, they were evacuated too, along with the insurgents.

    Second photo shows Ukropy battalion “Donbass” (one of Kolomoisky’s death squad battalions) at entrance to Slav’ansk.

    Other photos show evactuating insurgents.

    Video at bottom is interview with Ponomarev, who is on his way to Donetsk.
    Ponomarev flashing that famous gold-toothed grille which so captivated Irma Krat.

    Other video reveals that telephone service in Slav’ansk has been cut off. People desperately trying to phone their relatives, but phones don’t work, so nobody actually knows what is going on inside Slav’ansk right now.

  24. yalensis says:

    Expose of July 4 bash in Kiev.
    Yesterday Junta spent an estimated $5 million for July 4 Independence day bash to suck up to their American masters.
    The gala was organized as a gift to Hunter Biden.
    The proceedings were leaked by a Ukrainian government insider to an organization called API (Agency of Political Investigation) which publishes leaks and compromising material.

    [yalensis Note: the text is in the future tense, because the leak was published BEFORE the event; it is just assumed that the event still occurred yesterday, despite the leak.]

    «Вечеринка будет посвящена Дню независимости США 4-го июля и будет преподнесена нашим правительством как подарок сыну Байдена. Точная сумма, которую потратит правительство, неизвестна, но говорят о сумме порядка пяти миллионов долларов. Точно знаю, что на приглашение певицы Рианы потратят не меньше двух миллионов. Также желающие смогут воспользоваться услугами 50 проституток. Их подбор заказывали самому Пете Листерману.
    Информация о месте и времени проведения вечеринки держится в строгом секрете. Всех членов правительства предупредили о том, что им сообщат точное время и место проведения за час до начала. Это неудивительно, наше правительство опасается, что если наш народ узнает об этой вечеринке, то может просто устроить бунт, возмутившись такими тратами», – поделился информацией источник API.

    The gala will be dedicated to America’s Independence Day July 4, and will be presented by our government as a gift to (Joe) Biden’s son (=Hunter Biden). The exact amoung which this (gala) will cost is unknown, but there is talk of a sum around $5 million (American) dollars. I myself know [this is the leaker speaking] that the singer Rihanna alone costs at least $2 million [to perform for the guests]. There is also talk of hiring 50 prostitutes for those who wish to indulge in their services. The selection (or prostutes) was picked by Pete Listerman himself [yalensis: who he??]
    Information about the place and time of the gala is held in strict secrecy. All us members of the government were alerted that the exact time and place would not be communicated until exactly one hour before the event itself. Which is not surprising. Because our government is afraid, that if our people were to learn about this gala, then they would simply mutiny, especially hearing how much money this is going to cost…

    Curious minds want to know: Which of the 50 prostitutes did Hunter pick?
    Or did he get the Queen Bee, Rihanna herself?

    • Moscow Exile says:

      Петр Листерман

      Листерман, Пётр Григорьевич

      Owner of “Escort Agency” – in other words, a pimp.


      That’s “democracy” for you!

      Do your own thing!

    • cartman says:

      I don’t normally follow the whereabouts of celebrities, but I looked it up and Rihanna was in West Hollywood last night. Still, the Ukrainian crisis is a huge opportunity for pimps and connects to keep the moneyed elites well supplied.

      Maybe Ukrainians will get the opportunity like Bulgarians to watch drunk Brits act like fools in their crumbling nation.

      • yalensis says:

        Thanks, cartman! that was taking some good initiative, to fact-check this story.
        I didn’t even think of checking Rihanna’s activities, and I wouldn’t have a clue how to do that, even if I had thought of it.
        How did you do it, if you don’t mind my asking?
        Did you check her Facebook page, or something like that?

        Anyhow, given that Rihanna was not in Kiev last night, it does cast some doubt on above story.
        Although the gala could still have happened, but maybe with a different celebrity?
        Or, maybe Rihanna was whisked into Kiev on Air Force 2 and just performed one set for Hunter Biden, then whisked back out to LA. Still a 10-flour flight, though, however you cut it, unless they flew her on the Concorde.

        • cartman says:

          I suppose the junta could be running things from West Hollywood – similar to way that Kolomoyskyi keeps his fiefdom running smoothly from Switzerland. I just did a search for Rihanna and restricted my results to the last 24 hours to find out what she was doing. I am not quick enough to be a paparazzo.

        • marknesop says:

          “…unless they flew her on the Concorde.”

          None of which are still flying, nor have been for more than a decade. So I guess she was not in Kiev. I often think that is the blogger’s job, to fact-check claims, and the Intertubes have certainly made that easier.

          • yalensis says:

            That’s true, Mark. You, as the blog owner, should have fact-checked my dubious claims, and then moderated them.

            Getting a bit sloppy, aren’t you?

            I’ll forgive you this one time, knowing that you haven’t been feeling well.
            (Hint to Fern: THIS MAN NEEDS CHICHEN SOUP!)

            • marknesop says:

              I feel fine, and there is no need for anyone thus far to be moderated (except for AJ). Oh, and Mike. Gee, this is a regular dictatorship, isn’t it? Anyway, I have a penchant for correcting even the points of allies if I can see they are incorrect, and have frequently been the recipient of the same correction.

              But a little chicken soup would not come amiss.

            • Fern says:

              Ah, the difference a vowel makes. Chichen soup, as any fule kno, is a restorative delicacy much valued by Chechens.

  25. Brzezinski calls to isolate Russia, urges US to arm Ukrainian military:

    It seems that the most evil people also live the longest. At 86 this man is still plotting the destruction of Russia.

    • kirill says:

      If NATO follows his advice, Russia’s arms would be untied. So NATO will not follow his advice. He can bloviate all he wants and is basically irrelevant.

    • Southerncross says:

      He’s not very good at it then is he? Perhaps he should find another hobby. Like boules.

  26. yalensis says:

    Back to that issue of Rand Corporation “Plan B” document (the one proposing to Chocco that he intern ethnic Russians in Donbass). The issue is whether or not this leaked document is a fake.

    Well, today a Rand media liaison and press spokesperson denied the authenticity of the document . Nope, he said. We never advised Chocco to cut off the water, food and electricity; ethnically cleanse East Ukraine of ethnic Russians; filtrate military-age males, or intern the population. Nope, never happened!

    The Rand denial was carried in several Russian sources, and the spokesperson’s name was spelled as Джеффри Хайдэй. When reporting this in my comment, I wanted to spell his name out in English, and I deserve a medal for this, because I spent at least 20 minutes scouring the internet and getting crafty before I finally found his name tucked away in a Rand employee list, it’s Jeffrey Hiday. Jeff’s title is “Media Director for Rand”.

    Okay, now this part of the story is funny, so listen hard. After I found the spelling of Jeff’s name, I wanted to see if I could find an English-language version of the Ukraine denial story, so that people wouldn’t have to read it in Russian. So I googled “Jeffrey Hiday denies”, and it came back with this story from 2008, in which the very same guy, Jeff Hiday, is denying that Rand recommended U.S. go to war against China!
    Seems like this guy is always denying these terrible things, and in the latter case, the Chinese government, not some tabloid, was the one who accused them.

    In conclusion, I believe the story that Rand wrote up Plan B for Chocco, and I think this Jeff Hiday guy is a fucking liar. Part of my reasoning is based on the fact that Hiday will not publish a photo of himself on his staff profile. From this, I deduce that he probably has shifty little beady eyes, and it follows from this, that he is a liar.

    • ucgsblog says:

      I clicked your link, and I’ll raise you a link:

      From your link: “Contrary to various online accounts, RAND is not advocating war against China or any nation to advance recovery of the US economy…Our recent research on China, Afghanistan and Iraq is strictly nonpartisan. Our core values are quality and objectivity”

      If you were living in the US, you’d be laughing your ass off once you read the “and Iraq” part. Yep, Rand, “totally nonpartisan” when it comes to Iraq, not advocating war… I’ll simply quote them, “not” advocating war:

      “if you accept any of the propositions — that Saddam Hussein would try to dominate or conquer his neighbors; that he would not hesitate to kill and torture as many as needed to reach his goals; that he seeks to control oil flows and revenues from the Middle East to his own advantage and so cause significant damage to the world economy; that the position of his own citizens is in itself a great evil which should be rectified; that he would not hesitate to share chemical, biological, radiological and perhaps even nuclear weapons with terrorists should it suit his purposes; or any one of a number of other damning propositions generally thought to be true — then you must admit to the possibility that U.S. and allied intentions could be just.”

      Let’s see:

      1. Saddam Hussein would try to dominate or conquer his neighbors – yeah, that’s what’s going on in the Middle East. All the time. Say, isn’t Israel trying to dominate its neighbors? I’m not saying that to bash Israel, I think that, illegal settlement program aside, Israel’s doing the right things. I’m just pointing out that dominating and conquering your neighbors is what you do in a volatile region like the Middle East.

      2. that he would not hesitate to kill and torture as many as needed to reach his goals – hey, is that something that’s just against Saddam, or does that go for the Saudis too?

      3. that he seeks to control oil flows and revenues from the Middle East to his own advantage and so cause significant damage to the world economy – you mean like the OPEC embargo? Not really seeing how Iraq, on their own, can damage the World economy, but you don’t have to show that, you just have to show that Saddam “seeks” it.

      4. that the position of his own citizens is in itself a great evil which should be rectified – what about the position of other people in the Middle East?

      5. that he would not hesitate to share chemical, biological, radiological and perhaps even nuclear weapons with terrorists should it suit his purposes – oh this is just golden. It doesn’t even falsely pretend that Saddam has nukes; rather, it talks about Saddam, potentially dreaming of sharing nukes, hey, that’s casus belli for invasion.

      6. or any one of a number of other damning propositions generally thought to be true – that’s a crafty way of calling these propositions damning, even though most Middle Eastern States, (except Cyprus and Israel,) clearly adhere to more than one of these propositions, but in Saddam’s case, it could be just one. So basically if Saddam is behaving like a Middle East tyrant, then: “you must admit to the possibility that U.S. and allied intentions could be just.”

      You “MUST ADMIT”. If that’s not cheer leading for the War in Iraq, I don’t know what is.

    • Jen says:

      Hiday’s job is to run interference for his employers so anything he can use to obfuscate and deny is a legitimate tool. This goes for Jen Psaki and Marie Harf for the US State Department as well.

      Media and public relations used to be about portraying your employer in a positive light or as a responsible global citizen (even when everyone knew your employer was totally evil) by mouthing pious platitudes about good deeds being done all over the world but now modern PR doesn’t even try.

    • Fern says:

      Hunting around on the Rand Corporation’s website, I came across a report by Olga Oliker, who seems to be one of Rand’s main players in its ‘Center for Russia and Eurasia’, entitled “Soft power, hard power and counter insurgency: the early Soviet experience”. This focuses on the tactics used by the Soviets in the Central Asian republics during the 1930’s and looks at the implications for US counter-insurgency tactics in Afghanistan and other places. Much of what’s happened in eastern Ukraine would fall into the category of ‘hard power’. There’s no doubt that Rand researches counter-insurgency tactics and advises on them.

      The US, of course, has a long history of using terror against civilian populations – the Phoenix program and death squads operating throughout Central and South America during the 1970’s and 1980’s are just two examples – to achieve political and geopolitical goals. The guys and gals at Rand are in the US uber alles business – their ideological creed is that the US domination of the world is just and right and everything they do is geared to ensure nothing challenges that and they don’t care what fires they light along the way. Many of their reports on Iran, for example, talk openly of the ease or otherwise of fomenting ethnic strife to challenge the regime in Tehran. So there are no ethical or moral scruples here. I don’t think there is anything inherently implausible about Rand or any other think-tank offering advice on how to deal with the resistance to Kiev along the lines alleged.

      • marknesop says:

        Perhaps not. I would feel much more comfortable about it if any reputable news site had picked it up, and RT were not relying on Before It’s News as a reference. They’re just so wacky. And if that is just business as usual for Rand, why did they deny it was their work? Just keeping in lying practice?

  27. ucgsblog says:

    I just found out that when Khrushchev handed Crimea over to Ukraine, he did not hand Sevastopol over to Ukraine, which was independent from Crimea. Sevastopol was forcibly annexed to Ukraine in 1994. And yeah, it’s true: Khrushchev actually forgot about an entire city when he was involved in Moscow’s political games. Whoops.

    • kirill says:

      Yet another fact ignored in the western narrative. All the west needs is to recognize some state and its borders and poof it is legit. But if the locals object, e.g South Ossetia, then they are terrorists. Pure, unadulterated and capricious imperialism. Wrapped in a verbal sheet of intellectual diarrhea about human rights and democracy.

    • yalensis says:

      That’s true. Sebastopol (I prefer the Greek spelling) had the status of a free, autonomous city. Sort of like Heidelberg, or something like that.

      Sebastopolitans never accepted Ukropy attempts at dominance. They were always, like, “You’re not the boss of me. We’re RUSSIANS!”

      • Moscow Exile says:

        The Greek letter “B” had become pronounced as “V” by the time Sts. Cyril and Methodius were formulating the “Cyrillic” alphabet, which was really Cyril’s brother Methodius’ work and should, therefore, be called the Methodios’ alphabet, thereby causing the saintly duo to creat the letter “Б” to represent the sound that had been lost and once represented by the Greek letter “beta”.

        Кстати, всем большой привет из Анапы, в котором курортном городе мы с семьей сейчас отдыхают.

  28. yalensis says:

    Here is another point of view about Strelkov’s withdrawal from Slav’ansk.

    (I know, I know, Karl will rip me open for trying to put a good spin on this horrendous defeat, but all I am doing is conveying this piece that was written by other analysts):

    The key point these correspondents want to make is that Strelkov and his men basically broke out of an unbreakable encirclement, hooked up with other insurgents from Kramatorsk, formed a column of solid armour, stretching for almost 2 kilometers, drove for almost 3 hours into Donetsk down the open road, and during all that time, while they were sitting ducks out on the road, not one bomb or artillery shell fell their way.

    This fact (of their miraculous escape) has caused a member of Uke “punitive operation” to question whether or not there may have been a touch of “treason” involved. Why were Strelkov and his men allowed to leave, and not bombed out on the open road? this suspicious source suspects Ukropy Lieutenant-General Muzhenko of treason. Accounts say that Muzhenko forbade Ukies to open fire on Strelkov’s convoy.

    Muzhenko is the guy who marched into Slav’ansk and raised Ukie flag, on Chocco’s orders.
    Within hours, Chocco was gloating that he had won the greatest victory ever, in the history of the planet, since Wellington at Waterloo; and promptly awarding medals to everybody who was there, including Muzhenko.

    Meanwhile, Igor Strelkov and his Merry Men have set up shop in Donetsk, where they have more space to move about, and are not constantly under Banderite artillery fire. Within hours, they were already attacking Ukie border posts on the Azov Sea.

  29. Southerncross says:

    Pukes resume shelling Slavyansk.

  30. Pingback: Epstein’s Cupid – A Deep Dive into Peter Listerman – DarkDox

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s