poncho
Well-Known Member
You can stop now CMG you've already proven my point several times over. Thanx. :smilewinkgrin:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Huns on the March Again
- Thread starter OldRegular
- Start date
You can stop now CMG you've already proven my point several times over. Thanx. :smilewinkgrin:
Nazis and KGB--politics makes strange bedfellows.
poncho
Well-Known Member
ISIS to the Rescue
Amid NATO's failures in Ukraine, America's terrorist mercenaries threaten war with Russia.
September 4, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - As the crisis in Ukraine continues to fare poorly for Kiev and its NATO-backers, an "unlikely" ally has emerged - ISIS. Threatening to "liberate" Chechnya and the Caucasus, ISIS would essentially be handing over regions of Russia to its Western and Persian Gulf sponsors. While one would imagine the West would attempt to at least appear to stand in solidarity with Russia in the face of this recent threat, it has instead used the threat to stir fear among Russians, and as leverage against Moscow.
The Fortune 500-funded Carnegie Europe think tank recently published an op-ed titled, "Forget NATO, Russia’s Got Bigger Problems." In it contains astounding admissions - that NATO's agenda is expanding itself all along Russia's borders, that "the EU is now in direct competition with Russia over the future of the lands straddling the EU and Russia," and that its plans in Ukraine are in utter disarray
The op-ed would also leave readers with an unmistakable threat:
< snip >
Global Domination by Any Means
While it seems unfathomable that such a gambit - spanning the entire Middle East and edging into Russia - can be conceived let alone executed, it should be remembered that the Arab Spring and the subsequent violent subversion of Syria was planned as far back as 2007-2008, with the indirect consequence of undermining Iran as the ultimate objective. That this itself is part of a grander strategy originating from machinations hatched as far back as 1991, orchestrated by US policy makers who compare geopolitics and the world map to a "Grand Chessboard," is fairly easy to comprehend.
Read More At: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/isis-to-rescue.html
Neo-Nazis, Neo-conservatives and ISIS. US/NATO military interventionism makes for some really strange and dangerous bedfellows. I wonder, do they hog the blankets CMG?
Amid NATO's failures in Ukraine, America's terrorist mercenaries threaten war with Russia.
September 4, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - As the crisis in Ukraine continues to fare poorly for Kiev and its NATO-backers, an "unlikely" ally has emerged - ISIS. Threatening to "liberate" Chechnya and the Caucasus, ISIS would essentially be handing over regions of Russia to its Western and Persian Gulf sponsors. While one would imagine the West would attempt to at least appear to stand in solidarity with Russia in the face of this recent threat, it has instead used the threat to stir fear among Russians, and as leverage against Moscow.
The Fortune 500-funded Carnegie Europe think tank recently published an op-ed titled, "Forget NATO, Russia’s Got Bigger Problems." In it contains astounding admissions - that NATO's agenda is expanding itself all along Russia's borders, that "the EU is now in direct competition with Russia over the future of the lands straddling the EU and Russia," and that its plans in Ukraine are in utter disarray
The op-ed would also leave readers with an unmistakable threat:
< snip >
Global Domination by Any Means
While it seems unfathomable that such a gambit - spanning the entire Middle East and edging into Russia - can be conceived let alone executed, it should be remembered that the Arab Spring and the subsequent violent subversion of Syria was planned as far back as 2007-2008, with the indirect consequence of undermining Iran as the ultimate objective. That this itself is part of a grander strategy originating from machinations hatched as far back as 1991, orchestrated by US policy makers who compare geopolitics and the world map to a "Grand Chessboard," is fairly easy to comprehend.
Read More At: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/isis-to-rescue.html
Neo-Nazis, Neo-conservatives and ISIS. US/NATO military interventionism makes for some really strange and dangerous bedfellows. I wonder, do they hog the blankets CMG?
Last edited by a moderator:
The anti-West considers Nazis as source of information in their quest to assist the KGB. Such an alliance has not been seen since June 22, 1941.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Sheesh, we get it already. Being against all the neocon's lies, deceptions and war crimes = un patriotic.
We get it already Hermann. Give it a rest.
Poncho, you quoted the Nazis to support the KGB.
poncho
Well-Known Member
CMG, you're using Nazi propaganda tactics to support a dangerously insane foreign policy that backs violent neo nazi groups in Ukraine and blood thirsty Islamic radicals in the middle east. You've proven my point several times over now. How many more times do you need to prove me right?
Last edited by a moderator:
Poncho, I don't even read Nazi doctrine and I do not quote it to support the KGB, which is the same as the Gestapo. You did that, Poncho.
poncho
Well-Known Member
You know better than that and so does everyone else CMG.
I understand you're upset because I called you and your buddies out about the lack of evidence to support your many allegations.
You got nothing but allegations. Period. Now instead of just being a man and admitting that you've evidently decided that lowering yourself to making outright false accusations is going to turn the tide of a debate you never had a chance to win in the first place.
I also understand that you probably never gave it a thought when you started repeating neocon talking points over and over and over. Let me clue you in one more time.
The neocons have been using classic nazi propaganda against us since 9/11 and even before that, and you have parroted it time and again.
They use scare tactics aka fear mongering that you have parroted time and again. They use the "guilt by association" fallacy to try and silence their critics that you have parroted time and again. They try to silence their critics by painting them as un patriotic and a danger to their own country simply because they question their insane need to go around getting in everyone's business, funding and arming murderers and cut throats and dropping bombs on people.
They are no better than nazis and to be quite frank they are probably even worse because they have the pressitutes in the western media repeating their lies and unfounded allegations as if they were true without any evidence.
You don't have to study nazi propaganda to repeat it. All you have to do is keep repeating the neocon's lies as if they were the truth like you have been.
Bottom line here is you are supporting war criminals of the worst sort.
Making a bigger fool of yourself over it now isn't going to change that, all it's going to do is make you look even more foolish than you already do.
As a friend. I'm asking you. Forget the hype. Forget the hate. Forget the cold war era paranoia and look at the evidence.
You're supporting an insane policy that's built on fear, lies and deception.
It's time to wake up and be a real patriot and defend your country against these insane war criminals before they start WWIII and get us all killed.
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Far from keeping the peace, Nato is a threat to it
It was the prospect of Ukraine being drawn into the western military alliance that triggered conflict in the first place
For the west's masters of war, it's a good time to be in Wales. A military alliance that has struggled for years to explain why it still exists has got a packed agenda for its Newport summit. Nato may not be at the centre of Barack Obama and David Cameron's plans to ramp up intervention in the Middle East and wipe the so-called Islamic state "out of existence". But after 13 years of bloody occupation of Afghanistan and a calamitous intervention in Libya, the western alliance has got an enemy that at last seems to fit its bill. Swinging through the former Soviet republic of Estonia today, the US president declared that Nato was ready to defend Europe from "Russian aggression".
Nato's secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen – who insisted as Danish prime minister in 2003 that "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction … we know" – has released satellite images supposed to demonstrate Russia has invaded Ukraine. Not to be outdone, the British prime minister has compared Vladimir Putin to Hitler.
The summit is planning a rapid reaction force to be deployed across eastern Europe to deter Moscow. Britain is sending troops to Ukraine for exercises. In Washington, Congress hawks are squealing appeasement and demanding action to give Ukraine "a more capable fighting force to resist" Russia.
Any hope that today's talk of a ceasefire agreement by Ukraine's president might signal an end to the conflict was sunk when his prime minister, Arseny Yatseniuk – an American favourite in Kiev – described Russia as a "terrorist state" and, encouraged by Rasmussen, demanded that Ukraine be allowed to join Nato. It was precisely the threat that Ukraine would be drawn into a military alliance hostile to Russia, despite the opposition of most Ukrainians and its then elected government, that triggered this crisis in the first place. Instead of keeping the peace, Nato has been the cause of escalating tension and war.
Which is how it's been since Nato was founded in 1949, at the height of the cold war, six years before the Warsaw pact, supposedly as a defensive treaty against a Soviet threat. It's often claimed the alliance maintained peace in Europe for 40 years, when in fact there is not the slightest evidence the Soviet Union ever intended to attack.
< snip >
The Ukrainian forces backed by western governments include groups such as the neo-Nazi Azov battalion, whose symbol is the wartime Nazi stormtroopers' wolf's hook. The increasingly repressive Kiev regime is now attempting to ban the Ukrainian communist party, which won 13% of the vote at the last parliamentary elections.
But then Nato, whose members have often included fascist governments in the past, has never been too fussy about democracy. Evidence for its claims that Russian troops have invaded eastern Ukraine is also thin on the ground. Arms supplies and covert intervention in support of the Donbass rebels – including special forces and state-backed irregulars – are another matter.
But that's exactly what Nato powers such as the US, Britain and France have been busy doing all over the world for years, from Nicaragua to Syria and Somalia. The idea that Russia has invented a new form of "hybrid warfare" in Ukraine is bizarre.
That's not to say the proxy war between Nato and Russia in Ukraine isn't ugly and dangerous. But it's not necessary to have any sympathy for Putin's oligarchic authoritarianism to recognise that Nato and the EU, not Russia, sparked this crisis – and that it's the western powers that are resisting the negotiated settlement that is the only way out, for fear of appearing weak.
Read More At: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/03/nato-peace-threat-ukraine-military-conflict
Can ya see this CMG?
But it's not necessary to have any sympathy for Putin's oligarchic authoritarianism to recognise that Nato and the EU, not Russia, sparked this crisis – and that it's the western powers that are resisting the negotiated settlement that is the only way out, for fear of appearing weak.
Or do I need to make it bigger?
It was the prospect of Ukraine being drawn into the western military alliance that triggered conflict in the first place
For the west's masters of war, it's a good time to be in Wales. A military alliance that has struggled for years to explain why it still exists has got a packed agenda for its Newport summit. Nato may not be at the centre of Barack Obama and David Cameron's plans to ramp up intervention in the Middle East and wipe the so-called Islamic state "out of existence". But after 13 years of bloody occupation of Afghanistan and a calamitous intervention in Libya, the western alliance has got an enemy that at last seems to fit its bill. Swinging through the former Soviet republic of Estonia today, the US president declared that Nato was ready to defend Europe from "Russian aggression".
Nato's secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen – who insisted as Danish prime minister in 2003 that "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction … we know" – has released satellite images supposed to demonstrate Russia has invaded Ukraine. Not to be outdone, the British prime minister has compared Vladimir Putin to Hitler.
The summit is planning a rapid reaction force to be deployed across eastern Europe to deter Moscow. Britain is sending troops to Ukraine for exercises. In Washington, Congress hawks are squealing appeasement and demanding action to give Ukraine "a more capable fighting force to resist" Russia.
Any hope that today's talk of a ceasefire agreement by Ukraine's president might signal an end to the conflict was sunk when his prime minister, Arseny Yatseniuk – an American favourite in Kiev – described Russia as a "terrorist state" and, encouraged by Rasmussen, demanded that Ukraine be allowed to join Nato. It was precisely the threat that Ukraine would be drawn into a military alliance hostile to Russia, despite the opposition of most Ukrainians and its then elected government, that triggered this crisis in the first place. Instead of keeping the peace, Nato has been the cause of escalating tension and war.
Which is how it's been since Nato was founded in 1949, at the height of the cold war, six years before the Warsaw pact, supposedly as a defensive treaty against a Soviet threat. It's often claimed the alliance maintained peace in Europe for 40 years, when in fact there is not the slightest evidence the Soviet Union ever intended to attack.
< snip >
The Ukrainian forces backed by western governments include groups such as the neo-Nazi Azov battalion, whose symbol is the wartime Nazi stormtroopers' wolf's hook. The increasingly repressive Kiev regime is now attempting to ban the Ukrainian communist party, which won 13% of the vote at the last parliamentary elections.
But then Nato, whose members have often included fascist governments in the past, has never been too fussy about democracy. Evidence for its claims that Russian troops have invaded eastern Ukraine is also thin on the ground. Arms supplies and covert intervention in support of the Donbass rebels – including special forces and state-backed irregulars – are another matter.
But that's exactly what Nato powers such as the US, Britain and France have been busy doing all over the world for years, from Nicaragua to Syria and Somalia. The idea that Russia has invented a new form of "hybrid warfare" in Ukraine is bizarre.
That's not to say the proxy war between Nato and Russia in Ukraine isn't ugly and dangerous. But it's not necessary to have any sympathy for Putin's oligarchic authoritarianism to recognise that Nato and the EU, not Russia, sparked this crisis – and that it's the western powers that are resisting the negotiated settlement that is the only way out, for fear of appearing weak.
Read More At: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/03/nato-peace-threat-ukraine-military-conflict
Can ya see this CMG?
But it's not necessary to have any sympathy for Putin's oligarchic authoritarianism to recognise that Nato and the EU, not Russia, sparked this crisis – and that it's the western powers that are resisting the negotiated settlement that is the only way out, for fear of appearing weak.
Or do I need to make it bigger?
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Here ya go CMG, meet some of your bedfellows.
The Key Man Behind the May 2nd Odessa Ukraine Trade Unions Building Massacre: His Many Connections to the White House
The key person behind the May 2nd massacre inside Odessa’s Trade Unions Building appears to have been Ihor Kolomoyskyi who was appointed to be the regional governor in that area by Yulia Tymoshenko, the Ukrainian Presidential candidate that the Obama Administration has apparently been hoping will win the May 25th election to take over the Ukrainian Government, from the junta that the Obama Administration imposed in Ukraine on February 22nd. Just weeks before this coup, on February 4th, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Asia, Victoria Nuland, chose Tymoshenko’s ally Arseni Yatsenyuk to head the post-coup interim government, which appointed Kolomoyskyi.
Only a few months before this coup, Nuland had asserted that U.S. taxpayers had already invested more than $5 billion, in order to bring “democracy” to Ukraine, by which she was referring to the U.S. effort to oust the Russian-oriented, democratically elected, leader of Ukraine, President Viktor Yanukovych, who had prosecuted and imprisoned Tymoshenko for embezzlement and abuse of governmental office. Tymoshenko was then on 11 October 2011 sentenced to seven years in prison, and was ordered to pay the government restitution of $188 million. She was released from prison less than three years later, two days after the coup, on 24 February 2014. The Ukrainian criminal code was immediately changed, in order to legalize the actions for which Tymoshenko had been imprisoned. This allowed Tymoshenko to run for the Ukrainian Presidency. She had been Prime Minister 2007-2010. Both she and her husband, Oleksandr Tymoshenko, and his father, all three of whom were on the board of United Energy Systems of Ukraine (and thus Ms. Tymoshenko was called “the gas princess”), have been legally prosecuted as embezzling state funds; but so have most of Ukraine’s oligarchs and political leaders (and there’s a lot of crossover between those two categories).
Kolomoyskyi, who lives in Geneva Switzerland, is generally regarded as the second-richest man in Ukraine, with a fortune estimated at about $6 billion. Tymoshenko used to be called “the Eleven Billion Dollar Woman,” but, like all of Ukraine’s oligarchs (including Kolomoyskyi), nobody really knows precisely how wealthy she is, nor even whether she is more, or perhaps less, wealthy than Kolomoyskyi. Almost all of the oligarchs’ money is hidden offshore; so, is invisible.
Most of Ukraine’s oligarchs live in Geneva (like Kolomoyskyi), London (like the Tymoshenkos’ daughter, Yevhenia), NYC, Rome, and other Western cities, and they tend to stash their money in secret bank accounts in tax-haven countries, not only in order to avoid paying taxes, but also in order to make more difficult their being successfully sued by each other, for violating handshake business deals that had helped them to become so rich. After all, illegal contracts cannot be enforced by any legal government (since they’re illegal, and have secret illegal terms). Thus, other means than written contracts — handshake deals — are resorted to between these aristocrats.
Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/key-man-behind-may-2nd-odessa-ukraine-trade-unions-building-massacre-many-connections-white-house.html
Makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy all over doesn't it?
The Key Man Behind the May 2nd Odessa Ukraine Trade Unions Building Massacre: His Many Connections to the White House
The key person behind the May 2nd massacre inside Odessa’s Trade Unions Building appears to have been Ihor Kolomoyskyi who was appointed to be the regional governor in that area by Yulia Tymoshenko, the Ukrainian Presidential candidate that the Obama Administration has apparently been hoping will win the May 25th election to take over the Ukrainian Government, from the junta that the Obama Administration imposed in Ukraine on February 22nd. Just weeks before this coup, on February 4th, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Asia, Victoria Nuland, chose Tymoshenko’s ally Arseni Yatsenyuk to head the post-coup interim government, which appointed Kolomoyskyi.
Only a few months before this coup, Nuland had asserted that U.S. taxpayers had already invested more than $5 billion, in order to bring “democracy” to Ukraine, by which she was referring to the U.S. effort to oust the Russian-oriented, democratically elected, leader of Ukraine, President Viktor Yanukovych, who had prosecuted and imprisoned Tymoshenko for embezzlement and abuse of governmental office. Tymoshenko was then on 11 October 2011 sentenced to seven years in prison, and was ordered to pay the government restitution of $188 million. She was released from prison less than three years later, two days after the coup, on 24 February 2014. The Ukrainian criminal code was immediately changed, in order to legalize the actions for which Tymoshenko had been imprisoned. This allowed Tymoshenko to run for the Ukrainian Presidency. She had been Prime Minister 2007-2010. Both she and her husband, Oleksandr Tymoshenko, and his father, all three of whom were on the board of United Energy Systems of Ukraine (and thus Ms. Tymoshenko was called “the gas princess”), have been legally prosecuted as embezzling state funds; but so have most of Ukraine’s oligarchs and political leaders (and there’s a lot of crossover between those two categories).
Kolomoyskyi, who lives in Geneva Switzerland, is generally regarded as the second-richest man in Ukraine, with a fortune estimated at about $6 billion. Tymoshenko used to be called “the Eleven Billion Dollar Woman,” but, like all of Ukraine’s oligarchs (including Kolomoyskyi), nobody really knows precisely how wealthy she is, nor even whether she is more, or perhaps less, wealthy than Kolomoyskyi. Almost all of the oligarchs’ money is hidden offshore; so, is invisible.
Most of Ukraine’s oligarchs live in Geneva (like Kolomoyskyi), London (like the Tymoshenkos’ daughter, Yevhenia), NYC, Rome, and other Western cities, and they tend to stash their money in secret bank accounts in tax-haven countries, not only in order to avoid paying taxes, but also in order to make more difficult their being successfully sued by each other, for violating handshake business deals that had helped them to become so rich. After all, illegal contracts cannot be enforced by any legal government (since they’re illegal, and have secret illegal terms). Thus, other means than written contracts — handshake deals — are resorted to between these aristocrats.
Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/key-man-behind-may-2nd-odessa-ukraine-trade-unions-building-massacre-many-connections-white-house.html
Makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy all over doesn't it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Note to readers, the message CMG is trying desperately to convey here is "if you believe the evidence instead of the propaganda you are an unpatriotic democrat pacifist and a danger to your own country".
This is the exact same type of propaganda the Nazis under Hitler were famous for.
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."
--Goering at the Nuremberg Trials
It's an old over used ploy the neocons have repeated every time they want to start another war with somebody.
Evidently the neocons and their followers haven't learned any new propaganda tricks since lying us into Iraq.
You need to quit reading what the Nazis said because that stuff is poison. The KGB is just like the gestapo and the Germans and Russians were close friends until June 22, 1941.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union:
The U.S. and Nato Are Provoking the Ukrainian Crisis
Encircling Russia and Arming Ukraine Are What’s Provoking the Bear
Jack Matlock, U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, says that the U.S. and NATO are to blame for the Ukraine crisis:
The fact is they are going to intervene until they are certain that there is no prospect of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. And all of the threats by NATO and so on to sort of increase defenses elsewhere is simply provocative to the Russians. Now, I’m not saying that’s right, but I am saying that’s the way Russia is going to react. And frankly, this is all predictable. And those of us who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War almost unanimously said in the 1990s, “Do not expand NATO eastward. Find a different way to protect eastern Europe, a way that includes Russia. Otherwise, eventually there’s going to be a confrontation, because there is a red line, as far as any Russian government is concerned, when it comes to Ukraine and Georgia and other former republics of the Soviet Union.”
< snip >
In March, Matlock said:
How would Americans feel if some Russian or Chinese or even West European started putting bases in Mexico or in the Caribbean, or trying to form governments that were hostile to us? You know, we saw how we virtually went ballistic over Cuba. And I think that we have not been very attentive to what it takes to have a harmonious relationship with Russia.
***
In the Orange Revolution in Kiev, foreigners, including Americans, were very active in organizing people and inspiring them.
***
I have to ask Americans: How would Occupy Wall Street have looked if you had foreigners out there leading them? Do you think that would have helped them get their point across? I don’t think so. And I think we have to understand that when we start directly interfering, particularly our government officials, in the internal makeup of other governments, we’re really asking for trouble. [The U.S. State Department spent more than $5 billion dollars in pushing Ukraine towards the West. The U.S. ambassador to Ukraine (Geoffrey Pyatt) and assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) were also recorded plotting the downfall of the former Ukraine government in a leaked conversation. Top-level U.S. officials literally handed out cookies to the protesters who overthrew the Ukrainian government. And the U.S. has been doing everything it can to trumpet pro-Ukrainian and anti-Russian propaganda. So – without doubt – the U.S. government is heavily involved with fighting a propaganda war regarding Ukraine.
Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/former-u-s-ambassador-ussr-u-s-nato-provoking-ukrainian-crisis.html
You need to stop and look at all the evidence before you jump on the neocon bandwagon and start repeating their lies and nazi style propaganda as if it were true.
In other words you need to look before you leap.
There is no truth in the people you are listening to.
Being patriotic means defending your country against all threats foreign and domestic CMG that includes defending it from the nutcases you've been listening to that have co opted our government and are taking us down the road to WWIII. Your neocon heros aren't just dishonest to the extreme and foolish to the max they're insane.
Stop reacting (to headlines) and start thinking things through. There's a reason you can't find any evidence of "Russian agression", there is none. The people you are listening to and sounding just like are poisonous psychopathic hypocritical forked tongued liars who would set the whole world on fire in order to hold onto power.
Honest people do not poke others in the eye with a sharp stick and accuse them of being aggressive when they react to the sharp stick in their eye.
Like Matlock said, all this was very predictable.
What you do if poked you in the eye with a sharp stick? Would you stand there silently and take it as I poked you in the eye again and again and again or would you try to defend yourself at some point?
The U.S. and Nato Are Provoking the Ukrainian Crisis
Encircling Russia and Arming Ukraine Are What’s Provoking the Bear
Jack Matlock, U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, says that the U.S. and NATO are to blame for the Ukraine crisis:
The fact is they are going to intervene until they are certain that there is no prospect of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. And all of the threats by NATO and so on to sort of increase defenses elsewhere is simply provocative to the Russians. Now, I’m not saying that’s right, but I am saying that’s the way Russia is going to react. And frankly, this is all predictable. And those of us who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War almost unanimously said in the 1990s, “Do not expand NATO eastward. Find a different way to protect eastern Europe, a way that includes Russia. Otherwise, eventually there’s going to be a confrontation, because there is a red line, as far as any Russian government is concerned, when it comes to Ukraine and Georgia and other former republics of the Soviet Union.”
< snip >
In March, Matlock said:
How would Americans feel if some Russian or Chinese or even West European started putting bases in Mexico or in the Caribbean, or trying to form governments that were hostile to us? You know, we saw how we virtually went ballistic over Cuba. And I think that we have not been very attentive to what it takes to have a harmonious relationship with Russia.
***
In the Orange Revolution in Kiev, foreigners, including Americans, were very active in organizing people and inspiring them.
***
I have to ask Americans: How would Occupy Wall Street have looked if you had foreigners out there leading them? Do you think that would have helped them get their point across? I don’t think so. And I think we have to understand that when we start directly interfering, particularly our government officials, in the internal makeup of other governments, we’re really asking for trouble. [The U.S. State Department spent more than $5 billion dollars in pushing Ukraine towards the West. The U.S. ambassador to Ukraine (Geoffrey Pyatt) and assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) were also recorded plotting the downfall of the former Ukraine government in a leaked conversation. Top-level U.S. officials literally handed out cookies to the protesters who overthrew the Ukrainian government. And the U.S. has been doing everything it can to trumpet pro-Ukrainian and anti-Russian propaganda. So – without doubt – the U.S. government is heavily involved with fighting a propaganda war regarding Ukraine.
Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/former-u-s-ambassador-ussr-u-s-nato-provoking-ukrainian-crisis.html
You need to stop and look at all the evidence before you jump on the neocon bandwagon and start repeating their lies and nazi style propaganda as if it were true.
In other words you need to look before you leap.
There is no truth in the people you are listening to.
Being patriotic means defending your country against all threats foreign and domestic CMG that includes defending it from the nutcases you've been listening to that have co opted our government and are taking us down the road to WWIII. Your neocon heros aren't just dishonest to the extreme and foolish to the max they're insane.
Stop reacting (to headlines) and start thinking things through. There's a reason you can't find any evidence of "Russian agression", there is none. The people you are listening to and sounding just like are poisonous psychopathic hypocritical forked tongued liars who would set the whole world on fire in order to hold onto power.
Honest people do not poke others in the eye with a sharp stick and accuse them of being aggressive when they react to the sharp stick in their eye.
Like Matlock said, all this was very predictable.
What you do if poked you in the eye with a sharp stick? Would you stand there silently and take it as I poked you in the eye again and again and again or would you try to defend yourself at some point?
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are you propping up Don Vladimir? We know that the KGB is like the gestapo and that the Russians and Nazis ate at the same trough in Poland in September 1939. We also know that Don Vladimir is homophobic, a slap in the face to code pink.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Answer my question.
What would you do if I poked you in the eye with a sharp stick? Would you stand there silently and take it as I poked you in the eye again and again and again or would you try to defend yourself at some point?
Or are you afraid to answer it? I think you are. I think the truth scares you more than the Russians do. Prove me wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have no idea why you are supporting KGB Lt. Col. Don Vladimir Putin, a gestapo guy.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Just as I thought. The truth scares the daylights out of you. Thank you for proving me right once again.
Washington’s credibility, and your own, will continue to erode, should you be unwilling – or unable – to present more tangible evidence behind administration claims.
Exclusive: Given the very high stakes of a nuclear confrontation with Russia, some analysts wonder what’s the real motive for taking this extraordinary risk over Ukraine. Is it about natural gas, protection of the U.S. dollar’s dominance, or an outgrowth of neocon extremism, asks Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
A senior U.S. diplomat told me recently that if Russia were to occupy all of Ukraine and even neighboring Belarus that there would be zero impact on U.S. national interests. The diplomat wasn’t advocating that, of course, but was noting the curious reality that Official Washington’s current war hysteria over Ukraine doesn’t connect to genuine security concerns.
So why has so much of the Washington Establishment – from prominent government officials to all the major media pundits – devoted so much time this past year to pounding their chests over the need to confront Russia regarding Ukraine? Who is benefiting from this eminently avoidable – yet extremely dangerous – crisis? What’s driving the madness?
Of course, Washington’s conventional wisdom is that America only wants “democracy” for the people of Ukraine and that Russian President Vladimir Putin provoked this confrontation as part of an imperialist design to reclaim Russian territory lost during the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. But that “group think” doesn’t withstand examination. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Who’s Telling the Big Lie on Ukraine?”]
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/03/the-whys-behind-the-ukraine-crisis/
Who’s Telling the ‘Big Lie’ on Ukraine?
Exclusive: Official Washington draws the Ukraine crisis in black-and-white colors with Russian President Putin the bad guy and the U.S.-backed leaders in Kiev the good guys. But the reality is much more nuanced, with the American people consistently misled on key facts, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
If you wonder how the world could stumble into World War III – much as it did into World War I a century ago – all you need to do is look at the madness that has enveloped virtually the entire U.S. political/media structure over Ukraine where a false narrative of white hats vs. black hats took hold early and has proved impervious to facts or reason.
The original lie behind Official Washington’s latest “group think” was that Russian President Vladimir Putin instigated the crisis in Ukraine as part of some diabolical scheme to reclaim the territory of the defunct Soviet Union, including Estonia and other Baltic states. Though not a shred of U.S. intelligence supported this scenario, all the “smart people” of Washington just “knew” it to be true.
Yet, the once-acknowledged – though soon forgotten – reality was that the crisis was provoked last year by the European Union proposing an association agreement with Ukraine while U.S. neocons and other hawkish politicos and pundits envisioned using the Ukraine gambit as a way to undermine Putin inside Russia.
The plan was even announced by U.S. neocons such as National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman who took to the op-ed page of the Washington Post nearly a year ago to call Ukraine “the biggest prize” and an important interim step toward eventually toppling Putin in Russia.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/02/whos-telling-the-big-lie-on-ukraine/
Now, you're buried under a mountain of evidence that contradicts your unfounded allegations and all you can do is keep throwing the old "guilt by association" fallacy back at me. What am I to think about that?
The only conclusion that I can come to is someone must have removed the bone in your head that would allow you to think critically and rationally, and you are scared to death of the truth.
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
The West Paves The Road To War With Lies
Marine Le Pen, the only leader France has, is not in power, although her support is growing. Le Pen says that Hollande’s obedience to Obama “will have a huge cost for France: the lost of millions of working hours and a fine of 5 to 10 billion euro.”
Holland sought to justify his kowtowing to Washington with a lie: “Russia’s recent actions in the east of Ukraine contravene the fundamental principles of European security.”
To the complete contrary. It is the stupid actions of Hollande, Merkel, and Cameron who are endangering European security by enabling Washington’s drive to war with Russia.
According to news reports for whatever they are worth, Washington and its EU puppet are preparing more sanctions against Russia. Considering the incompetence of Washington and the EU, it is unclear who will be bitten by the sanctions–Russia or Europe. The point is that Russia has done nothing to deserve any sanctions.
The sanctions are based on Washington’s lie that, in Obama’s words (September 3),
“Russian combat forces with Russian weapons in Russian tanks” are deployed in eastern Ukraine. As Professor Michel Chossudovsky reports on Global Research, observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) “have registered no troops, ammunition or weapons crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border over the past two weeks.”
These passages are from Professor Chossudovsky’s report on the OSCD findings:
Read More At: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/09/05/west-paves-road-war-lies-paul-craig-roberts/
Marine Le Pen, the only leader France has, is not in power, although her support is growing. Le Pen says that Hollande’s obedience to Obama “will have a huge cost for France: the lost of millions of working hours and a fine of 5 to 10 billion euro.”
Holland sought to justify his kowtowing to Washington with a lie: “Russia’s recent actions in the east of Ukraine contravene the fundamental principles of European security.”
To the complete contrary. It is the stupid actions of Hollande, Merkel, and Cameron who are endangering European security by enabling Washington’s drive to war with Russia.
According to news reports for whatever they are worth, Washington and its EU puppet are preparing more sanctions against Russia. Considering the incompetence of Washington and the EU, it is unclear who will be bitten by the sanctions–Russia or Europe. The point is that Russia has done nothing to deserve any sanctions.
The sanctions are based on Washington’s lie that, in Obama’s words (September 3),
“Russian combat forces with Russian weapons in Russian tanks” are deployed in eastern Ukraine. As Professor Michel Chossudovsky reports on Global Research, observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) “have registered no troops, ammunition or weapons crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border over the past two weeks.”
These passages are from Professor Chossudovsky’s report on the OSCD findings:
Read More At: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/09/05/west-paves-road-war-lies-paul-craig-roberts/
poncho
Well-Known Member
The U.S. media has repeatedly been claiming that Russia has invaded Ukraine. They claim it for a while, and there's obviously been no invasion, so they pause. Then they claim it again. Or they claim that a convoy of aid trucks constitutes an invasion. But the aid trucks look like aid trucks in all the photographs, and yet nobody has taken similar photographs of any invasion. When Ukrainian tanks rolled into eastern Ukraine and were surrounded by civilians, we saw photographs and videos. Now there's just a Colin-Powellesque satellite photo from NATO supposedly showing Russian artillery in Ukraine.
The major Russian invasion that apparently comes complete with some sort of muggle-and-photographer-repellant charm is said to consist of 1,000 troops -- or roughly as many troops as the U.S. has now sent back into Iraq in no sort of invasion to worry about whatsoever.
But where are the 1,000 Russian troops invading Ukraine? Ukraine claims to have captured 10 of them, but the captured troops don't seem to have agreed to the story. And what happened to the other 990? How did someone get close enough to capture 10 but not photograph the other 990?
Meanwhile Russia says it's all lies and publicly urges the United States to engage with Ukraine diplomatically and urge the Ukrainian government to stop bombing its own citizens and work out a federalist system that represents everyone within its borders.
But NATO is busy announcing a counter-invasion to the invisible Russian invasion.
How do they imagine they'll get away with it? Well, let's see. Not a single individual responsible for the lies that launched the destruction of Iraq and the death of some million people and the predictable and predicted chaos now tormenting Iraq's whole region has been held accountable in any way.
The lie that Gadaffi was about to slaughter innocents, the lie that facilitated the attack on Libya and the hell that has now been established there -- No one has been held accountable for that lie in any way whatsoever.
The lie that the White House had proof that Assad had used chemical weapons -- No one has been held accountable. No one has even had to recant as they switch targets and propose bombing Assad's enemies.
The lie that drone strikes don't kill innocents and don't kill those who could easily have been arrested instead -- No one has been held accountable.
The lie that the United States had proof Russia had shot down an airplane over Ukraine -- No one has been held accountable, and the United States is opposing an independent investigation.
The lie that torture makes us safe, a lie that led to the United States torturing some folks -- No one at the level of air-conditioned office work has been held responsible at all.
Why do they think they can get away with it?
Because you let them. Because you don't want to believe they commit such atrocities. Because you don't want to believe they tell big lies.
You know, some people feel like idiots for having believed the Iraq lies. Imagine how they're going to feel when they find out they believed a nation had been invaded when it hadn't.
http://davidswanson.org/node/4508
Just noticed OR hasn't been in this thread arguing on behalf of the neocons and NATO. Must be he's still disappointed in me for seeing through all the lies. Either that or he's still looking for the evidence of a "Russian invasion".
OR if you're out there reading this, don't bother looking there is no evidence of a "Russian invasion" you've been lied to again.
Okay CMG go ahead and tell me how my pointing out the obvious is so un patriotic again, for the umpteenth time.
The major Russian invasion that apparently comes complete with some sort of muggle-and-photographer-repellant charm is said to consist of 1,000 troops -- or roughly as many troops as the U.S. has now sent back into Iraq in no sort of invasion to worry about whatsoever.
But where are the 1,000 Russian troops invading Ukraine? Ukraine claims to have captured 10 of them, but the captured troops don't seem to have agreed to the story. And what happened to the other 990? How did someone get close enough to capture 10 but not photograph the other 990?
Meanwhile Russia says it's all lies and publicly urges the United States to engage with Ukraine diplomatically and urge the Ukrainian government to stop bombing its own citizens and work out a federalist system that represents everyone within its borders.
But NATO is busy announcing a counter-invasion to the invisible Russian invasion.
How do they imagine they'll get away with it? Well, let's see. Not a single individual responsible for the lies that launched the destruction of Iraq and the death of some million people and the predictable and predicted chaos now tormenting Iraq's whole region has been held accountable in any way.
The lie that Gadaffi was about to slaughter innocents, the lie that facilitated the attack on Libya and the hell that has now been established there -- No one has been held accountable for that lie in any way whatsoever.
The lie that the White House had proof that Assad had used chemical weapons -- No one has been held accountable. No one has even had to recant as they switch targets and propose bombing Assad's enemies.
The lie that drone strikes don't kill innocents and don't kill those who could easily have been arrested instead -- No one has been held accountable.
The lie that the United States had proof Russia had shot down an airplane over Ukraine -- No one has been held accountable, and the United States is opposing an independent investigation.
The lie that torture makes us safe, a lie that led to the United States torturing some folks -- No one at the level of air-conditioned office work has been held responsible at all.
Why do they think they can get away with it?
Because you let them. Because you don't want to believe they commit such atrocities. Because you don't want to believe they tell big lies.
You know, some people feel like idiots for having believed the Iraq lies. Imagine how they're going to feel when they find out they believed a nation had been invaded when it hadn't.
http://davidswanson.org/node/4508
Just noticed OR hasn't been in this thread arguing on behalf of the neocons and NATO. Must be he's still disappointed in me for seeing through all the lies. Either that or he's still looking for the evidence of a "Russian invasion".
OR if you're out there reading this, don't bother looking there is no evidence of a "Russian invasion" you've been lied to again.
Okay CMG go ahead and tell me how my pointing out the obvious is so un patriotic again, for the umpteenth time.
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
How can you tell whether Russia has invaded Ukraine?
Last Thursday the Ukrainian government, echoed by NATO spokesmen, declared that the the Russian military is now operating within Ukraine's borders. Well, maybe it is and maybe it isn't; what do you know? They said the same thing before, most recently on August 13, and then on August 17, each time with either no evidence or fake evidence. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
You be the judge. I put together this helpful list of top ten telltale signs that will allow you to determine whether indeed Russia invaded Ukraine last Thursday, or whether Thursday's announcement is yet another confabulation. (Credit to Roman Kretsul).
Because if Russia invaded on Thursday morning, this is what the situation on the ground would look like by Saturday afternoon.
Read More At: http://cluborlov.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/how-can-you-tell-whether-russia-has.html
Last Thursday the Ukrainian government, echoed by NATO spokesmen, declared that the the Russian military is now operating within Ukraine's borders. Well, maybe it is and maybe it isn't; what do you know? They said the same thing before, most recently on August 13, and then on August 17, each time with either no evidence or fake evidence. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
You be the judge. I put together this helpful list of top ten telltale signs that will allow you to determine whether indeed Russia invaded Ukraine last Thursday, or whether Thursday's announcement is yet another confabulation. (Credit to Roman Kretsul).
Because if Russia invaded on Thursday morning, this is what the situation on the ground would look like by Saturday afternoon.
Read More At: http://cluborlov.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/how-can-you-tell-whether-russia-has.html