The parliament, aware of the obvious public relations fiasco that would follow if it bowed to far-right demands to honor members of the Nazi-affiliated Ukrainian Insurgent Army (or UIA), defeated the proposal. That touched off riots by an estimated 8,000 protesters led by Ukraine's right-wing Svoboda party and the Right Sektor.
Historians blame the UIA and other Ukrainian fascist forces for the extermination of thousands of Poles and Jews during World War II as these right-wing Ukrainian paramilitaries sided with the German Nazis in their fight against the Soviet Union's Red Army. Svoboda and the Right Sektor have elevated UIA leader Stepan Bandera to the level of a Ukrainian national hero.
But Svoboda and Right Sektor activists are not just neo-Nazi street protesters. They were key figures in last February's violent uprising that overthrew elected President Viktor Yanukovych and established a coup regime that the U.S. State Department quickly recognized as "legitimate." Many far-right militants have since been incorporated into the Ukrainian military in its fight to crush resistance to the coup regime from ethnic Russians in Ukraine's east.
Though played down by the Western press, the neo-Nazi affiliations of these militants have occasionally popped up in news stories, including references to displays of Nazi insignias, but usually these citations are mentioned only in passing or are confined to the last few paragraphs of lengthy stories or are dismissed as "Russian propaganda."
But this neo-Nazi reality continues to be an inconvenient truth about the U.S.-backed coup regime that seized power in Kiev with the overthrow of Yanukovych on Feb. 22. Several government ministries, including national security, were given to these far-right elements in recognition of their key role in the putsch that forced members of Yanukovych's government to flee for their lives.
The larger historical context is that Nazism has been deeply rooted in western Ukraine since World War II, especially in cities like Lviv, where a cemetery to the veterans of the Galician SS, a Ukrainian affiliate of the Nazi SS, is maintained. These old passions were brought to the surface again in the battle to oust Yanukovych and sever historic ties to Russia.
The muscle behind the U.S.-backed Maidan protests against Yanukovych came from neo-Nazi militias trained in western Ukraine, organized into 100-man brigades and dispatched to Kiev. After the coup, neo-Nazi leader Andriy Parubiy, who was commander of the Maidan "self-defense forces," was elevated to national security chief and soon announced that the Maidan militia forces would be incorporated into the National Guard and sent to eastern Ukraine to fight ethnic Russians resisting the coup regime.
At War in the East
As the U.S. government and media cheered this "anti-terrorist operation," the neo-Nazis and other right-wing battalions engaged in brutal street fighting against Russian ethnic rebels. Only occasionally did this nasty reality slip into the major U.S. news media. For instance, an Aug. 10 article in the New York Times mentioned the neo-Nazi paramilitaries at the end of a lengthy story on another topic.
"The fighting for Donetsk has taken on a lethal pattern: The regular army bombards separatist positions from afar, followed by chaotic, violent assaults by some of the half-dozen or so paramilitary groups surrounding Donetsk who are willing to plunge into urban combat," the Times reported.
"Officials in Kiev say the militias and the army coordinate their actions, but the militias, which count about 7,000 fighters, are angry and, at times, uncontrollable. One known as Azov, which took over the village of Marinka, flies a neo-Nazi symbol resembling a Swastika as its flag." [See Consortiumnews.com's "NYT Discovers Ukraine's Neo-Nazis at War."]
The conservative London Telegraph offered more details about the Azov battalion in an article by correspondent Tom Parfitt, who wrote: "Kiev's use of volunteer paramilitaries to stamp out the Russian-backed Donetsk and Luhansk 'people's republics'... should send a shiver down Europe's spine.
Based on interviews with militia members, the Telegraph reported that some of the fighters doubted the reality of the Holocaust, expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler and acknowledged that they are indeed Nazis."Recently formed battalions such as Donbas, Dnipro and Azov, with several thousand men under their command, are officially under the control of the interior ministry but their financing is murky, their training inadequate and their ideology often alarming. The Azov men use the neo-Nazi Wolfsangel (Wolf's Hook) symbol on their banner and members of the battalion are openly white supremacists, or anti-Semites."
Andriy Biletsky, the Azov commander, "is also head of an extremist Ukrainian group called the Social National Assembly," according to the Telegraph article which quoted a commentary by Biletsky as declaring: "The historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen."
In other words, for the first time since World War II, a government had dispatched Nazi storm troopers to attack a European population - and officials in Kiev knew what they were doing. The Telegraph questioned Ukrainian authorities in Kiev who acknowledged that they were aware of the extremist ideologies of some militias but insisted that the higher priority was having troops who were strongly motivated to fight. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Ignoring Ukraine's Neo-Nazi Storm Troopers."]
But a rebel counteroffensive by ethnic Russians in August reversed many of Kiev's gains and drove the Azov and other government forces back to the port city of Mariupol, where Foreign Policy's reporter Alec Luhn also encountered these neo-Nazis. He wrote:
Nazi Insignia on Helmets"Blue and yellow Ukrainian flags fly over Mariupol's burned-out city administration building and at military checkpoints around the city, but at a sport school near a huge metallurgical plant, another symbol is just as prominent: the wolfsangel ('wolf trap') symbol that was widely used in the Third Reich and has been adopted by neo-Nazi groups. ...
"Pro-Russian forces have said they are fighting against Ukrainian nationalists and 'fascists' in the conflict, and in the case of Azov and other battalions, these claims are essentially true." [See Consortiumnews.com's "Seeing No Neo-Nazi Militias in Ukraine."]
More evidence continued to emerge about the presence of Nazis in the ranks of Ukrainian government fighters. Germans were shocked to see video of Azov militia soldiers decorating their gear with the Swastika and the "SS rune." NBC News reported: "Germans were confronted with images of their country's dark past ... when German public broadcaster ZDF showed video of Ukrainian soldiers with Nazi symbols on their helmets in its evening newscast.
Despite the newsworthiness of a U.S.-backed government dispatching neo-Nazi storm troopers to attack Ukrainian cities, the major U.S. news outlets went to extraordinary lengths to excuse this behavior, with the Washington Post publishing a rationalization that the use of the Swastika was merely "romantic.""The video was shot ... in Ukraine by a camera team from Norwegian broadcaster TV2. 'We were filming a report about Ukraine's AZOV battalion in the eastern city of Urzuf, when we came across these soldiers,' Oysten Bogen, a correspondent for the private television station, told NBC News. "Minutes before the images were taped, Bogen said he had asked a spokesperson whether the battalion had fascist tendencies. 'The reply was: absolutely not, we are just Ukrainian nationalists,' Bogen said."
This curious description of the symbol most associated with the human devastation of the Holocaust and World War II can be found in the last three paragraphs of a Post lead story published in September. Post correspondent Anthony Faiola portrayed the Azov fighters as "battle-scarred patriots" nobly resisting "Russian aggression" and willing to resort to "guerrilla war" if necessary.
The article found nothing objectionable about Azov's plans for "sabotage, targeted assassinations and other insurgent tactics" against Russians, although such actions in other contexts are regarded as terrorism. The extremists even extended their threats to the government of Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko if he agrees to a peace deal with the ethnic Russian east that is not to the militia's liking.
"If Kiev reaches a deal with rebels that they don't support, paramilitary fighters say they could potentially strike pro-Russian targets on their own - or even turn on the government itself," the article states. (The riot outside the parliament building on Tuesday is an early indication that such a threat is real.)
The Post article - like almost all of its coverage of Ukraine - was laudatory about the Kiev forces fighting ethnic Russians in the east, but the newspaper did have to do some quick thinking to explain a photograph of a Swastika gracing an Azov brigade barracks.
So, in the last three paragraphs of the story, Faiola reported: "One platoon leader, who called himself Kirt, conceded that the group's far right views had attracted about two dozen foreign fighters from around Europe.
"In one room, a recruit had emblazoned a swastika above his bed. But Kirt ... dismissed questions of ideology, saying that the volunteers - many of them still teenagers - embrace symbols and espouse extremist notions as part of some kind of 'romantic' idea."
Now, this inconvenient truth - this neo-Nazi extremism in Ukraine - has reemerged in violent clashes outside the parliament building in Kiev.
Sorry, the US media and the most media outlets in the West are ZIONIST-controlled mouthpieces, and are NOT 'presstitutes' blindly doing the government's bidding. There's a simple, obvious analysis to show that.
Ask yourself this: If B.O. suddenly grew a pair AND finally exhibited a small measure of true humanitarianism by abruptly turning on The Cancer (Israel) and the zionists for their crimes against humanity, and further, by calling for (as he did as a candidate in 2008) JUSTICE FOR PALESTINE, and thereafter, PROSECUTIONS of Israeli leadership for the endless horrific brutalities inflicted on countless Palestinian innocents, do you think for even a second that publications like the New York Times, or the Washington Post, or CNN, or Faux News would SUPPORT this? Do you? Because if you do, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you cheap!
No, my friends, the zionists and their incredible wealth aim for full spectrum information control and dominance, and they do so by buying up sufficient control of media organizations and installing 'friendly' editors who know what side their matzohs are buttered on. (And ridding themselves of those who don't!)
In fact, Noam Chomsky specifically refers to this process of zionising the news and other critical public information sources (such as university and college professorships) in the book "Understanding Power" in the chapter entitled "The Fate Of An Honest Intellectual", which tells the sad story of Norman Finkelstein, a truly righteous jewish mensch, superb academic, and vociferous critic of the Holocaust Industry and The Cancer's genocidal policies, who has had his academic career annihilated as a result.
So how do the zionists do this?
It's simple, Chomsky says: put a menorah or a small Israeli flag on your desk or credenza and the boot-licking minions will take the hint, report in a zio-positive fashion, and quickly move up the ladder of success to positions of even more authority and ability to shift the narrative towards a zio-friendly result (and the clueless ones who print the truth will get transferred, demoted and ultimately, fired, and their careers utterly destroyed, like Dr. Finkelstein. No need for open proselytizing or coercion whatsoever; the keen, malleable ones will take the hint immediately. The truthful ones will get the boot.)
This system applies everywhere the zionists infiltrate and then dominate an industry. And the media is a key area of dominance for them. So is education (as Dr Finkelstein has repeatedly found out.)
This is why you'll read me saying: "They control all that you see and hear." Because they do. The MSM is theirs, lock, stock and barrel. It is strictly and 100% pure ZOT: Zionist Occupied Territory. They don't have to own it all, just enough to insure THEIR people edit and shape what you get spoon-fed as "news". I call it, "The Jew's News".
(And who can blame them? They have the power, and they are using it to their collective advantage. I simply despise the result it produces at all levels. Thus my virulent anti-zionist postings. Never anti-jew postings, of course, as I am part jewish, too. Jews in general are good, fine people; it's the zionists who are the problem. I just wanted to make that crystal clear.)
So again, ask yourself, what if B.O. really did seek justice for Palestine? Would the US papers and televised press really follow the government's new line against The Cancer and the zionists, and demand justice for Palestinians, and war crime prosecutions for Israeli leaders? Or would they seriously question Obama's mental clarity, or maybe even press for his impeachment? (Clearly, it's a political capital offense in America currently to offend zionists, The Cancer, or impugn their evil, thieving, murderous policies in any meaningful way.) And if all that didn't stop B.O. from pressing forward with plans for justice for Palestine, I could even imagine another JFK moment being manufactured in the dark recesses of zio-fascist circles that exist at every level of US governance.
So in closing, I must protest this disinformation campaign conveniently disguised and hidden in a small, cute, one-word slogan that stops the inquiry from ultimately going where it needs to. Calling the MSM a bunch of "presstitutes" for the government is simply a very misleading generalization, and actually false. It shifts the focus away from the REAL force currently dominating the American MSM news and information: zionism and its eager, willing, well-paid minions (which even Chomsky makes abundantly clear, as noted above.)