Yesterday in Odessa, Ukraine, more than 30 anti-Kiev protesters were burned alive, as a US-backed pro-Kiev mob set fire to the trade union building into which they ran to escape the pro-Kiev crowd. It was the largest loss of life in Ukraine since the US-backed coup in February, and it may well be a turning point in the east versus west struggle that ensued.
The pictures from the scene were
ghastly (warning: graphic), as desperate protesters tried to claw their way out of the building as they were burned alive. Also ghastly were the
photos of the young girls happily making the molotov cocktails that were
thrown into the building.
More ghastly still, was the US media coverage of the savage event. Even when 25 minutes video available
clearly demonstrated what happened in Odessa, clearly demonstrated who was responsible for the incineration of unarmed protesters, the US media all hewed to the State Department line that pointedly refused to pin any blame on the pro-Kiev mob supported by Washington. Said the State Department release:
The events in Odesa that led to the deadly fire in the Trade Union Building dramatically underscore the need for an immediate de-escalation of tensions in Ukraine. The violence and efforts to destabilize the country must end.
Contrast this to US government's very different position when violence broke out in Kiev in February: even as evidence pointed to
much violence committed by the protesters, the US nevertheless blamed the then-Yanukovich government exclusively.
"As the building was engulfed in flames, photos posted on Twitter showed people hanging out of windows and sitting on windowsills on several floors, possibly preparing to jump. Other images showed pro-regime elements celebrating the inferno. Some jeered on Twitter that "Colorado beetles are being roasted up in Odessa," using a derogatory term for pro-Russian activists wearing St. George's ribbons."
- Mike Head, Washington responsible for fascist massacre in Odessa, World Socialist Web Site
"I think what's happening now shows us who's actually been orchestrating the process from the beginning. At first, the United States preferred to stay in the shadows, but now they've exposed themselves as the leaders of this whole process."
- Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Members of the fascist Right Sector set fire to Odessa's Trade Unions House on Friday killing 40 anti-coup activists who had retreated to the building to escape escalating street violence. Witnesses say that members of the Ukrainian security forces withdrew from the scene allowing the rightwing radicals to block the exits and firebomb the building forcing many to jump from open windows to the pavement below where they died on impact. The few who survived the fall were savagely beaten with clubs and chains by the nearly 300 extremist thugs who had gathered on the street. Much of the murderous provocation was caught on video including footage of the terrified occupants leaping to their deaths.
© RIA Novosti/ Max Vetrov
Foreigners are taking part along with Ukrainian forces in special operations in the southeastern city of Slavyansk, a representative from the city's self-defense movement told RIA Novosti Friday.
"When using radios, activists have heard English several times on the air," the activist said. According to the activist, this is "direct proof of the participation of foreigners in the retaliatory operations against Slavyansk."
Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly voiced its concerns about the involvement of agents from Greystone private security firm into Ukraine's crisis, as well as about the buildup of foreign forces in Ukraine.
Last month Moscow said it had reports that some 150 of agents from Greystone mercenaries were implicated in a crackdown on protesters in eastern Ukraine.
© RIA Novosti/Mikhail Voskresensky
The self-defense forces who are opposing the assault on Slaviansk by the Ukrainian law enforcers this Friday claim that the Ukrainian soldiers are acting strangely, as if they are under the influence of some drugs.
"These people are overexcited, I personally witnessed a few episodes of unexplained aggression and merriment. As if they are fed pills with food, or something else," a pro-federalization activist told RIA Novosti, after observing the Ukrainian security forces at the abandoned protesters' checkpoint.
Previously, social networks and media reported that psychostimulants could have been given to people on Maidan under the guise of sports nutrition.
Specialists of the Kiev detoxication clinic Socioterapiya diagnosed the Euromaidan participants with signs of withdrawal symptoms, the so-called "cold turkey," which happens when an addict stops using drugs.
Nevertheless, these people deny having ever used drugs. The method of pumping up soldiers with psychotropic substances is a long known one, in particular, it has been has been practiced by the US military.
© ReutersPro-Kiev terrorist throws a Molotov cocktail at the burning Trade Union building in Odessa, killing 48 people trapped inside. May 2, 2014.
The
murder of at least
38 people in the city of Odessa in the midst of Kiev's "anti-terrorist" offensive last Friday revealed the true face of the
fascist regime that has
seized power in Kiev - and the Western media is doing everything it can to cover up the truth.
Most "mainstream" accounts of what happened there are
filled with ambiguity: it's "not clear" who's responsible, they say. Everybody was supposedly throwing Molotov cocktails and so who's to say who started which conflagration?
And yet the truth is getting out there. The
Washington Post reported on Saturday that "police said at least 31 people were dead after pro-Kiev demonstrators hurled Molotov cocktails into a building where a pro-Russia contingent was holding out." The piece cites tweets from
Howard Amos, a
Guardian reporter on the scene, noting that the fire broke out on the main floor of the Trade Union building, where a pro-Kiev crowd had gathered and was storming the building - and where, as
USA Today noted, "Witnesses and journalists reported that as the building burned with people inside,
a crowd shouted, 'Glory to Ukraine!" and 'Death to enemies!'"The
USA Today headline read: "Fire Kills 31 in Odessa." But did the fire kill them - or was it the people who set the fire? And let's go back to Howard Amos' tweets to find out exactly who is fighting on the front lines on the pro-Kiev side: why
it's Right Sector! They're leading the crowd, just as
they did on Friday.
Washington has no intention of allowing the crisis in Ukraine to be resolved. Having failed to seize the country and evict Russia from its Black Sea naval base, Washington sees new opportunities in the crisis.
One is to restart the Cold War by forcing the Russian government to occupy the Russian-speaking areas of present day Ukraine where protesters are objecting to the stooge anti-Russian government installed in Kiev by the American coup. These areas of Ukraine are former constituent parts of Russia herself. They were attached to Ukraine by Soviet leaders in the 20th century when both Ukraine and Russia were part of the same country, the USSR.
Essentially, the protesters have established independent governments in the cities. Thepolice and military units sent to suppress the protesters, called "terrorists" in the American fashion, for the most part have until now defected to the protesters.
With Obama's incompetent White House and State Department having botched Washington's takeover of Ukraine, Washington has been at work shifting the blame to Russia. According to Washington and its presstitute media, the protests are orchestrated by the Russian government and have no sincere basis. If Russia sends in military units to protect the Russian citizens in the former Russian territories, the act will be used by Washington to confirm Washington's propaganda of a Russian invasion (as in the case of Georgia), and Russia will be further demonized.
The Russian government is in a predicament. Moscow does not want financial responsibility for these territories but cannot stand aside and permit Russians to be put down by force. The Russian government has attempted to keep Ukraine intact, relying on the forthcoming elections in Ukraine to bring to office more realistic leaders than the stooges installed by Washington.
Justin Sink
The HillThu, 24 Apr 2014 13:13 UTC
© Getty Images
First lady Michelle Obama is scrapping her plans to deliver a graduation speech for high school seniors in Topeka, Kan., after hundreds signed a petition in protest.
Instead of delivering a graduation speech, Obama will speak before the school district the day before graduation, and will deliver remarks at a "Senior Recognition Day."
More than 1,750 people had signed a petition protesting the first lady's appearance at the graduation ceremony, angered that security concerns would limit the number of friends and family who could attend.
According to the
Topeka Capital-Journal, students would have only been allotted six tickets apiece had the first lady maintained her original plans.In a statement to The Hill, the first lady's communications director said Obama wanted to accommodate all who hoped to attend the graduation ceremony.
When the Bush administration started lobbying for war with Iraq, they used as rationale a definition of preemption (generally meaning anticipatory use of force in the face of an imminent attack) that was broadened to allow for the waging of a preventive war in which force may be used even without evidence of an imminent attack. They also were able to convince much of the American public that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks of 9/11, despite the fact that no evidence of a link has been uncovered. Consequently, many people supported the war on the basis of 1) a policy that has no legal basis in international law and 2) a totally unfounded claim of Iraqi guilt.
What most people do not know, however, is that certain high ranking officials in the Bush administration have been working for regime change in Iraq for the past decade, long before terrorism became an important issue for our country. In 1997 they formed an organization called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). They have sought the establishment of a much stronger U.S. presence throughout the Mideast and Iraq's Saddam Hussein has been their number one target for regime change. Members of this group drafted and successfully passed through Congress the Iraqi Liberation Act, giving legal sanctions for an invasion of the country, and funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to Hussein opposition groups called the Iraqi National Congress and The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.
© PJMedia.com
Attorney General Eric Holder canceled an appearance before the Oklahoma City Police Department's graduating cadet class Thursday amid angry protests over his scheduled visit.
Mr. Holder was expected to deliver remarks at the afternoon graduation ceremony, according to his official itinerary sent out by the Justice Department Thursday morning.
A Justice Department spokesman denied that the trip was canceled because of the possibility of a hostile reception. An early meeting at the Justice Department delayed Mr. Holder's departure from Washington, causing him to miss the graduation ceremony, spokesman Brian Fallon said in an email.
"The attorney general had been looking forward to addressing the cadets, and regrets he cannot attend in person," Mr. Fallon said. "He extends his heartfelt congratulations to the cadets and their families."
Chris Elliott
GuardianSun, 04 May 2014 15:03 UTC
© Russian govt
Trolling covers a multitude of sins but
a particularly nasty strain has emerged in the midst of the armed conflict in
Ukraine, which
infests comment threads on
the Guardian and elsewhere, despite the best efforts of moderators.
Readers and reporters alike are concerned that these are from those paid to troll, and to denigrate in abusive terms anyone criticising
Russia or President Vladimir Putin.
One complaint came to the readers' editor's office on 6 March. "In the past weeks [I] have become incredibly frustrated and disillusioned by your inability
to effectively police the waves of Nashibot trolls who've been relentlessly posting pro-Putin propaganda in the comments on Ukraine v Russia coverage.
"... the quantity of
pro-Kremlin trolling on this topic ... which has been documented extensively since 2012 as
a real and insidious threat to online communities of idea and debate,
has rendered commenting on these articles all but meaningless, and a worthless exercise in futility and frustration for anyone not already being
mind-controlled by the Kremlin."
On 23 April the writer complained again: "
One need only pick a Ukraine article at random, pick any point in the comments at random, and they will find themselves in a sea of incredibly aggressive and hostile users (the most obvious have accounts created since February 2014 ... but there also exist those who registered with the
Guardian before the high point of the crisis)
who post the most biased, inciteful [sic] pro-Kremlin, anti-western propaganda that seems as if it's taken from a template, so repetitive are the statements. Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends',
sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive."
Comment: Props to the Guardian for publishing such an exemplary propaganda piece! Somebody's gotta do it, and Chris Elliott takes up the task with inhuman vim and vigor. There's so much wrong with Elliott's piece above that it's hard to know where to start. First of all, yes, many governments have paid internet trolls to maintain the accepted talking points and party line on a whole host of issues. But 'Missy' Elliott misses the crux of the matter: how many pro-Kiev comments are being posted by American govt-hired trolls? Why no outrage about the open secret called Hasbara, Israel's online army of brainwashed and brainwashing Net trolls?
Second, why on earth should anti-Kiev comments be described as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" [sic]? Let's remember what we're talking about here! After all, a pro-Kiev commenter, by supporting the "Western" narrative, must at least implicitly support the following: externally directed coups against legally elected governments, the murder of innocent people fed up with their corrupt leaders, said leaders ordering troops to kill their fellow citizens, right-wing nazi extremists, the deliberate murder of unarmed civilians by burning them alive, shooting them in the head, strangling pregnant women, et cetera ad nauseam. Using nasty words to describe something that is inherently anti-nastiness is a classic propaganda technique. Is your government engaged in nefarious, murderous, treasonous behavior? Well, just describe the opposition as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" and you'll be right as rain!
Third, there is "no conclusive evidence" that this is a Russian campaign! Did it not even enter the empty-headed Elliott's mind that these comments reflect what people actually think? That they're fed up with the murderous regime installed by Western advisers and manipulators, and that online comments reflect this? It's plain as day who's in the wrong here: Kiev, the West, NOT Russia or the anti-Kiev protestors in Ukraine.
Fourth, we have only one response to the Guardian's 'commenter' quoted above, who wrote, "Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends', sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive": that's the way it should be!
Comment: Props to the Guardian for publishing such an exemplary propaganda piece! Somebody's gotta do it, and Chris Elliott takes up the task with inhuman vim and vigor. There's so much wrong with Elliott's piece above that it's hard to know where to start. First of all, yes, many governments have paid internet trolls to maintain the accepted talking points and party line on a whole host of issues. But 'Missy' Elliott misses the crux of the matter: how many pro-Kiev comments are being posted by American govt-hired trolls? Why no outrage about the open secret called Hasbara, Israel's online army of brainwashed and brainwashing Net trolls?
Second, why on earth should anti-Kiev comments be described as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" [sic]? Let's remember what we're talking about here! After all, a pro-Kiev commenter, by supporting the "Western" narrative, must at least implicitly support the following: externally directed coups against legally elected governments, the murder of innocent people fed up with their corrupt leaders, said leaders ordering troops to kill their fellow citizens, right-wing nazi extremists, the deliberate murder of unarmed civilians by burning them alive, shooting them in the head, strangling pregnant women, et cetera ad nauseam. Using nasty words to describe something that is inherently anti-nastiness is a classic propaganda technique. Is your government engaged in nefarious, murderous, treasonous behavior? Well, just describe the opposition as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" and you'll be right as rain!
Third, there is "no conclusive evidence" that this is a Russian campaign! Did it not even enter the empty-headed Elliott's mind that these comments reflect what people actually think? That they're fed up with the murderous regime installed by Western advisers and manipulators, and that online comments reflect this? It's plain as day who's in the wrong here: Kiev, the West, NOT Russia or the anti-Kiev protestors in Ukraine.
Fourth, we have only one response to the Guardian's 'commenter' quoted above, who wrote, "Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends', sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive": that's the way it should be!