Joe Biden heeft al lang toegegeven dat hij Oekraïne onder druk zette een openbaar aanklager te ontslaan die zijn zoon vervolgde

In het
hieronder opgenomen artikel van Joe Lauria, gepubliceerd op
Consortium News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media, wordt
onder meer gemeld dat Biden al een aantal jaren geleden, toen hij onder Obama vicepresident was, heeft
toegegeven de Oekraïense regering onder druk te hebben gezet om een
openbaar aanklager te ontslaan, ‘toevallig’ was die
aanklager bezig met een corruptie zaak bij het bedrijf Burisma, waar
de zoon van Biden (Hunter) een achterlijk hoog salaris verdiende, maar liefst
50.000 dollar per maand…… De druk bestond eruit zoals je
wellicht weet, dat Oekraïne een miljard aan oorlogstuig zou mislopen
als men niet gehoorzaamde…….

Eén
verschil met de hysterie bij de reguliere media in de VS (die eerder
Oekraïne onder de corrupte neonazi Porosjenko door dik en dun steunden) is het feit dat dit totaal geen
nieuws is….. Als het om het ‘buitenlandbeleid’ van de VS gaat, was er
geen administratie die niet ongehoorzame landen (ongehoorzaam aan de VS) onder druk zette met de dreiging
dat men verdere hulp van de VS kon vergeten, of dat de handel met
zo’n land zou worden stopgezet, of zelfs een dreiging met een
coup of oorlog………. 

Het buitenlandbeleid van de VS: -chantage, -manipuleren
van verkiezingen en -opstanden op poten zetten met de bedoeling dat deze
tot een coup leiden (waar de VS bij helpt of zelfs de
regie neemt als een coup bijvoorbeeld door het leger van een bepaald
land wordt uitgevoerd). Als dit alles niet werkt staat de weg open om
een land aan te vallen, meestal nadat zo´n land al economisch aan de
grond is geraakt door illegale sancties van de VS (zie Venezuela en Iran)… Ook maakt de VS veelvuldig gebruik van false flag operaties als reden voor het binnenvallen van een land, voorbeelden te
over……..

Waar men
al helemaal niet over lult is het feit dat Biden mede aan de wieg
stond van de opstand en coup tegen de democratisch gekozen Oekraïense president
Janoekovytsj, een opstand opgezet door hare kwaadaardigheid Hillary
Clinton toen zij minister van buitenlandse zaken was onder
Obama…… Clinton stak maar liefst 4 miljard dollar aan
belastinggeld in de opstand en coup in Oekraïne…… Ook de regie
tijdens de opstand in Oekraïne was van VS hand (CIA), dat tevens zorgde voor het geweld dat werd gebruikt op het Maidanplein, geweld dat vervolgens in de schoenen van Janoekovytsj werd geschoven,
ofwel ook dat was een false flag operatie van de VS……

Janoekovytsj
moest weg van de VS, daar hij weigerde in het keurslijf van de EU te
stappen en daarmee de economie een enorme slag toe te brengen,
terwijl hij een uiterst lucratieve deal met Rusland kon sluiten……

Lees
over het zoveelste staaltje smeerpijperij van de VS, of beter gezegd
terreur van de VS:

The
Untold Story of the Trump-Ukraine Scandal

September
28, 2019 at 6:09 pm

Written
by 
Consortium
News

(CN) —
The most crucial aspects of the Trump-Ukraine “scandal,”
which has led to impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump, are
not being told, even by Republicans.

Trump
was very likely motivated by politics if he indeed withheld military
aid to Ukraine in exchange for Kiev launching an investigation into
Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden, though
the 
transcript of
the call released by the White House between Trump and Ukrainian
President Volodymr Zelinsky does not make certain such a
quid-pro-quo.

But
what’s not being talked about in the mainstream is the context of
this story, which shows that, politics aside, Biden should indeed be
investigated in both Ukraine and in the United States.

We
know from the
 leaked, early
2014 telephone conversation between Victoria Nuland, then assistant
secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, and Geoffrey
Pyatt, then U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, that then Vice President
Biden played a role in “midwifing” the U.S.-backed overthrow of
an elected Ukrainian government soon after that conversation.

That’s
the biggest crime in this story that isn’t being told. The illegal
overthrow of a sovereign government.

As
booty from the coup, the sitting vice president’s son, Hunter
Biden, soon got a seat on the board of Ukraine’s biggest gas
producer, Burisma Holdings. This can only be seen as a transparently
neocolonial maneuver to take over a country and install one’s own
people. But Biden’s son wasn’t the only one.

A
family friend of then Secretary of State John Kerry also joined
Burisma’s board. U.S. agricultural giant Monsanto got a
Ukrainian 
contract soon
after the overthrow.  And the first, post-coup Ukrainian finance
minister was an 
American
citizen
,
a former State Department official, who was given Ukrainian
citizenship the day before she took up the post.

After
a Ukrainian prosecutor began 
looking into
possible corruption at Burisma, Biden 
openly
admitted
 at
a conference last year that as vice president he withheld a $1
billion credit line to Ukraine until the government fired the
prosecutor. As Biden says himself, it took only six hours for it to
happen.

Exactly
what Biden boasted of doing is what the Democrats are now accusing
Trump of doing, and it isn’t clear if Trump got what he wanted
as Biden did.

Threats,
Bribes and Blackmail

That
leads to another major part of this story not being told: the routine
way the U.S. government conducts foreign policy: with bribes, threats
and blackmail.


Trump
may have withheld military aid to seek a probe into Biden, but it is
hypocritically being framed by Democrats as an abuse of power out of
the ordinary. But it is very much ordinary.

Examples
abound. The threat of withholding foreign aid was wielded against
nations on the UN Security Council in 1991 when the U.S. sought
authorization for the First Gulf War. Yemen had the temerity to vote
against. A member of the U.S. delegation 
told Yemen’s
ambassador: “That’s the most expensive vote you ever cast.” The
U.S. then cut $70 million in foreign aid to the Middle East’s
poorest nation, and Saudi Arabia repatriated about a million Yemeni
workers.

The
same thing happened before the Second Gulf War in 2003, as revealed
by whistleblower Katharine Gun (who will appear Friday night on 
CN
Live!
).
Gun leaked an NSA memo that showed the U.S. sought help from its
British counterpart in signals intelligence to spy on the missions of
Security Council members to get “leverage” over them to influence
their vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq.

In
2001 the U.S. 
threatened the
end of military and foreign aid if nations did not conclude bilateral
agreements granting immunity to U.S. troops before the International
Criminal Court.

More
recently, the U.S. used its muscle against Ecuador,
including 
dangling a
$10 billion IMF loan, in exchange for the expulsion
of 
WikiLeaks founder
Julian Assange from its London embassy.

This
is how the U.S. conducts “diplomacy.”

As
former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali 
wrote:

Coming
from a developing country, I was trained extensively in international
law and diplomacy and mistakenly assumed that the great powers,
especially the United States, also trained their representatives in
diplomacy and accepted the value of it. But the Roman Empire had no
need for diplomacy. Nor does the United States. Diplomacy is
perceived by an imperial power as a waste of time and prestige and a
sign of weakness.”

This
fundamental corruption of U.S. foreign policy, which includes
overthrowing elected governments, is matched only by the corruption
of a political system that exalts partisan political power above all
else. Exposing this deep-seated and longstanding corruption should
take precedence over scoring partisan scalps, whether Biden’s or
Trump’s.

By
Joe Lauria 
Republished
with permission / 
Consortium
News
 / Report
a typo

=======================================

Zie ook:

VS burgers zijn gewaarschuwd: Rusland kan hun hersenen hacken en laten geloven dat Joe Biden niet geschikt is als president

Nieuwe Russische hack samenzweringstheorie t.a.v. Joe Biden ‘schokt’ VS Democraten‘ 

Hunter Biden zit in de Oekraïense ‘witwas val’ 

Snowden vindt het ongelofelijk dat de media VS politici niet aanspreken op totaal verschillende reacties n.a.v. ‘klokkenluiden’

Joe Biden (ex-vicepresident VS) heeft zichzelf fiks in de Oekraïense staart gebeten

Oekraïne, een mislukte, corrupte en fascistische staat……..‘ (o.a. met aandacht voor Biden en zijn zoon)

VS stelt Duitsland een ultimatum (chantage): geen Russisch gas via NS2 anders volgt een handelsoorlog…..
Chantage o.a. ten behoeve van het Oekraïense bedrijf Burisma waar
Hunter Biden voor werkt. Intussen heeft Trump aangekondigd dat de
bedrijven, o.a. een deels Nederlands bedrijf, die blijven meewerken aan
Nord Stream 2 (NS2) gesanctioneerd zullen worden…..
Zie voorts: ‘Donald
‘Darth Vader’ Trump verklaart ruimte tot oorlogsgebied en laat
Duitsland en haar bedrijven weten dat men zich heeft te schikken naar de
VS wensen
 

De Krim het echte verhaal: geen annexatie maar de vrijwillige aansluiting bij Rusland, zelfs Oekraïners stemden voor

Oekraïne: opnieuw neonazi protesten op Maidanplein, vanwege Rusland vriendelijk handelen door president Zelensky

Voor meer berichten over Biden of Oekraïne, klik op het betreffende label, direct onder dit bericht.

Oekraïne, wat de reguliere (massa-) media, ‘deskundigen’ en politici u niet vertellen over dit door een junta geregeerd land

Mint
Press News publiceerde gisteren een lang artikel van Darius
Shahtahmasebi over Oekraïne en wat de massamedia (zogenaamd onafhankelijk) u niet vertellen.
Dezelfde media die keer op keer volhouden dat Rusland de VS
presidentsverkiezingen, het Brexit-referendum, het
onafhankelijkheidsreferendum van Catalonië enz. hebben
gemanipuleerd, zonder daar ook maar één steekhoudend bewijs voor te
leveren.

Voor die
zogenaamde Russische bemoeienis wordt ook het beest Trump als
mededader genoemd, terwijl we telkens weer zien, dat Trump
allesbehalve een pro-Russische beleid voert, iets dat Shahtahmasebi
in het volgende artikel uit en te na bewijst.

In het
artikel o.a. De volgende feiten:

  • De
    door de VS georganiseerde opstand in Oekraïne, die tot de
    succesvolle staatsgreep tegen de democratisch gekozen president
    Janoekovytsj moest leiden en leidde, waarna de VS een door haar
    gewilde junta installeerde (met bewijzen van gesprekken daarover
    tussen Nuland (staatssecretaris BuZa onder Obama) en Pyatt, destijds
    ambassadeur voor de VS in Oekraïne ….. Overigens was de VS al
    vanaf 2011 bezig met de voorbereidingen tot die opstand, onder
    eindverantwoording van Hillary Clinton (en Obama), de toenmalige minister van
    Buitenlandse Zaken. Deze coup en de voorbereidingen heeft de VS meer
    dan 4 miljard dollar gekost…… Intussen is duidelijk geworden dat
    Porosjenko ongelofelijk corrupt is en er intussen nog geen 15% van
    de bevolking achter deze juntaleider staat………

  • De
    VS levert zware wapens aan Oekraïne, waarmee de VS de
    ‘burgeroorlog’ in Oekraïne verder aanwakkert en Rusland voor het
    blok zet…. Immers de burgers in Oost-Oekraïne, die niet wensen te
    leven onder de neonazi-dictatuur van Porosjenko, worden al een paar
    jaar gebombardeerd door de neonazi-bataljons van Porosjenko. Rusland
    zou vechten in Oekraïne, een belachelijke weergave van de
    werkelijkheid >> wanneer dit een feit zou zijn, waren deze
    neonazi-bataljons al lang het gebied uit gewerkt. Met deze nieuwe VS
    wapens wordt het steeds moeilijker voor Rusland niet de burgers in
    Oost-Oekraïne te hulp te schieten met militaire hulp……..

  • Het
    door de VS ondersteunen van neonazi’s in Oekraïne. Voordat
    Porosjenko door de VS werd geparachuteerd als ‘president’ van
    Oekraïne, werkte hij al voor BuZa in Washington, hij werd in de VS
    zelfs ‘onze mol’ in Oekraïne genoemd….. Dit alles terwijl de VS
    zogenaamd opkomt voor democratie, waar dit ‘land’ bij herhaling
    democratisch gekozen regeringen aan de kant laat zetten en het
    liefst laat vervangen door fascisten…. Naast Oekraïne: Chili in 1973
    en Honduras in 2009, verder een reeks Midden- en Zuid-Amerikaanse
    landen voor en na 1973, waar de VS uiteraard dikke steun
    verleende aan deze fascistische mensenrechten schendende junta’s……. Voorts nog de staatsgrepen tegen: Syrië (een mislukte poging),
    Brazilië (de staatsgreep tegen president Dilma Rousseff), Libië en
    Iran (waar de staatsgrepen tegen de Braziliaanse president Rousseff
    en president Assad van Syrië, alweer gericht waren tegen democratisch
    gekozen regeringen…….). Om te besluiten met Venezuela waartegen de VS al een aantal jaren een economische oorlog voert en gewelddadige groepen steunt, dit met de opzet president Maduro af te zetten…..

  • De
    uitbreiding van de NAVO, tegen de afspraken in, die in 1991 met
    Gorbatsjov werden gemaakt….. Het niet uitbreiden van de NAVO was zelfs de eis van Gorbatsjov, voor het akkoord gaan met de hereniging van Oost- en
    West-Duitsland……..

Mensen lezenm dit met feiten onderbouwde artikel van
Shahtahmasebi en geeft het door!

What
Trump Is Doing in Ukraine Proves the Mainstream Media Doesn’t Know
Sh*t

January
9, 2018 at 9:38 am

Written
by 
Darius
Shahtahmasebi

The
Russia-obsessed corporate media continues to peddle the narrative
that Donald Trump has turned the United States into a client-state of
Russia, even while he directly provokes the former Soviet Union by
providing Russia’s foe — Urkaine — with the largest lethal
assistance to a country on its border.

(MPN) — Despite
the mainstream media’s 
insistence that
U.S. President Donald Trump is some sort of compromised Russian
lackey, the fact is that at the end of last year, his
 administration
approved
 the
largest U.S. commercial sale of lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine
since 2014. This is a move that clearly
 infuriates
and angers
 Russia,
souring relations between the two countries even more so than
they
 already
had been
 under
the Obama administration (and in
 various
stages
 throughout
Trump’s first year in office).

According to The
Washington Post
,
administration officials confirmed that in December the State
Department had approved a commercial license authorizing the export
of Model M107A1 Sniper Systems, ammunition, and other associated
parts and accessories to Ukraine — a package valued at $41.5
million.

At
first, it was reported there had not yet been approval to export the
heavier weaponry the Ukrainian government had been asking for, such
as anti-tank missiles. However, by the end of

December, reports began
surfacing that the Trump administration was in fact going to
provide 35 FGM-148 Javelin launchers and 210 anti-tank missiles.
The Javelin is allegedly one of the most advanced anti-tank systems
on the market. The total package is now valued at $47 million, and it
wouldn’t be surprising if this figure continues to rise in the
weeks to come.

Even
under the 
2014
Ukraine Freedom Support Act
,
the Obama administration never authorized large commercial or
government arms sales, thereby making the recent announcement the
first time that the U.S. will provide “lethal” weapons to the
Ukraine military.

One
senior congressional official said that he predicted this would be
just the beginning, stating that the U.S. had “
crossed
the Rubicon; this is lethal weapons and I predict more will be
coming,”
 according
to the 
PostForeign
Policy’s
 Michael
Carpenter 
suggested that
NATO countries should follow suit and also provide Ukraine with the
arms it needs to counter the so-called threat of Russia. Considering
that in September 2017 Russia proposed that UN peacekeepers
be 
deployed to
Ukraine, it should be clear that the U.S. is more bent on escalating
this conflict than on resolving it.

Russia
has already 
responded in
kind, with Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stating that the
U.S. has become an accomplice in the war and that these developments
make it impossible for Russia to remain “indifferent,” thereby
forcing Russia to consider retaliation measures in response.

The
U.S. is the
 world’s
largest arms dealer
.
The U.S. arms so many countries so much of the time that most of us
barely blink. And yet, even taking at face value America’s stated
goals of spreading democracy and promoting human rights, the facts on
the ground appear to run contrary to those ideals and the U.S. is
well aware of these contradictions.

In
reality, the United States intervened covertly in Ukraine in 2014
because Russia and Europe were 
growing
far too close to each other for America’s comfort
,
with Russia supplying at least 30 percent of Europe’s gas supply.
This was an issue particularly in relation to 
Germany’s
growing fondness for Russian gas
,
as Germany is set to 
become
the EU’s major player
.

This
is a deal-breaker for Washington, which would rather support 
known
neo-Nazis
 and
anti-Semites in order to install a right-wing government capable of
opposing Russia as close to the Russian border as one can get.

U.S.
Installed a Puppet Government in Ukraine

John
McCain, center, speaks as Connecticut senator Chris Murphy, second
left, and Opposition leader Oleh Tyahnybok, right, stand around him
during a rally in Kiev, Ukraine, Dec. 15, 2013. (AP/Dmitry Lovetsky)

On
February 7, 2014, the BBC published a
 transcript of
a bugged phone conversation between Assistant Secretary of State
Victoria Nuland and the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.
In this phone call, the U.S. officials were openly discussing who
should form Ukraine’s government even before the president, Viktor
Yanukovych, had been successfully 
ousted
from power
.
In other words, the U.S. was actively doing to Russia’s neighbour
what the corporate media and various elements of the intelligence
communities have accused Russia of doing to the U.S. during the 2016
elections. As 
The
Nation
 explained:

In
the intercepted phone call between U.S. Assistant Secretary of State
for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine
Geoffrey Pyatt, the two were, as Russian expert 
Stephen
Cohen
 put
it to Democracy Now, 
plotting
a coup d’état against the elected president of
Ukraine.’” 
[emphasis
added]

Good.
I don’t think Klitsch [opposition leader Vitaly Klitschko] should
go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t
think it’s a good idea,”  Nuland said in the call, as
transcribed by the BBC.

Pyatt
responded:

Yeah.
I guess… in terms of him not going into the government, just let
him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just
thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep
the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok
[Oleh Tyahnybok, an opposition leader] and his guys and I’m sure
that’s part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on
all this.”

Nuland
added:

I
think Yats [opposition leader Arseniy Yatseniuk] is the guy who’s
got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the…
what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be
talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch
going in… he’s going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk,
it’s just not going to work.”

Oleh
Tyahnybok, who had met with Senator John McCain
 one
year prior
,
is the leader of the right-wing nationalist party Svoboda. When
Svoboda was founded in 1995, the party
 had a
swastika-like logo. As 
Business
Insider
 explains,
Tyahnybok is also a known anti-Semite:

Tyahnybok
himself was expelled from the Our Ukraine parliamentary faction in
2004 after giving a speech 
demanding
that Ukrainians fight against a
 ‘Muscovite-Jewish
mafia’ (he later clarified 
this
by saying that he actually had Jewish friends
 and
was only against to ‘a group of Jewish oligarchs who control
Ukraine and against Jewish-Bolsheviks [in the past]’). In 2005 he
wrote open letters demanding Ukraine do more to halt ‘criminal
activities’ of ‘organized Jewry,’ and, even now, Svoboda openly
calls for Ukrainian citizens to have their ethnicity printed onto
their passports.”

When
the protests broke out in Ukraine in 2014, the entire movement was
hijacked by these racist elements.

You’d
never know from most of the reporting that far-right nationalists and
fascists have been at the heart of the protests and attacks on
government buildings,” reported Seumas Milne of 
The
Guardian
. Just
days ago,
 thousands
marched
 in
Kiev to celebrate the anniversary of far-right nationalist Stepan
Bandera’s birthday.

It
is revealing that, when the U.S. decided to make a choice between a
president they viewed as a Russian ally and the various ultra-right
nationalist elements of Ukraine, Washington decided to help oust the
former for the benefit of the latter.

The
State Department Promoting Neo-Nazism in Ukraine


A
photo of the Azov Battalion – a regiment of the National Guard of
Ukraine. (Photo: Twitter)

Eventually,
it was reported that a man named Petro Poroshenko would be taking up
the reins after Yanukovych’s abdication. According to a
cable 
obtained by
WikiLeaks, Poroshenko previously worked as a mole for the U.S. State
Department. The State Department even referred to Poroshenko as “our
Ukrainian insider.”

For
those who truly believe the U.S. protects and promotes democracy
while challenging tyranny and dictatorships across the globe, the
truth about Washington’s support for puppet regimes that fail to
garner the support of their own people is even worse than
any 
anti-imperialist
commentator
 could
ever have imagined. In March last year, 
Foreign
Affairs 
reported
that
 Poroshenko had
an approval rating as low as 
17
percent
.
In September last year, the 
Japan
Times
 reported that
his approval rating had dropped to a 
single
digit
.
Some
 reportssay
it was as low as 
2
percent
.
October last year saw his approval rating grow to its highest in
recent times,
 reaching a
stratospheric 
14
percent
.

In
other words, the Trump administration is actively propping up a
failed administration in Europe, which does not have the support of
15 percent of its people. Even the far-right militias in Ukraine
 seem
to have more support
 than
the current government. Meanwhile, the U.S. has done nothing but its
utmost to tear apart the respective democratically elected
governments in
 Syria and Iran, both
of which
 have
far 
greater
approval ratings
 than
do Poroshenko and his administration.

Russian
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov
 said Washington’s
recent decision to arm Ukraine will only make the conflict more
deadly and suggested that Russia could be forced to respond. “[The
U.S. is] not a mediator. It’s an accomplice in fueling the war,”
Ryabkov said in a statement. Clearly, Russia has a vested interest in
not seeing another NATO ally on its borders, capable of pointing
American missiles in its face on a daily basis.

As The
National Interest
 learned at
the end of last year from recently
 declassified
material
, the
U.S. did indeed break a promise at the end of the Cold War that NATO
would expand “not one inch eastward.” George Washington
University National Security Archives researchers Svetlana
Savranskaya and Tom Blanton 
wrote
in the 
National
Security Archives
:

The
[recently declassified] documents show that multiple national leaders
were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European
membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991. That
discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations
in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German
territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about
being misled about NATO expansion, were founded in written
contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.”

The
documents appear to confirm Russia’s assertion that Soviet leader
Mikhail Gorbachev accepted the proposal for German reunification
(which Gorbachev could have vetoed) only in reliance upon these
assurances from its American counterparts that NATO would not expand
into Eastern Europe. This history is reminiscent of how Russia was
further duped out of using its veto power on a U.N. Security Council
Resolution in Libya in 2011, after having 
received
assurances
 that
the coalition would not pursue regime change.

I
believe that your thoughts about the role of NATO in the current
situation are the result of misunderstanding,” then-British Prime
Minister John Major 
told Gorbachev,
according to British Ambassador Rodric Braithwaite’s diary entry of
March 5, 1991
:

We
are not talking about strengthening of NATO. We are talking about the
coordination of efforts that is already happening in Europe between
NATO and the West European Union, which, as it is envisioned, would
allow all members of the European Community to contribute to enhance
[our] security.”

The
documents also show that Russia had received these assurances from a
number of other high-level officials. These officials included
then-Secretary of State James Baker; President George H.W. Bush; West
German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher; West German
Chancellor Helmut Kohl; former CIA Director Robert Gates; French
leader Francois Mitterrand; Margaret Thatcher; British Foreign
Minister Douglas Hurd; and NATO Secretary-General Manfred Woerner.

U.S.
Army soldiers representing units participating in the the Anaconda-16
military exercise, attend the opening ceremony, in Warsaw, Poland,
Monday, June 6, 2016. Poland and some NATO members launched their
biggest ever exercise, involving some 31,000 troops in a show of
force to neighboring Russia.

Since
that time, NATO has clearly expanded into Europe to the detriment of
Russia. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has grown to 
include the
Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, Albania and Croatia,
and 
Montenegro.

These
developments are crucial because, when one is honest about America’s
infamous history since World War II, it is clear that NATO 
exists
as an entity
 only
to counter and contain Russian influence. Its sole purpose is to
oppose Russia at every corner and this is no secret even in the
corporate media.

According
to the 
Telegraph
,
NATO was formed in “Washington on 4th April, 1949 after the end of
the Second World War, largely to block Soviet expansion into Europe.”
This can be seen clearly in the complete rejection of the
Soviets’ 
attempt
to join NATO itself
 after
Joseph Stalin’s death.

In
a 2016 
interview
with 
The
New Yorker
,
 Douglas Lute, a former three-star general and then-U.S.
Ambassador to NATO also patently admitted that:

“…NATO
was founded on the premise of preventing an attack by the Soviet
Union in Central Europe, where the U.S. would have to come to the aid
of Europe … For the first forty years, NATO focussed on its
greatest risk—the threat that the Soviet Union posed to Western
European security.”

At
the time the unrest broke out in 2014, then-NATO Secretary General
Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s 
comment that
the proposed IMF-EU package presented to Ukraine would have been “a
major boost for Euro-Atlantic security” suggested that NATO had set
its sights on bringing Ukraine into the military alliance.
 In
July of this year
,
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg met with Poroshenko in Kiev
to further discuss this prospect, already pledging support to Ukraine
on some level.

Now
Ukraine’s bid to join NATO seems almost irrelevant, as the U.S. is
formally involving itself deeper in the Ukrainian conflict and
providing arms to a regime that has flirted with an approval rating
lower than 10 percent, all the while provoking Russia to take further
measures in response.

What
could possibly go wrong?

Meanwhile,
the Russia-obsessed corporate media 
continues
to peddle the narrative
 that
Donald Trump has turned the United States into a client-state of
Russia, even while he directly provokes the former Soviet Union by
providing lethal assistance to a country on its border. Not only is
Trump maintaining an Obama-era policy, he is aggravating and
converting Obama’s Ukraine policy into a much more dangerous one —
ultimately aimed at provoking an aggressive response from Russia in
the weeks or months to come.

By Darius
Shahtahmasebi
 / Creative
Commons
 / MintPress
News
 / Report
a typo

Oekraïne, een mislukte, corrupte en fascistische staat……..

Het volgende artikel vond ik op het blog van Stan van Houcke en is geschreven door Robert Parry. Het betreft een analyse over de situatie in Oekraïne en hoe e.e.a. zover heeft kunnen komen. Zoals op deze plek al vaker betoogt, het westen heeft o.l.v. de VS de boel op scherp gezet in Oekraïne…..

Parry schrijft dat Oekraïne weleens de volgende ‘failed state’, of ‘mislukte staat’ staat kan worden, m.i. is Oekraïne dat al. Parry beschrijft zelfs de voorwaarden daarvoor. Voorts stelt Parry, dat Putin daar vervolgens de schuld voor zal krijgen, echter ik heb al politici horen zeggen, dat de chaos en enorme corruptie in Oekraïne, te danken is aan de Russen en Putin in het bijzonder………

Uiteraard wordt daar door de afhankelijke reguliere media in één adem bij vertelt, dat Rusland aan de kant van de ‘pro-Russische opstandelingen’ vecht in Oost-Oekraïne, terwijl daar geen splinter bewijs voor is…..

Trouwens een belachelijk verhaal, dat laatste, immers als het Russische leger echt had gevochten in Oost-Oekraïne, was niet alleen Oost-Oekraïne allang gezuiverd van de neonazi’s*, maar was ook Kiev allang bevrijd. Op dat moment zou Porosjenko allang in het buitenland hebben gezeten, waar hij van ‘zijn’ enorme kapitalen zou hebben genoten, kapitalen die hij via corruptie en fraude het Oekraïense volk heeft ontstolen……

Mensen lezen, een uitstekend artikel!!

Reality
Peeks Through in Ukraine

January 6, 2016

Robert
Parry

Exclusive: With
corruption rampant and living standards falling, Ukraine may become
the next failed state that “benefited” from a
neoconservative-driven “regime change,” though the blame will
always be placed elsewhere in this case, on the demonized
Russian President Putin, writes Robert Parry.


Nearly
two years since U.S. officials helped foment a coup in Ukraine partly
justified by corruption allegations the country continues to wallow
in graft and cronyism as the living standards for average Ukrainians
plummet, according to economic data and polls of public attitudes.


Even
the neocon-oriented Wall Street Journal took note of the worsening
corruption in a Jan. 1, 2016 
article observing
that “most Ukrainians say the revolution’s promise to replace
rule by thieves with the rule of law has fallen short and the
government acknowledges that there is still much to be done.”

Actually,
the numbers suggest something even worse. More and more Ukrainians
rate corruption as a major problem facing the nation, including a
majority of 53 percent last September, up from 48 percent last June
and 28 percent in September 2014, according to polls by International
Foundation for Electoral Systems.

Meanwhile,
Ukraine’s GDP has fallen in every quarter since the Feb. 22, 2014
putsch that overthrew elected President Viktor Yanukovych. Since
then, the average Ukrainian also has faced economic “reforms” to
slash pensions, energy subsidies and other social programs, as
demanded by the International Monetary Fund.

In
other words, the hard lives of most Ukrainians have gotten
significantly harder while the elites continue to skim off whatever
cream is left, including access to billions of dollars in the West’s
foreign assistance that is keeping the economy afloat.

Part
of the problem appears to be that people supposedly responsible for
the corruption fight are themselves dogged by allegations of
corruption. The Journal cited Ukrainian lawmaker Volodymyr Parasyuk
who claimed to be so outraged by graft that he expressed his fury “by
kicking in the face an official he says owns luxury properties worth
much more than a state salary could provide.”

However,
the Journal also noted that “parliament is the site of frequent
mass brawls [and] it is hard to untangle all the overlapping
corruption allegations and squabbling over who is to blame. Mr.
Parasyuk himself was named this week as receiving money from an
organized crime suspect, a claim he denies.”

Then,
there is the case of Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko, who is
regarded by top American columnists as the face of Ukraine’s
reform. Indeed, a Wall Street Journal 
op-ed last
month by Stephen 

Sestanovich, a senior fellow at the Council on
Foreign Relations, hailed Jaresko as “a tough reformer” whose
painful plans include imposing a 20 percent “flat tax” on
Ukrainians (a favorite nostrum of the American Right which despises a
progressive tax structure that charges the rich at a higher rate).


Sestanovich
noted that hedge-fund billionaire George Soros, who has made a
fortune by speculating in foreign currencies, has endorsed Jaresko’s
plan but that it is opposed by some key parliamentarians who favor a
“populist” alternative that Sestanovich says “will cut rates,
explode the deficit, and kiss IMF money good-bye.”


Ukrainian Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko.

Ukrainian
Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko.

Yet,
Jaresko is hardly a paragon of reform. Prior to getting instant
Ukrainian citizenship and becoming Finance Minister in December 2014,
she was a former U.S. diplomat who had been entrusted to run a $150
million U.S.-taxpayer-funded program to help jump-start an investment
economy in Ukraine and Moldova.

Jaresko’s
compensation was capped at $150,000 a year, a salary that many
Americans would envy, but it was not enough for her. So, she engaged
in a variety of maneuvers to evade the cap and enrich herself by
claiming millions of dollars in bonuses and fees.

Ultimately,
Jaresko was collecting more than $2 million a year after she shifted
management of the Western NIS Enterprise Fund (WNISEF) to her own
private company, Horizon Capital, and arranged to get lucrative
bonuses when selling off investments, even as the overall WNISEF fund
was losing money, according to official records.

For
instance, Jaresko collected $1.77 million in bonuses in 2013,
according to WNISEF’s latest 
available
filing
 with
the Internal Revenue Service. In her financial disclosure forms with
the Ukrainian government, she reported earning $2.66 million in 2013
and $2.05 million in 2014, thus amassing a sizeable personal fortune
while investing U.S. taxpayers’ money supposedly to benefit the
Ukrainian people.

It
didn’t matter that WNISEF continued to hemorrhage money, shrinking
from its original $150 million to $89.8 million in the 2013 tax year,
according to the IRS filing. WNISEF reported that the bonuses to
Jaresko and other corporate officers were based on “successful”
exits from some investments even if the overall fund was losing
money. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “
How
Ukraine’s Finance Minister Got Rich
.”]

Though
Jaresko’s enrichment schemes are documented by IRS and other
official filings, the mainstream U.S. media has turned a blind eye to
this history, all the better to pretend that Ukraine’s “reform”
process is in good hands. (It also turns out that Jaresko did not
comply with Ukrainian law that permits only single citizenship; 
she
has kept her U.S. passport exploiting a loophole
 that
gives her two years to show that she has renounced her U.S.
citizenship.)


Propaganda
over Reality

Yet,
as good as propaganda can be especially when the U.S. government and
mainstream media are moving in lockstep reality is not always easily
managed. Ukraine’s continuing and some say worsening corruption
prompted last month’s trip to Ukraine by Vice President Joe Biden
who gave a combination lecture and pep talk to Ukraine’s
parliament.

Vice President Joe Biden.

Vice
President Joe Biden.

 

Of
course, Biden has his own Ukraine cronyism problem because three
months after the U.S.-backed overthrow of the Yanukovych government, Ukraine’s 
largest private gas firm, Burisma Holdings, appointed his
son, Hunter Biden, to its board of directors.


Burisma a shadowy Cyprus-based company also lined up well-connected lobbyists, some with ties to Secretary of State John Kerry, including Kerry’s former Senate chief of staff David Leiter, according to lobbying disclosures.

As
Time magazine 
reported,
“Leiter’s involvement in the firm rounds out a power-packed team
of politically-connected Americans that also includes a second new
board member, Devon Archer, a Democratic bundler and former adviser
to John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign. Both Archer and Hunter
Biden have worked as business partners with Kerry’s son-in-law,
Christopher Heinz, the founding partner of Rosemont Capital, a
private-equity company.” 

According to
investigative journalism
 inside
Ukraine, the ownership of Burisma has been traced to Privat Bank,
which is controlled by the thuggish billionaire oligarch Ihor
Kolomoysky, who was appointed by the U.S.-backed “reform”
regime to be governor of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, a south-central
province of Ukraine (though Kolomoisky 
was
eventually ousted 
from
that post in a power struggle over control of UkrTransNafta,
Ukraine’s state-owned oil pipeline operator).

In his
December speech
,
Biden lauded the sacrifice of the 100 or so protesters who died
during the Maidan clashes in February 2014, referring to them by
their laudatory name “The Heavenly Hundred.” But Biden made no
heavenly references to the estimated 10,000 people, mostly ethnic
Russians, who have been slaughtered in the U.S.-encouraged
“Anti-Terror Operation” waged by the coup regime against eastern
Ukrainians who objected to the violent ouster of President
Yanukovych, who had won large majorities in those areas.

Apparently,
heaven is not as eager to welcome ethnic Russian victims of
U.S.-inspired political violence. Nor did Biden take note that some
of the Heavenly Hundred were street fighters for neo-Nazi and other
far-right nationalist organizations.

But
after making his sugary references to The Heavenly Hundred Biden
delivered his bitter medicine, an appeal for the parliament to
continue implementing IMF “reforms,” including demands that old
people work longer into their old age.

Biden
said, “For Ukraine to continue to make progress and to keep the
support of the international community you have to do more, as
well. The big part of moving forward with your IMF program —
it requires difficult reforms. And they are difficult.


Let
me say parenthetically here, all the experts from our State
Department and all the think tanks, and they come and tell you, that
you know what you should do is you should deal with pensions. You
should deal with — as if it’s easy to do. Hell, we’re
having trouble in America dealing with it. We’re having trouble. To
vote to raise the pension age is to write your political obituary in
many places.

Don’t
misunderstand that those of us who serve in other democratic
institutions don’t understand how hard the conditions are, how
difficult it is to cast some of the votes to meet the obligations
committed to under the IMF. It requires sacrifices that might
not be politically expedient or popular. But they’re critical
to putting Ukraine on the path to a future that is economically
secure. And I urge you to stay the course as hard as it
is. Ukraine needs a budget that’s consistent with your IMF
commitments.”

Eroding
Support

But
more and more Ukrainians appear to see through the charade in Kiev,
as the poll numbers on the corruption crisis soar. Meanwhile,
European officials seem to be growing impatient with the Ukraine
crisis which has added to the drag on the Continent’s economies
because the Obama administration strong-armed the E.U. into painful
economic sanctions against Russia, which had come to the defense of
the embattled ethnic Russians in the east.

Many
E.U. officials are fed up with Ukraine,” said one Western official
quoted by the Journal, which added that “accusations of graft by
anticorruption activists, journalists and diplomats have followed to
the new government.”

The
Journal said those implicated include some early U.S. favorites, such
as Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “whose ratings have plummeted
to single digits amid allegations in the media and among
anticorruption activists of his associates’ corrupt dealings. Mr.
Yatsenyuk has denied any involvement in corruption and his
associates, one of whom resigned from parliament over the controversy
this month, deny wrongdoing.”


Ukraine's Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. (Photo credit: Ybilyk)

Ukraine’s
Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. (Photo credit: Ybilyk) 

The
controversy over Yatsenyuk’s alleged cronyism led to an
embarrassing moment in December 2015 when an anti-Yatsenyuk lawmaker
approached the podium with a bouquet of roses, which the slightly
built Yatsenyuk accepted only to have the lawmaker lift him up and
try to carry him from the podium.


In
many ways, the Ukraine crisis represents just another failure of
neocon-driven “regime change,” which has also spread chaos across
the Middle East and northern Africa. But the neocons appear to have
even a bigger target in their sites, another “regime change” in
Moscow, with Ukraine just a preliminary move. Of course, that scheme
could put in play nuclear war.


Taking
Aim

The
Ukraine “regime change” took shape in 2013 after Russian
President Putin and President Barack Obama collaborated to tamp down
crises in Syria and Iran, two other prime targets for neocon “regime
changes.” American neocons were furious that those hopes were
dashed. Ukraine became Putin’s payback.

In
fall 2013, the neocons took aim at Ukraine, recognizing its extreme
sensitivity to Russia which had seen previous invasions, including by
the Nazis in World War II, pass through the plains of Ukraine and
into Russia. Carl Gershman, neocon president of the U.S.-funded
National Endowment for Democracy, cited Ukraine as the “biggest
prize” and a key step toward unseating Putin in Moscow. [See
Consortiumnews.com’s “
What
the Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis.
”]


Initially,
the hope was that Yanukovych would lead Ukraine into an economic
collaboration with Europe while cutting ties to Russia. But
Yanukovych received a warning from top Ukrainian economists that a
hasty split with neighboring Russia would cost the country a
staggering $160 billion in lost income.


So,
Yanukovych sought to slow down the process, prompting angry protests
especially from western Ukrainians who descended on Maidan square.
Though initially peaceful, neo-Nazi and other nationalist militias
soon infiltrated the protests and began ratcheting up the violence,
including burning police with Molotov cocktails.

Meanwhile,
U.S.-funded non-governmental organizations, such as the Organized
Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (which receives money from
USAID and hedge-fund billionaire George Soros’s Open Society),
hammered away at alleged corruption in the Yanukovych government.

In
December 2013, Nuland reminded Ukrainian business leaders that the
United States had invested $5 billion in their “European
aspirations,” and in an intercepted phone call in early February
2014 she discussed with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt who Ukraine’s
new leaders would be.


Yats
is the guy,” Nuland said of Arseniy Yatsenyuk, as she also
disparaged a less aggressive approach by the European Union with the
pithy phrase: “Fuck the E.U.” (Nuland, a former aide to ex-Vice
President Dick Cheney, is the wife of arch-neoconservative ideologue
Robert Kagan.)

Sen.
John McCain also urged on the protests, telling one group of
right-wing Ukrainian nationalists that they had America’s backing.
And, the West’s mainstream media fell in love with the Maidan
protesters as innocent white hats and thus blamed the worsening
violence on Yanukovych. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “
NYT
Still Pretends No Coup in Ukraine.
”]

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, speaking to Ukrainian and other business leaders at the National Press Club in Washington on Dec. 13, 2013, at a meeting sponsored by Chevron.

Assistant
Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, speaking to
Ukrainian and other business leaders at the National Press Club in
Washington on Dec. 13, 2013, at a meeting sponsored by Chevron.

Urging
Restraint

In
Biden’s December 2015 speech to the parliament, he confirmed that
he personally pressed on President Yanukovych the need to avoid
violence. “I was literally on the phone with your former President
urging restraint,” Biden said.


However,
on Feb. 20, 2014, mysterious snipers apparently from buildings
controlled by the far right fired on and killed policemen as well as
some protesters. The bloodshed sparked other violent clashes as armed
rioters battled with retreating police.

Although
the dead included some dozen police officers, the violence was blamed
on Yanukovych, who insisted that he had ordered the police not to use
lethal force in line with Biden’s appeal. But the State Department
and the West’s mainstream media made Yanukovych the black-hatted
villain.

The
next day, Feb. 21, Yanukovych signed an accord negotiated and
guaranteed by three European nations to accept reduced powers and
early elections so he could be voted out of office if that was the
public’s will. However, as police withdrew from the Maidan, the
rioters, led by neo-Nazi militias called sotins, stormed government
buildings on Feb. 22, forcing Yanukovych and other officials to flee
for their lives.


In
the West’s mainstream media, these developments were widely hailed
as a noble “revolution” and with lumps in their throats many
journalists averted their misty eyes from the key role played by
unsavory neo-Nazis, so as not to dampen the happy narrative
(although 
BBC
was among the few MSM outlets that touched on this inconvenient
reality
).

Ever
since, the major U.S. news media has stayed fully on board, ignoring
evidence that what happened was a U.S.-sponsored coup. The MSM simply
explains all the trouble as a case of naked “Russian aggression.

There
were kudos, too, when “reformer” Natalie Jaresko was made Finance
Minister along with other foreign “technocrats.” There was no
attention paid to evidence about the dark underside of the Ukrainian
“revolution of dignity,” as Biden called it.

Though
the neo-Nazis sometimes 
even
teamed up with Islamic jihadists
 were
the tip of the spear slashing through eastern Ukraine, their
existence was either buried deep inside stories or dismissed as
“Russian propaganda.”


That
was, in effect, American propaganda and, as clever as it was, it
could only control reality for so long.

Even
though the fuller truth about Ukraine has never reached the American
people, there comes a point when even the best propagandists have to
start modifying their rosy depictions. Ukraine appears to have
reached that moment.

Investigative
reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The
Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest
book, 
America’s
Stolen Narrative,
 either
in 
print
here
 or
as an e-book (from 
Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/01/06/reality-peeks-through-in-ukraine/

=============================

Zie ook:

VS burgers zijn gewaarschuwd: Rusland kan hun hersenen hacken en laten geloven dat Joe Biden niet geschikt is als president

Nieuwe Russische hack samenzweringstheorie t.a.v. Joe Biden ‘schokt’ VS Democraten‘ 

Hunter Biden zit in de Oekraïense ‘witwas val’

Joe Biden heeft al lang toegegeven dat hij Oekraïne onder druk zette een openbaar aanklager te ontslaan die zijn zoon vervolgde

Snowden vindt het ongelofelijk dat de media VS politici niet aanspreken op totaal verschillende reacties n.a.v. ‘klokkenluiden’

Joe Biden (ex-vicepresident VS) heeft zichzelf fiks in de Oekraïense staart gebeten  

VS stelt Duitsland een ultimatum (chantage): geen Russisch gas via NS2 anders volgt een handelsoorlog…..
Chantage o.a. ten behoeve van het Oekraïense bedrijf Burisma waar
Hunter Biden voor werkt. Intussen heeft Trump aangekondigd dat de
bedrijven, o.a. een deels Nederlands bedrijf, die blijven meewerken aan
Nord Stream 2 (NS2) gesanctioneerd zullen worden…..
Zie voorts: ‘Donald
‘Darth Vader’ Trump verklaart ruimte tot oorlogsgebied en laat
Duitsland en haar bedrijven weten dat men zich heeft te schikken naar de
VS wensen

VS – Duitse verhouding dreigt te exploderen‘ 

Alarm Code Geel: Lara Rense (NOS) voedt Rusland-haat‘ (zie ook de labels in dat bericht)

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.