Civil War in Ukraine: Western Empire vs Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Be said:
I have to presume there is a (partly hidden) narrative to protect? Because Russia can never be revealed as the aggressor? Because then the whole narrative of 'the West' being the cause of the conflict would start tumbling down?

As I said, you are so woefully ignorant of, or unable to grasp, the obvious facts of the situation that you best leave the hard work to others who have that ability. It's clear that underlying all of your convoluted statements here, is an irrational hatred of Putin. You have obviously internalized the crass and mindless Western propaganda that "Putin's a thug". You clearly have no respect for the 80+% of Russians that support Putin. Like the psychopaths in Western governments and their pusillanimous media that spews nothing but yellow journalism, you're happy to sit with the starkly contradictory claims that Russia is "anti-democratic" while an overwhelming majority of Russians repeatedly voted for Putin's party.

You repeatedly ignore the clear evidence that the US organised the coup in Ukraine last year with the intention of removing Ukraine from Russia's influence. You, like the stuffed shirt psycho US military media pundits, completely ignore the historical context of the situation and the massive double standard and hypocrisy exhibited by the West.

So in the interest of decency, even though because of the Dunning Kruger effect you are unable to know it, please just try to assume that you are severely deficient in your abilities to understand this situation objectively and refrain from spouting any more nonsense or we will, in the interest of the sanity of all forum members, have to restrict your ability to post here. Not that you'd lose out as a result of such a ban, but that many others would benefit.

Surely there's something better for you to do with your free time on a Sunday afternoon in the Bristol area?
 

Lumiere_du_Code

Jedi Council Member
Thanks, Perceval, I do not know how else do you have the patience for it :) Well, I just almost every day I see all these trolls and zombies, so I have no desire for anything to say to them, because it is communicating with a pillar.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)
by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved
(Revised April 2000)

Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives.

The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key to) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid and a new one must be found... but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

For such disinformationalists, the overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make select links seem weaker than they are, create the illusion of a break, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter. Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. This is why criminals are allowed to testify against other criminals. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Were a known 'liar's' testimony to stand on its own without supporting fact, it might certainly be of questionable value, but if the testimony (argument) is based on verifiable or otherwise demonstrable facts, it matters not who does the presenting or what their motives are, or if they have lied in the past or even if motivated to lie in this instance -- the facts or links would and should stand or fall on their own merit and their part in the matter will merely be supportive.

Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular position, idea, or solution -- very much in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollination to better form their ideas. Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role -- the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to their early successes. You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of "higher standards" of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders any discussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid -- and they generally put it in exactly those terms.

So, as you read any such discussions, particularly so in Internet news groups (NG), decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the latter freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run for cover when thus illuminated, or -- put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal.)

Here are the twenty-five methods and seven traits, some of which don't apply directly to NG application. Each contains a simple example in the form of actual (some paraphrased for simplicity) from NG comments on commonly known historical events, and a proper response.[examples & response- _http://www.proparanoid.com/truth.html]

Accusations should not be overused -- reserve for repeat offenders and those who use multiple tactics. Responses should avoid falling into emotional traps or informational sidetracks, unless it is feared that some observers will be easily dissuaded by the trickery. Consider quoting the complete rule rather than simply citing it, as others will not have reference. Offer to provide a complete copy of the rule set upon request (see permissions statement at end):

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

by H. Michael Sweeney

copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved

(Revised April 2000 - formerly SEVEN Traits)

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentatorbecome argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

1) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.

2) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.

3) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

I close with the first paragraph of the introduction to my unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth:

Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Zee Ley said:
The point that is extensively covered in Russian side of the media is "Ukrainian army kills civilians and destroys their property". Recently found this video on youtube: _https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mgLdG9o0n5A
And I am aware that it doesn't necessary explain all the cruelties that were done.

Hi Zee, I don't really understand your point about the video. Can you explain?
 
Perceval said:
Hi Zee, I don't really understand your point about the video. Can you explain?

Hello Joe/Perceval. Sure...
As you can see in the video the artillery unit is placed dangerously near the houses. What can we expect from such placement? First of all that enemy artillery will strike back into this area. By striking back enemy artillery can hurt or kill average citizens as well as damage their property. Was it done intentionally or not interests me as well.

The video title is something like "GRAD is shooting from the yard of the multistory houses & is waiting for the response. Donetsk. Ukraine". The title pretty much says how one should think. I am aware of that:) If somebody found out that this is a hoax of any kind I am feeling ready to see it debunked.

The speech of girl and possibly her mother irrelevant, but for the context it is something like:
Girl: Wow, Beautiful!
"Mother": What is there so beautiful?
 

griffin

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
Perceval said:
Be said:
I have to presume there is a (partly hidden) narrative to protect? Because Russia can never be revealed as the aggressor? Because then the whole narrative of 'the West' being the cause of the conflict would start tumbling down?

<snip>

So in the interest of decency, even though because of the Dunning Kruger effect you are unable to know it, please just try to assume that you are severely deficient in your abilities to understand this situation objectively and refrain from spouting any more nonsense or we will, in the interest of the sanity of all forum members, have to restrict your ability to post here. Not that you'd lose out as a result of such a ban, but that many others would benefit.

Laura said:
"Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world."

- Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney

Amen. Since the unhinged AngloZionist authoritarian follower troll using the handle "Be" obviously is incapable of rational engagement with this topic or argument with even a minimal level of integrity and objectivity, I and I believe others following this discussion of the simmering proxy war between the US and Russia in Ukraine - which has the distinct potential to blow up into WWIII - would support a decision by forum management to remove his or her posting privileges. "Be" adds nothing to this thread but noise.
 

Siberia

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Zee Ley said:
Perceval said:
Hi Zee, I don't really understand your point about the video. Can you explain?

Hello Joe/Perceval. Sure...
As you can see in the video the artillery unit is placed dangerously near the houses. What can we expect from such placement? First of all that enemy artillery will strike back into this area. By striking back enemy artillery can hurt or kill average citizens as well as damage their property. Was it done intentionally or not interests me as well.

The video title is something like "GRAD is shooting from the yard of the multistory houses & is waiting for the response. Donetsk. Ukraine". The title pretty much says how one should think. I am aware of that:) If somebody found out that this is a hoax of any kind I am feeling ready to see it debunked.

The speech of girl and possibly her mother irrelevant, but for the context it is something like:
Girl: Wow, Beautiful!
"Mother": What is there so beautiful?

Zee Ley, there is nothing funny about this video. The Kiev army is attacking the cities of Donbass and the local militia are defending their cities. If by the above post you suggest that they should defend themselves in a more suicidal way (like go in a bare field where they can be butchered more easily) and let Kiev troops enter their cities, then I start doubting about your moral and mental abilities, please excuse me if I got your point wrong..

Also, why not using nicknames only for the sake of respect to forum members?
 
Siberia said:
Zee Ley, there is nothing funny about this video. The Kiev army is attacking the cities of Donbass and the local militia are defending their cities. If by the above post you suggest that they should defend themselves in a more suicidal way (like go in a bare field where they can be butchered more easily) and let Kiev troops enter their cities, then I start doubting about your moral and mental abilities, please excuse me if I got your point wrong..
Siberia, I didn't meant to joke or ridicule something by commenting this video. Regarding everything else I don't know what to answer.

Siberia said:
Also, why not using nicknames only for the sake of respect to forum members?
Allright. Got it.
 

Siberia

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Zee Ley said:
Siberia said:
Zee Ley, there is nothing funny about this video. The Kiev army is attacking the cities of Donbass and the local militia are defending their cities. If by the above post you suggest that they should defend themselves in a more suicidal way (like go in a bare field where they can be butchered more easily) and let Kiev troops enter their cities, then I start doubting about your moral and mental abilities, please excuse me if I got your point wrong..
Siberia, I didn't meant to joke or ridicule something by commenting this video. Regarding everything else I don't know what to answer.

Trying to imagine yourself in such situation helps.

Imagine that your new government starts banning your language and your history first. The history of the most bitter sufferings: millions of Soviet people died in the war with fascism. Now the Soviet anti-fascist symbols (like the Georgian ribbons, monuments, etc.) are being ridiculed and destroyed en masse in Ukraine. Imagine that your fellow men are slaughtered in Odessa, and then in Mariupol. Try to imagine that the Minister of Education openly says that everything Russian is garbage and shall be restricted.

Now try to imagine that Nazis like Bandera become heroes in your country.

This is how it all started. Not Russians or pro-Russians started all this, but they decided to defend themselves which is understandable.

And because they don't have as many soldiers and weapons as the Kiev army has, they have to defend themselves in the best way possible given the circumstance. Are we on the same page now?
 

Jeremy F Kreuz

Dagobah Resident
As you can see in the video the artillery unit is placed dangerously near the houses. What can we expect from such placement? First of all that enemy artillery will strike back into this area. By striking back enemy artillery can hurt or kill average citizens as well as damage their property. Was it done intentionally or not interests me as well.

It is the same argument the Israeli Army is using for justifying the hitting of civilians in Gaza - because the Hamas is using the civilians as human shields, we are hitting them. It is advisable to look at this kind of situation from the one who is the agressor; doing the bombing of civilian areas - international laws, including the conventions of geneva, forbids bombing of areas when here are high risks of killing civilians EVEN when the enemy is using them to hide. So what they are showing with the video is that despite the fact that they knew they could hit civilians, they were still doing it anyway.
 

angelburst29

The Living Force
Re: The War against Putin; Russian opposition leader, shot dead in central

Laura said:
Siberia said:
mkrnhr said:
Actually it would be completely idiotic for any government to do such a thing, especially to a nobody on the political scene, and certainly not in broad daylight in the streets of the capital. This guy will become a symbol of "liberty", "freedom", "democracy" for the western media presstitutes, and for the ignorant masses, which is yet another symptom of the depths of lies this world is plunging into.

Indeed. Nemtsov news is already on top of Twitter and 99% of tweets are 'anti-Putin' and 'pro-liberty.' Sickening.

I agree with the Saker that it's yet another MH17 against Putin which is even stronger than Politkovskaya and Litvinenko combined (in terms of ponerizing people's minds).

Let's see if we can help turn the twitter tide by repeating over and over again that it was a CIA false flag attack designed to blame Putin/Russia.

Caught: The CIA at it again
http://www.shiftfrequency.com/moti-nissani-who-killed-boris-nemtsov/#more-67908

Summary: In all likelihood, the February 27 assassination of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov is part of the CIA’s campaign of discrediting Russian President Vladimir Putin and destablizing the nuclearly-armed Russian Federation.

Was President Vladimir Putin behind this murder—or was it someone else?

To begin with, everyone agrees that Putin is a brilliant strategist and politician. Against all odds, he has so far brought Russia from the brink of utter poverty, disintegration, and disaster. One has just to watch him improvising a press conference, calmly, competently, and tirelessly, to realize that one is dealing here with a real, almost forgotten, specimen of a lost art: superb statesmanship.

So, we need to ask ourselves: What could Putin gain from the killing of Nemtsov? On first sight, it might appear that he had plenty to gain, for the two were clearly at odds about the future direction of Russia. But with an 85% popularity rating—by far the highest of any politician on our war-ridden planet—Putin has no need to assassinate his opponents.

Moreover, according to the facts put forward by a CIA-sponsored publication, and despite attempts to lionize the likes of Kasparov and Nemtsov in the Western captive media, Nemtsov was a political small potato who posed no threat whatsoever to the immensely popular Putin.

To continue our exploration of Boris Nemtsov’s death, we can next turn to history. Is America’s shadow government capable of killing their friends, agents, and servants when such cold-blooded murders serve its long-term objectives? The entire historical record is chockfull of precisely such examples. Here, let us focus on just three recent incidents.

With much fanfare, the American government and its servile media (and Boris Nemtsov of course) immediately—and with no trace of supporting evidence–blamed Russia or Novorussian freedom fighters for the tragic downing of a Malaysian airplane and its 298 passengers over Novorussian airspace. Following an extensive and immediate baseless media barrage, it gradually came to light that this was a CIA-orchestrated false-flag event, leading the western media to drop the subject. If the CIA can order their Ukrainian puppets to kill 298 innocent men, women, and children to advance their agenda of world conquest, couldn’t they kill their Russian agent Nemtsov to advance that very same agenda?

Then we have another CIA success story, the so-called Maidan coup of 2014. Everyone knows by now that this was a CIA-sponsored event. We even know the price tag: 5 billion dollars (we may note in passing that CIA fascist coups d’état are subject to inflationary pressures too—in 1953, it only cost $100,000 to overthrow Iranian democracy). As well, to remove the elected president of Ukraine from power, the CIA had Ukrainian snipers killing their own paid protesters in order to successfully turn Ukraine into a fascist dictatorship—and a thorn in Russia’s side. If they can kill their comrades in Kiev, can’t they likewise kill comrade Nemtsov in Moscow?

So, in my view, the probability that the Russian government is behind the killing of Boris Nemtsov is close to zero, while the probability of involvement of the CIA and its allies and stooges is well over 90%.

And this, right here and now, before the dust of the bullets that terminated the life of Boris Nemtsev settles, allows us to make two predictions.

The first prediction is this. The captive Western media will go out of their way to demonize Putin and attribute Nemtsov’s assassination to him. Day and night we shall be bombarded with stories of the defiant and heroic Nemtsov and the perfidious and murderous Putin.

The second prediction is this. The CIA will orchestrate anti-Putin demonstrations the world over. We shall have anti-Putin concocted marches not only in the port city commanded by Wall Street, not only in the river city commanded by the City of London, not only in the ancient city commanded by the Vatican, but everywhere the CIA can stir up trouble. More importantly—and this is one probable reason Nemtsov was killed—there would be demonstrations by traitorous, naïve, ignorant, or misinformed Russians.

If these predictions come true, they would lend further support to the assertion that, most likely, the CIA is behind the assassination of Boris Nemtsov.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Zee Ley said:
Perceval said:
Hi Zee, I don't really understand your point about the video. Can you explain?

Hello Joe/Perceval. Sure...
As you can see in the video the artillery unit is placed dangerously near the houses. What can we expect from such placement? First of all that enemy artillery will strike back into this area. By striking back enemy artillery can hurt or kill average citizens as well as damage their property. Was it done intentionally or not interests me as well.

The video title is something like "GRAD is shooting from the yard of the multistory houses & is waiting for the response. Donetsk. Ukraine". The title pretty much says how one should think. I am aware of that:) If somebody found out that this is a hoax of any kind I am feeling ready to see it debunked.

Siberia and Jeremy have explained the situation to you in the case that the video is not being misrepresented. The problem with wars is that the conditions on the ground are much more complicated than it appears to people looking at them remotely. It's always useful to try and put yourself in the position of the people whose intentions you are trying to analyze. I always try to do this because I want to understand the beliefs and thinking and therefore motivation of both sides in a conflict, because it makes it much easier to arrive at a more reasonable and fair judgement of the overall situation.
 

Lumiere_du_Code

Jedi Council Member
As RIA Novosti reported with reference to Ukrainian media, to the Verkhovna Rada was inscribed a bill providing punishment in the form of imprisonment up to three years for "deliberate actions to undermine the authority of the state and its authorities" that would provide punishment for "socially dangerous illegal acts encroaching on the authority of Ukraine as a sovereign state."

The bill requires punishment for "public humiliation, outrage, defilement or other actions aimed at undermining the authority of the state, local government and citizens' associations in Ukraine" as well as "cynical dismissive attitude and rejection of individual structural elements of public administration (its relevant bodies) and the state as a whole."

Deputy of the Popular Front does not exclude other measures of punishment against persons who commit such acts, in particular the arrest up to six months or correctional labor for up to two years. The explanatory note to the document states that the bill does not require public consultation.

http://russian.rt.com/article/76998

Especially noteworthy words "Ukraine as a sovereign state"... and laughter, and tears, as saying Russians...
as Senya the Bunny (Yatsenyuk) constantly repeats, is a European country! Now all should rejoice and give thanks to junta for everything "wonderful" that they made for Ukrainians.
that they discriminate against Ukraine by their actions and statements, they do not see it, and when people are outraged by these actions - they need to be punished, to shut their mouths and throw in jail or in a trench.
while junta itself can and must criticize and pour dirt on Russian authorities. but to do the same at Kiev authorities it's prohibited for everyone.
 

thorbiorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
According to https://vk.com/wall-57424472_49251 a US military flag was found in Debaltsevo. The hypothesis is that it was left behind by military instructors. About the present military situation there is this review in Russian. https://vk.com/video-57424472_171284014 which apart from being in Russian may require a VK account. The short of the long is that there is gunfire along several points of the line of contact. In serveral places the Kiev side has allegedly attacked DPR/LPR positions and mortar is often used, artillery has been used in one place. DPR/LPR have withdrawn almost all and it has been verified by OSCE. On the other hand the Kiev side is in no hurry according to this report in Russian https://vk.com/video-57424472_171284278 The impression of the DPR it that about 15 % of the heavy weapons have been removed by Kiev side, but there is no information from the OSCE, the impression is that Kiev is not in a hurry. The DPR would like, as I understand it, for OSCE to count how much the Ukrainian side has left to move.

I have tried to read the latest OSCE reports to get their view on the process of the removing the heavy equipment:

http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/143241 said:
[...]
At the JCCC headquarters in Soledar (government-controlled, 77km north of Donetsk), the Ukrainian Chief-of-Staff (CoS) indicated a possible speed-up of the Ukrainian Armed Forces heavy-weapons withdrawal process, should the ceasefire hold.
[...]
Fifteen kilometres west of Hranitne (government-controlled, 57km south of Donetsk), the SMM heard what it assessed to have been the sound of outgoing mortar fire, judged to have been from a location five kilometres south-east. Three kilometres south of Hranitine, a Ukrainian Armed Forces checkpoint commander prevented the SMM from entering the village.

The SMM monitored the movement of military equipment in the Luhansk region. The SMM was asked by the “LPR” to monitor two convoys. The first was met in Brianka (45km west of Luhansk, “LPR”-controlled), where the SMM saw one APC, four 122mm self-propelled howitzers, five Grad MLRS, and one military-style truck. The second convoy consisted of four towed 152mm howitzers and one truck, met by the SMM 7km south of the centre of Luhansk. The SMM followed these convoys away from the contact line. However, the “LPR” prohibited the SMM from following either of these convoys to their end-points.
[...]
At a Ukrainian Armed Forces checkpoint near Shchastye (government-controlled, 23km north of Luhansk), the SMM saw four T-64 tanks, two BTR APCs and two Grad MRLS.
[...]
The last effort could be compared with point 2 of the Minsk agreement. Especially one can compare the above mentioned distance of 23km from Luhansk for the above mentioned Grad MLRS i(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-21_Grad) with the 70km of distance it should be from the line of contact (which is probably very close to the above mentioned checkpoint!) according to the Minsk 2 agreement:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/12/us-ukraine-crisis-minsk-agreement-factbo-idUSKBN0LG20Y20150212 said:
2. Withdrawal of all heavy weapons by both sides by an equal distance to create a security zone at least 50 kilometers wide for artillery systems of caliber of 100 millimeters and more; 70 km wide for Multiple Rocket Launching Systems (MLRS) and 140 km wide for MLRS "Tornado-S", "Uragan", "Smerch" and tactical missile systems "Tochka" and "Tochka-U":

- for the Ukrainian troops: from the de facto line of contact;

- for the armed formations of certain areas of Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine: from the line of contact according to the Minsk Memorandum of Sept. 19, 2014.

The withdrawal of heavy weapons as specified above should start no later than on the second day of the ceasefire and be completed within 14 days.

The process will be facilitated by the OSCE with the support of the Trilateral Contact Group.
The Minsk 2 with additional points can also be found on http://slavyangrad.org/2015/02/12/minsk-agreement-2-0-february-12-2015/

In case the war stops, it can be deduced from the OSCE reports that there may be a problem or two left to solve:
http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/143221 said:
The head of the Kherson regional police said to the SMM that there were concerns associated with the planned return in the coming weeks of approximately 3,500 servicemen after a full year based in the east. There has been an increase in the number and amount of weapons and explosives brought back by former soldiers which is concerning, he added.

The SMM monitored a session of the Lviv city council. Five former servicemen who have recently returned from active duty in the “Anti-Terrorism Operation” (“ATO”) zone, along with ten family members, interrupted the session demanding the allotment of land and apartments to families whose members had served in the east. The mayor explained that the land allocation was under the authority of the city council but that apartment funding would depend on central funding and had not yet materialized. The city council agreed on the development of a roadmap for the establishment of a special commission to initiate dialogue with soldiers returning from the “ATO” and defining modalities for allocation of land and other benefits. The council also voted for increased funding for a rehabilitation centre for servicemen.
The effects of this conflict reach into the future.
 

Attachments

  • 20150301.jpg
    20150301.jpg
    159.4 KB · Views: 161

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Lumiere_du_Code said:
Thanks, Perceval, I do not know how else do you have the patience for it :) Well, I just almost every day I see all these trolls and zombies, so I have no desire for anything to say to them, because it is communicating with a pillar.

It really is! It's also an interesting example of how deeply authoritarian followers identify with THE authority and are therefore completely impervious to any suggestion that their authority is wrong or bad. They totally lose any sense of morality or good or bad. For them, all morality sits in the hands of THE authority. Whatever it does is good, anyone who criticizes it is bad. They're like mind-controlled dupes that have no ability to see themselves as such. So yeah, like pillars, but the really annoying pillars that know how to user a keyboard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom