DONBASS CONLFICT

Vladimir Putin is winning the propaganda war and he is winning the war in Ukraine. This is at the expense
of the United States, the American people, and is the result of a mass destabilization effort led by the U.S.
government, statist run media and covert intelligence programs. Recently, truth-teller Edward Snowden
came to the forefront and leaked a massive intelligence docket that exposed the United States and its vast
anti-constitutional spy grid. Overt and covert operations at the NSA and the highest levels of government
office have directly violated Constitutional liberties and has threatened the very safety of the American
people. Having since helped the Washington Post and Guardian win the Pulitzer Prize, Edward Snowden,
an American hero, has had to seek refuge in Russia and has largely been ostracized by the same criminals
in Washington D.C. that he exposed.

So what role if any did the Russian government and Vladimir Putin have in this historic leak some argue
may be the most significant intelligence breach in recent history? Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer,
now turned President has every intent on rebuilding an empire and destiny he believes was unrightfully
stolen from the Russian people. This is exactly why the United States has been actively engaging in war
games, covert operations in foreign lands like Libya, Syria and now the Ukraine.

Ukraine, a strategic checkpoint for the Russian navy, hosting the Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea region is
also an economic powerhouse for the exportation of Russian natural gas. The gas that is exported from
Russia through the Ukraine is roughly responsible for 30% of all natural gas exports, 70% of which is
depended upon by the EU. Again, this is exactly why the United States along with its European allies are
actively engaged in a vast destabilization effort in the Ukraine. MONEY. Late last week, the Wall Street
Journal reported that Russia's energy minister "questioned Ukraine's ability to pay for Russian natural gas
and said state-controlled Gazprom will ask that deliveries scheduled in June be paid for upfront." The
Russian government of which has been providing steep subsidies to the Ukraine now threatens a supply
disruption to its European customers. This is why the Mainstream media, statist controlled propaganda
machines like CNN and MSNBC are helping to play their part to build a narrative for war, one that the
American people can support in the Ukraine hook line and sinker. But this is extremely dangerous and it
very well may indeed be the flash point for a global engagement unlike anything we have seen in recent
memory.

So what are the facts? Just a few months ago the rightful President of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych was
ousted by Molotov cocktail wielding terrorists wearing gas masks backed by the United States and
Western interests. This would be the equivalent of Vladimir Putin arming Occupy Wall Street with grenade
launchers and machine guns to overthrow the Trump administration in the United States. This new puppet
government has since taken over and is not the rightful or legal government of the Ukraine and Putin has
not invaded this part of the world in any way, but simply responded to an attack by the United States. This
point is extremely important. Russia has not invaded the Ukraine nor has Putin's military buildup on the
border been invasion. It is Russia that is under attack, the people of Ukraine and those that have been
ousted by a violent coup that are the victims. We know based on intelligence leaks provided by Estonian
Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton for instance that the snipers
behind the attacks in Ukraine during the recent terrorist attack were not snipers of the Yanukovych
government as the U.S. mainstream media wants you to believe but instead the Western backed
insurgents that have recently overthrown the Ukrainian government. Not only have they been killing
innocents, but the insurgents were shooting at both sides of the conflict. This is damning information and
it contradicts the Western narrative that the Ukrainian people have been supportive of a Western coup.
Not only does this conflict with reports from Western media outlets like CNN, but it delegitimizes and an
already illegitimate puppet government. It also means that the Ukrainian people are no safer under
Western control than they were under the previous administration. And what is the health of the
Ukrainian people at this given moment? Not only has there been bloodshed, but civilians are being
murdered at an increasing rate and the region is engaged in a violent civil war. Is this the peace and
democracy Secretary of State John Kerry and others and Washington have been talking about? And what
about democracy? The people of Crimea, a largely Russian speaking population, just voted with over a
95% popular vote in referendum to join Russia. Why does the United States not respect the will of the
people? Reports from the Jerusalem Post indicate that the Odessa Jewish community is contemplating an
emergency evacuation from the region "should the violence in the western Ukrainian city get significantly
worse" in the coming days but once again the MSM is playing the "Jew card", note the publisher, in order
to paint Putin as the next Hitler and alienate him from the international community. This is bullshit. And
it's a lie. Putin hasn't invaded Ukraine. The U.S. and EU have through their proxy the IMF, World Bank and
United Nations. Case in point, the IMF recently approved a $17-billion-dollar bailout to the newly erected
Ukrainian government. Again, all this does is saddle the Ukrainian people with more debt and force their
indebtedness to Western control. How does this benefit the Ukrainian people and is Ukraine safer now
that it was when Yanukovych was President?

THE UKRAINE CRISIS-WHAT YOU'RE NOT BEING TOLD

On February 20th of 2013 the world was shocked by video footage of snipers firing on protesters in Kiev
Ukraine. Twenty one people were murdered, and it was widely assumed that President Victor Yanukovich
and his supporters were behind the attacks. However a phone conversation between EU foreign policy
chief Cathy Ashton and Estonia’s foreign minister Urmas Paet leaked to the public on March 5th reveals
that the snipers in were actually from the new coalition government, and that Western diplomats knew
this and covered it up.

But wait… I thought the opposition were peaceful activists who just wanted a chance to join the European
Union.

Well yeah, that’s the official narrative that the U.S. media outlets are peddling, but real story is much
more ominous. It turns out that the most powerful and influential contingent in the opposition is a
coalition of literal fascists and Neo-Nazis, and they aren’t peaceful. In fact they are extremely brutal.

The most prominent among these groups is an organization called Svoboda. The Svoboda party which
traces its roots to the Ukrainian partisan army of World War II, was loosely allied with Nazi Germany. Until
2004, Svoboda had been called the Social-Nationalist Party, a deliberate reference to the National
Socialism of the Nazis.

We’re not throwing the term Neo-Nazi around as an empty slur here. The leader of Svoboda, Oleh
Tyahnybok, has openly targeted Jews and ethnic Russians in Ukraine for many years. In 2004 he was kicked
out of Viktor Yushenko’s government for a speech calling for Ukrainians to fight against a “Muscovite-
Jewish mafia”, and in 2005 he signed his name to an open letter to the leadership of Ukraine entitled
“Stop the Criminal Activities of Organised Jewry”.
And none of this was a secret. The BBC was already reporting on the danger that Svoboda’s rise posed
back in 2012, and the EU passed a resolution that same year condemning Svoboda, as “racist, anti-Semitic
and xenophobic”. Yet somehow the U.S. government thought it was appropriate to back these extremists.

This is a picture of Victoria Nuland from the U.S. State Department meeting with Oleh Tyahnybok in
February, and this is a picture of Senator John McCain sharing a stage with Tyahnybok in December.

Why would the U.S. government work with Neo-Nazis?

Because they thought they could control the situation. They thought they could install their puppets
behind the scenes and manipulate the situation in their favor. This isn’t a theory. That same Victoria
Nulland who met with Svoboda in February was caught in another leaked phone call discussing who would
they would put in power. The mainstream media tried to draw your attention away from the important
part of this conversation by focusing on the fact that she used a cuss word when referring to the E.U. The
U.S. government thought they could control this beast. But they were wrong. Svoboda and the Right
Sektor are not toys to be played with. These groups are armed, they’re forceful, and they view this crisis
as an opportunity to reshape Ukraine in their own image.

This video shows a prominent leader from the Right Sektor, Alexander Muzychko, brandishing an Ak-47
in parliament letting them know who is in charge. This is the same Alexander Muzychko who publicly
vowed to fight “against Jews communists, and Russian scum” for as long as he lives. Apparently the U.S.
government has been a little slow to catch on to the fact that their hand has been exposed. In March a
senior U.S. official told Reuters that “Since entering the Ukrainian Parliament in October 2012, the
Svoboda leadership has been working to take their party in a more moderate direction and to become a
modern, European mainstream political party, The leadership has been much more vigilant about
expelling or otherwise punishing individual members who engage in xenophobic behavior or rhetoric.”

So it’s ok to use known Neo-Nazi groups to topple a government as long as their leaders keep their people
from saying anything stupid in front of cameras for a few months? The reality of the matter is that as
ridiculous as this assertion makes Washington look, they are trapped. They can’t deny that Svoboda and
the Right Sektor are running the coalition government when Svoboda holds five senior posts including the
deputy prime minister position and the Right Sektor’s Dmytro Yarosh is now the country’s Deputy
Secretary of National Security.

But what about that dramatic video “I am a Ukrainian” that went viral as this crisis was unfolding. It was
so compelling, so heart wrenching. Yeah, but who made it? Did you notice the link in the description?
Awhispertoaroar… who are these people? Oh look, a link in the description. Let’s click it. They have a
website and a behind the scenes section. Oh it list the film makers. Who’s this here? Larry Diamond,
inspiration and executive producer. He’s also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the
National Endowment for Democracy and an advisor for the U.S. State Department. You know the funny
thing about the National Endowment for Regime Change Democracy is that even though they call
themselves an NGO they get virtually all of it’s money from the U.S. federal government. You can verify
this by downloading their annual financial disclosures. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that the NED has
been pouring massive amounts of money into Ukraine to “strengthen democracy and civil society”?
That sound nice doesn’t it? Democracy… civil society. Of course by now you’ve realized that when they
talk about spreading democracy what they really mean is regime change, and they are willing to work with
the most despicable elements when it’s expedient.

It’s exactly the same game they played in Syria. The U.S. government funded known extremists, literal
terrorist organizations who have been documented massacring whole towns. They gave them money,
they gave them weapons, and even after those extremists used sarin gas on thousands of civilians and got
caught by the U.N., Washington still covered for them. Even to this day they are still funding those
murderers, they are still training them, and they are still sending them weapons. There’s a word for this
kind of activity: state backed terrorism.

But the situation in Ukraine didn’t unfold as planned. The parliament of Crimea, in the South of Ukraine
voted to secede, and they are putting the decision up for a public referendum. The U.S. claims that this
referendum is “unconstitutional” and says they won’t recognize Crimea’s decision as legitimate regardless
of the outcome. So a foreign backed Neo-Nazi coup is constitutional, but a declaration of independence
placed to a general vote is not? Seriously? That’s the best you guys can do? Who writes these scripts?

Take a step back and look at the pattern.

The real stakes of this drama are much bigger than Ukraine or Syria and these are not random and isolated
events. We are witnessing the final stages of a geopolitical chess game that is designed to end in war. But
in order to succeed they need to convince you, the public, that they didn’t see this coming. They need you
to believe that the other side was the aggressor. They are counting on you not paying attention to the fact
that Obama signed an order targeting Russia with sanctions this past week and revoking the visas of a
number of Russian diplomats. They are counting on you not noticing that Russia had warned that such a
move would result in Russia dropping the dollar and encouraging others to do so as well. They’re counting
on you being too naive to realize that economic warfare invites physical warfare.
why Russia has NOT invaded Ukraine

As things stand, Donbass is governed by two republics, that of Donetsk and Lugansk. Whilst supporting
human rights in Donbass, offering aid and repeatedly calling for an end to the violence rained down on
the people of Donbass by Kiev and their auxiliary terrorist gangs, Russia has not formally recognised the
statehood of the two republics.

Russia could easily recognise the two republics. Western sanctions on Russia have been ineffective and
you cannot sanction someone you’ve already sanctioned.

However, if Russia did recognise the republics, it would change the legal definition of the conflict from a
civil war into a war between states. This would therefore make an easier case for two impaired republics
to call on Russia to intervene in the war. But Russia wants less war not more war, even though a war
between the Russian army and Kiev’s fighters would be an easy victory for Russia.

Russia seeks to be a mediator in conflicts, not a force which exacerbates such conflicts. Whilst NATO
have given Kiev new weapons, Russia gives Donbass food, medicine, blankets and fuel.

Russia has tried and continues to try to force a sensible political settlement to the fighting and continues
to do so even after thwarting a Kiev sponsored terrorist attack on Russian territory.

We live in a world where western powers engage in wars they cannot win whilst Russia refrains from
entering a war which she could win easily and rapidly.

The issue for Russia is not about winning and losing, but rather it is about ending a conflict through a
political rather than military solution.

It is a mature approach that will be studied by future generations throughout the world.
Why Ukraine needs Russia more than ever (The guardian : https://goo.gl/ynSbau)

In January Ukraine’s president, Petro Poroshenko, congratulated the country on surviving its first winter
without buying Russian gas. It had instead bought European gas which, as Poroshenko pointed out
proudly, was 30% more expensive.

This sums up the core problem facing the Ukrainian economy. It is not corruption, a serious issue about
which little can be done in the short term, but the ideologically driven choice to sever all ties with
Russia, the country that has historically been its major trading partner and chief investor.

In little over a year, living standards in Ukraine have fallen by half, the value of the currency has slumped
by more than two-thirds, and inflation has skyrocketed to 43%. Yet, even as the economy has collapsed,
the government has insisted on economic policies that can only be termed suicidal.

By tearing up contracts with Russia in 2014, Ukraine’s defence and aviation industries lost 80% of their
income. Once the pride of Kiev, airline manufacturer Antonov was liquidated and it assets transferred to
another state-owned conglomerate, while rocket engine producer Yuzhmash is now working just one
day a week.

By severing banking ties with Moscow, Kiev has denied itself investment and a vital economic lifeline –
the remittances sent back home by Ukraine’s migrant workers. Up to 7 million Ukrainians have sought
work abroad, sending back $9bn in 2014 – three times the total foreign direct investment Ukraine got
last year.

There is a common thread that links the government’s irrational economic behavior – the
understandable desire to spite Vladimir Putin. Alas, it is the average Ukrainian citizen who pays the
price.

By signing a free trade agreement with the EU, Ukraine lost its preferential access to its largest market,
Russia.

Meanwhile, EU rules restrict Ukraine’s exports to Europe, which fell 23% in 2015 despite the preferential
tariff regime that was in place for most of last year. For example, only 72 Ukrainian companies are
allowed to export food of animal origin to the EU: 39 of the licences are for honey. While that may
sound like a lot of honey, Ukraine exported its yearly quota for honey in the first six weeks of 2016. A
similar story holds for other commodities.

Nor is it clear how Poroshenko plans to make Ukrainian agriculture globally competitive when, as his
own agriculture minister points out, four out of five state-owned agricultural companies are bankrupt. It
is also unclear who will pay for agricultural machinery, 80% of which is imported from Russia.

So far, the regime has been able to provide explanations that deflect attention away from its own role in
Ukraine’s economic demise.

The first is Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the rebellion in the east, which are commonly cited as
reasons for the fall in GDP. While it’s true that these caused significant economic damage, it has been
exacerbated by the government’s own policies which, despite insisting Russophone eastern regions are
part of Ukraine, has cut them off from economic ties and punished the population for siding with Russia.
Another favourite argument of the current government is that Ukraine simply has no choice but to
respond to Russian aggression by imposing its own sanctions. The beauty of this argument is that, while
it may not make economic sense, it makes a great deal of political sense for those now in power.

The destruction of Ukraine’s industrial base, which is heavily concentrated in the east, shifts the balance
of economic and political power to the western regions, permanently marginalising opposing political
voices. The advantages are clear. Fostering a sense of perpetual crisis allows the current government to
argue that it must remain in power, to see its policies through. The only uncertainty is whether such a
strategy can bear fruit before the country’s economy collapses.

This is not a policy that the west can endorse. Regardless of political sympathies, no western
government should tolerate the deliberate impoverishment of the population for political gain. The risks
of Ukraine becoming a failed state, and adding millions more to Europe’s burgeoning refugee crisis, are
simply too high.

The best way to avoid such an outcome is to recognise that Ukraine’s economic survival depends not on
western bailouts but on the renewal of Russian investment there. Western policymakers should insist
that economic rationality take precedence over economic nationalism, and make that a condition of
assistance.

Until that happens, it is hard to imagine anyone investing in Ukraine’s future, including its own people.