I'm noticing a certain level of 'bias' ?
The film of his 'rifle' was made at a Euromaidan checkpoint, filmed by euromaidan. Bit hard for that to be propoganda. Which is probably the reason its been fairly much under the radar. Certainly never reported by Western Media. GOSH, SHOCK HORROR !!!!!!
Remember, I personally have no preconceved view on any side. If it actually is a 'peoples movement' then great. The overwhelming evidence ( US spent 5 billion on this 'peoples revolution') suggests otherwise. The make up of the new 'govt' suggests otherwise. Listen to Nulands conversation about who will be the new Junta, especially, listen to Ashton and Paets conversation in full, Ashton is not surprised about Paets information, I wonder why ?
I certainly don't support the previous Ukraine govt, any more than I support the current junta that has seized power. I do think that you'll learn that 'the peoples choice' is a very long way down the list of priorities of those big states who are playing this game.
The Crimea was 'given' to the Ukraine in 53, surely they have the right to become Russian again.
And the refusal to accept a referendium by the people of the Crimea, is interesting.
Robert McCorquodale, professor of international law and human rights at the University of Nottingham, attempts to parse the legality of the situation, arguing that whether or not a declaration of independence or merging is valid in international law is determined both “by the actions of the state within whose borders the people live; and the responses of the international community.”
By these standards, he argues that while Crimea is well within its rights to hold an independence referendum, Russia had no legal right to intervene on Ukrainian territory given that there was no evidence that Ukraine was oppressing the region by force.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the ... dependence_movements.html
And, it's also interesting that the resources that the World Bank (IMF) wants are mainly in the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.
And who run's the IMF ?
This is an academic answer, lots of reading sorry...
http://www.asu.edu/courses/pos ... %20thw%20IMF%20+%20WB.pdf
Short answer, as this isn't touched by the media, read the long answer for a better source.
The World Bank - IMF is owned and controlled by NM Rothschild and 30 to 40 of the wealthiest people in the world.
Before Joe Stiglitz was fired he took a large stack of secret documents out of the World Bank. These secret documents from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund reveal that the IMF required nations:
1. to sign secret agreements of 111 items
2. in which they agreed to sell off their key assets - water, electric, gas, etc.
3. in which they agreed to take economic steps which are really devastating to the nations involved
4. in which they pay off the politicians billions of dollars to Swiss bank accounts to do this transfer of a countries fixed assets
If they do not agree to these steps they are cut-off from all international borrowing. Today if can't borrow money in the international marketplace, no one can survive, whether you are people or corporations or countries. If that does not work they overthrow the government and plant lies about the former government and/or even rewrite history.
http://www.unitypublishing.com/Government/IMF.htm
The IMF is funded with taxpayer money, yet it operates behind a veil of secrecy. Members of affected communities do not participate in designing loan packages. The IMF works with a select group of central bankers and finance ministers to make polices without input from other government agencies such as health, education and environment departments. The institution has resisted calls for public scrutiny and independent evaluation.
The IMF routinely pushes countries to deregulate financial systems. The removal of regulations that might limit speculation has greatly increased capital investment in developing country financial markets. More than $1.5 trillion crosses borders every day. Most of this capital is invested short-term, putting countries at the whim of financial speculators. The Mexican 1995 peso crisis was partly a result of these IMF policies. When the bubble popped, the IMF and US government stepped in to prop up interest and exchange rates, using taxpayer money to bail out Wall Street bankers.
http://www.globalexchange.org/resources/wbimf/oppose
This is the closest the mainstream media seems to get.
Most emerging economies have no more than a cursory interest in the IMF. Politely, they will send representatives to the organisation's meetings. But they do not see the organisation as theirs, nor even partially theirs. They do not trust it as a political forum within which to negotiate, nor as an institution that will establish and apply rules with an even hand.
http://www.theguardian.com/com ... /08/interestrates.banking
Here's the Wall St journals take on the situation.
Investors think Ukraine has severe liquidity problems, but in the long term its debt would be manageable.
"Based on the little information we have, a maturity extension by a few years would make more sense than a haircut on the price of existing debt," said Angus Halkett, portfolio manager at Stone Harbor Investment Partners, which has $62.3 billion under management in total.
"A rescheduling of the nearer maturities, such as 2014 and 2015, would be sensible for Ukraine. Of course this will anger Russia, as the 2015 bond they bought would have to be included too. But it makes sense. The country is not in a position to pay at the moment," said Viktor Szabo, a portfolio manager at Aberdeen Asset Management, which manages $320 billion.
"We're talking about a country which has suffered multiple stresses lately, but its debt levels are contained. Also, Ukraine is likely back in a bad recession, after all the disruptions of the past few months," he added. Ukraine's debt amounts to around 40% of annual gross domestic product. That ratio is half as high as Germany's.
http://online.wsj.com/news/art ... 4732804579421123474521510
This is actually informative, Global research who try to be factual. Worth a read, only I know most of you won't bother. Then you'll argue with me later about points already made here.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/t ... f-a-global-currency/13239
And if the vision of a global currency outside government control does not set off conspiracy theorists, putting the BIS in charge of it surely will. The BIS has been scandal-ridden ever since it was branded with pro-Nazi leanings in the 1930s. Founded in Basel, Switzerland, in 1930, the BIS has been called “the most exclusive, secretive, and powerful supranational club in the world.” Charles Higham wrote in his book Trading with the Enemy that by the late 1930s, the BIS had assumed an openly pro-Nazi bias, a theme that was expanded on in a BBC Timewatch film titled “Banking with Hitler” broadcast in 1998.2 In 1944, the American government backed a resolution at the Bretton-Woods Conference calling for the liquidation of the BIS, following Czech accusations that it was laundering gold stolen by the Nazis from occupied Europe; but the central bankers succeeded in quietly snuffing out the American resolution.
And
Dr. Quigley was Professor of History at Georgetown University, where he was President Bill Clinton’s mentor. He was also an insider, groomed by the powerful clique he called “the international bankers.” His credibility is heightened by the fact that he actually espoused their goals. He wrote:
“I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960′s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. . . . [I]n general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”
I do believe I made a point earlier about Senator P BUSH being charged with working with the Nazi's ? No problem though, charges were dropped and his son and grandson went on to become US presidents. Hmmmmmmm
Yes, looney conspiracy bankers stuff, by rights I should be agreeing with the Junta now in power in the Ukraine, for all their neo nazi stuff they get close.............
I just find it amusing that they are now supporting all they hate.
Isn't history fun. :google:
And this is an interesting read, who do the Ukraine richlist people back...... ?
(When their not trying to avoid being arrested for their crimes. Move to the West guys......)
http://www.theguardian.com/wor ... re-they-which-side-are-on
tl:dr; f the people, it's all about the money.
There isn't and never was. There were Crimean Tatars, rellocated to Siberia by Stalin... and with this "referendum" they can loose their country for the second time... looks like to nation of Criminals.
)
