By The Weeping Angel
Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:48 pm
Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:48 pm
And US client states armed ISIS. We can do this all day. But doesn't that prove the point? Both US/European neoliberalism and Russian plutocratic dictatorship are part of the problem. Both have to go and neither are worthy of support for anyone seriously committed to progressive politics.Littlejohn's brain wrote:and Russia has helped out the Assad regime to gas its own civilians
Shaun Walker @shaunwalker7 1h
Blair gave talk on leadership in Kiev on Saturday. Just remembered amazing line, something like: "If you're sure you're right, you should...
Shaun Walker @shaunwalker7 1h
... take the decision whatever others say, & you'll sleep well at night"... "Unlike 1 million Iraqi children", a journo next to me muttered.
http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/225600.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said it is worth considering assigning the status of combatant to veterans of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists - Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN-UPA).
"This is a very important issue and one that was raised in a very timely manner. Previously, this issue split the country and was not on the agenda... Now is the right time," he told a press conference in Kyiv on Thursday.
The president also added that he sees OUN-UPA fighters as examples of heroism.
http://www.thenation.com/article/hero-o ... ns-ukraine" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In the 1930s, when the western part of Ukraine (known as "eastern Galicia") was under Polish control, Bandera's Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) terrorized Polish officials and families with assassinations. Bandera's guerrillas grew increasingly successful, thanks to German military training and support. The 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact handed the Ukrainian-dominated eastern part of Galicia over to Soviet control, making Russia the main enemy for Bandera and the OUN. When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, Bandera's forces fought alongside the Wehrmacht. Jewish Holocaust scholars, among others, say that Bandera's forces participated in the mass killings of Jews in L'viv and other parts of Western Ukraine where Jews once thrived. But within a few months after Operation Barbarossa started, Hitler soured on the alliance and imprisoned Bandera. Many of his followers integrated themselves into the Nazi-run security forces.
Last week, the chief rabbi of Ukraine, Reuven Azman, announced that he was returning his Order of Merit that the government awarded him to protest the rehabilitation of Bandera, calling the move a "hideous blow to Ukraine's image" and warning of dark "consequences."
Protests and criticism spread both inside Ukraine and in neighboring Russia and Poland. That's because Bandera's toxic ethnic chauvinism, centered on promoting ethnic Ukrainians from the western, more Catholic region, targeted not just Jews,but all non-Ukrainians. Given Ukraine's ethnic makeup, glorifying one region's racism as "heroic" is suicidal.
http://www.criticatac.ro/lefteast/maida ... -analysis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Finally, the far right’s participation in Maidan had an important regional diversity. Counter-intuitively, after Kyiv (32%), the highest participation of the far right was at local maidans not in the western region, but in the eastern region and Donbas (29%). The lowest participation (except for Crimea) was in the central (24%) and western regions (23%). The same is true for the participation of other opposition parties and/or politicians at local maidans. In the Donbas (54%), southern (51%) and eastern (40%) regions it was higher than in Kyiv (37%), Central (34%) and Western (29%) regions. This regional difference evidently reflects not the local support for the parties and the far right, but rather the local support for maidans. Where the local majority was against Maidan, the more the local maidans were dependent on the organized structures of the opposition parties, including Svoboda. At the same time, the opposition parties and the far right, which already had a very low level of trust from the residents of the southern and eastern regions, might have only pushed those people even further away from Maidan, making a genuine nationwide movement against Yanukovych and approval of Maidan almost impossible.
This preliminary analysis indicates that the far right’s participation in Maidan was anything but insignificant. The far right groups were the most visible identified collective actors among Maidan participants, with the largest share of reported participation in Maidan protest events and specifically in violent events, which had a crucial significance and usually attracted the most attention. The far right groups were the most frequently mentioned collective actors at all stages of Maidan. Despite the decline in Svoboda’s participation in the last days of the armed insurrection, Right Sector took first position. Against all expectations, the far right groups (as well as political parties or politicians in general) were more frequently mentioned at the local maidans in the eastern and in the southern regions than in the western or central, i.e. precisely where they had the lowest support among the local residents.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Russians were providing support to the far right in Western Europe, no. But the EU - which, as its political class likes to remind us, aspires to somewhat loftier ideals than the Russian kleptocracy - has been equivocal (to put it very mildly) about its stance on Ukrainian fascism. It seems both are using the far right to provide them with political leverage against their opponents. So the faux indignation is a bit much.cycloon wrote:Certainly not, if Russia has owt to do with it!
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ational-eu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Personal right to anonymity? I think the lion's […]
It's a fair summary of his entire life and career.[…]
Back in 1991, various people said that the sures[…]