What is one to make of Barack Obama's remarks yesterday, during a visit to Mexico, when he condemned violence against "peaceful protesters" - considering that the tele-operated mob in the Ukraine determined to violently overthrow the government may be many things, but is most assuredly not peaceful?
Everyone knows that violence against peaceful protesters is wrong. That is why Ukraine's President Yanukovich has offered a general amnesty, offered a leader of the protesters the post of Prime Minister, and tolerated the occupation of Kiev's central square and public buildings for three months. The problem are not peaceful protesters, but the violent ones.
So, either Mr. Obama's statement applies to an abstraction, or what he said was that Washington doesn't mind legitimate police action against violent protesters. After all, the U.S. government has repeatedly resorted to force, both at home and abroad, to make its point. Surely, a government committed to the rule of law, freedom and democracy, i.e. the equality of all before the law (pace the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights) would not hold other governments to a different standard than itself, right? And surely it would be grossly unfair, and possibly bigoted, to suggest that Barack Obama does not know exactly what he is talking about.
With that in mind, Mr. Obama's remarks yesterday represent a clearly implied approval of subduing the violent law-breakers by all legal means. To interpret them any other way would be to suggest Mr. Obama is either a hypocrite, duplicitous, or stupid. Surely, the American public and the media don't mean to do that.
Do they?
 |
| (via Facebook) |
So, either Mr. Obama's statement applies to an abstraction, or what he said was that Washington doesn't mind legitimate police action against violent protesters. After all, the U.S. government has repeatedly resorted to force, both at home and abroad, to make its point. Surely, a government committed to the rule of law, freedom and democracy, i.e. the equality of all before the law (pace the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights) would not hold other governments to a different standard than itself, right? And surely it would be grossly unfair, and possibly bigoted, to suggest that Barack Obama does not know exactly what he is talking about.
With that in mind, Mr. Obama's remarks yesterday represent a clearly implied approval of subduing the violent law-breakers by all legal means. To interpret them any other way would be to suggest Mr. Obama is either a hypocrite, duplicitous, or stupid. Surely, the American public and the media don't mean to do that.
Do they?
4 comments:
Those "protesters" also cover their dead in nazi flags, how patriotic of them
It's history repeating. Germanys third attempt to conquer Ukraine has many parallels with the destruction of Yugoslavia. In both countries Germany supports fascists that collaborated with Hitler during WW2 and committed genocide against Jews and Orthodox Slavs. In both cases thier traditional strongholds are in the Catholic Western part of the country that was once occupied by the Austro-Hungarian empire.
And the German goal is still same: war and colonization.
After WW2 the Western German nazi-run intelligence service BND continued to support both the Ustashe and Bandera fascists.
BND support for the Ustashe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ed2E3jzwmo8&t=4m
800 millions for a war:
http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/gc-53.html
"Germany backs Tudjman 1991"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e31_1323961383
"European neo-Nazis fight on Croatian side"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=481_1325596183&safe_mode=off
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=626_1322140474
BND support for Bandera:
"By 1959 the BND was helping Bandera to run a new generation of
Ukrainian agents from West Germany into the USSR."
http://hnn.us/article/122778
"On the Offensive
...
The rightwing extremists are benefiting from pressure Berlin is applying on the Ukrainian government and from the fact that German diplomats, on various occasions, have met with functionaries of the rightwing extremist Svoboda party."
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58713
"At all Costs"
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58723
Steinmeier meets nazi leader Tiahnybok
http://german-foreign-policy.com/pics/steinmeier_tiahnybok.jpg
Klitschko is a German puppet:
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58705
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58302
More articles:
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/map/country/30
Even Merkels own think-tank admits that the EU "agreement" would be very harmful for the population:
"The implementation of the Association Agreement calls for "stringent and, in part, very painful social adjustment measures," predicts the DGAP."
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58700
In a country with ~100$ wages that would be a new Hunger Plan for the Ukraine:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan
No wonder why the German government thinks it is necessary to hire nazis for that. They have already attacked barracks and even armed themselves with heavy weapons just like they did in Yugoslavia.
But if this follows the Yugoslav pattern, then the Germans instigate the trouble, and Americans swoop in to "finish the job." For all intents and purposes, they are indistinguishable.
Well, at least the EU had the courtesy to warn Yanukovich that any retaliation on his part will. E met with a one way trip to The Hague.
Post a Comment