What the Western Media Won’t Tell You: Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians Also Voted to Join Russia


16 марта мы выбираем

или

Image: “On the 16th of March We Choose”: neo-Nazi Ukraine “Or” Russia?

Media reports acknowledge that 83.1 percent of eligible Crimean voters cast their ballot in the March 16th referendum.

The final tally of the vote was 96.77 percent in favor of joining the Russian Federation, and 2.51 percent against.

File:Distribution of ethnic groups in Crimea 2001.png

The Western media has underscored that both the Crimean Tatars as well as the Ukrainian population of Crimea were against joining the Russian Federation. The Non-Russian population constitutes 41.7 percent of the Crimean population.

According to official data, Russians constitute 58.32% of the population of Crimea, 24.32% are Ukrainians and 12.10% are Crimean Tatars.

The Guardian, in a slither of media disinformation intimated that the Tatars feared a wave of repression if Crimea were to join the Russian Federation:

Now, as Crimea faces a referendum that is likely to seal its fate as a province or satellite of Russia, ethnic tensions are reaching boiling point. In a chilling echo of history, Tatar houses in the Crimean city of Bakhchisarai have been marked with an ominous X, just as they were before the Soviet-era deportations. On Monday two Tatar businesses were firebombed.

…. The prospect of a return to living under Moscow’s rule is disturbing. “People are in panic. “We are trying to keep people calm but they are scared of the Russian soldiers and Cossacks that come here,” he said.” (Crimea’s Tatars fear the worst as it prepares for referendum | World news | theguardian.com

Contrary to the reports of 135  international observers from 23 countries, the Western media in chorus has suggested without a shred of evidence that the elections were rigged and that Crimea was under Russian military occupation.

The observer mission reports which include members of theEuropean Parliament have been casually ignored by the mainstream Western media: 

Mateus Piskorkski, the leader of the European observers’ mission and Polish MP:  “Our observers have not registered any violations of voting rules.”

Ewald Stadler, member of the European Parliament, dispelled the “referendum at gunpoint” myth:  “I haven’t seen anything even resembling pressure… People themselves want to have their say.”

Pavel ChernevBulgarian member of parliament:  “Organization and procedures are 100 percent in line with the European standards,” he added.

A woman is reflected in a mirror as she casts her ballot during voting in a referendum at a polling station in Simferopol March 16, 2014.(Reuters / Thomas Peter)

A woman is reflected in a mirror as she casts her ballot during voting in a referendum at a polling station in Simferopol March 16, 2014.(Reuters / Thomas Peter)

Johann Gudenus, member of the Vienna Municipal Council:  “Our opinion is – if people want to decide their future, they should have the right to do that and the international community should respect that. There is a goal of people in Crimea to vote about their own future. Of course, Kiev is not happy about that, but still they have to accept and to respect the vote of people in Crimea”.

People line up to receive their ballots during the referendum on the status of Ukraine's Crimea region at a polling station in Simferopol March 16, 2014. (Reuters / Vasily Fedosenko)

Serbian observer Milenko Baborats “People freely expressed their will in the most democratic way, wherever we were… During the day we didn’t see a single serious violation of legitimacy of the process,”

Srdja Trifkovic, prominent and observer from Serbia: “The presence of troops on the streets is virtually non-existent and the only thing resembling any such thing is the unarmed middle-aged Cossacks who are positioned outside the parliament building in Simferopol. But if you look at the people both at the voting stations and in the streets, like on Yalta’s sea front yesterday afternoon, frankly I think you would feel more tense in south Chicago or in New York’s Harlem than anywhere round here,” he said.   (For more details see Crimean ‘Referendum at Gunpoint’ is a Myth – International Observers By Global Research News, March 17, 2014)

Yet according to Time Magazine, without acknowledging the reports of the international observers,the ballot had to have been rigged and the vote was held under the gun of the Russian military:

“95 percent voted in favor of becoming a part of Russia. That may seem like an impossible result, the mark of a rigged election. And in some ways it was. The vote was held during a Russian military occupation of Crimea and the ballot did not offer voters the option of keeping their current status in Ukraine. ( Time, March 17, 2014)

In chorus, Western media reports have stated that both Ukrainians and Tatars were firmly against seceding from Ukraine. They also intimated that the Tatar community had decided not to vote.

According to the Washington Post, “a vote in favor of seceding” was inevitable because “ethnic Russians make up 60 percent of Crimea’s population”. But the result was not 60 percent in favor, it was 97 percent in favor, indicating that all major ethnic groups in the Crimea voted in favor of seceding from Ukraine.

crimeeThe figures do not add up:  The Russians constitute 58 percent of Crimea’s population, yet 97 percent of the vote was in favor of joining Russia. If Ukrainians and Tatars had refused to participate in the referendum, voter participation would have been substantially less that 83.1.

The referendum was also a vote against the US-EU sponsored Coup d’etat.

The results confirm that the Tatars and Ukrainians who did cast their ballot, also voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia.

What this 97 percent vote also indicates is a rejection of the illegal Neo-Nazi government in Kiev.  The Election poster (image above) reads:

16 марта мы выбираем или

“On the 16 of March we choose”: neo-Nazi Ukraine “Or” the Russian Federation?

Articles by:Prof Michel Chossudovsky 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-the-western-media-wont-tell-you-crimean-tatars-and-ukrainians-also-voted-to-join-russia/5373989

Judge Jeanine Destroys Obama About His War in Syria


I’m not what one might call a fan of FOX News, on the contrary, but this is just awesome, she so totally destroys

– And, YES, Was the same channel that helped spread the lies during Bush’s crusade.

– And YES, I do know this is the Republican channel in US and the so called liberals watch MSNBC/MSM … and I really don’t  care as long as she serves the means to the end result, no strike on Syria.  if we can get the republicans to rally just because they hate democrats I could care less.

– And, YES, I KNOW, that the US are frightened. Their staunch allies in Europe have distanced themselves. The US military is over stretched and their is too much at stake with all those military bases within easy reach of ‘enemy’ missiles. The US has too much at stake to risk attacking yet another sovereign nation to add to Empire USA.
FOX News should have been reporting like when Dubya decided to terrorize the  world. Obama is just another face that the powerful faceless are now using to portray their evils in a nice way.

And YES, I know that according to NEW YORK – President Obama’s Kenyan half-brother, Malik Obama, appears headed for the Egyptian terror watch list because of his Muslim Brotherhood ties.
Complaints have been filed with Egypt’s prosecutor-general calling for Malik to be put on Egypt’s terror watch list and brought to Egypt to be questioned by state criminal investigators for allegedly financing terrorism, according to former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat.
According to Egyptian newspaper and television reports, Malik Obama has become a target in an Egyptian government terrorist investigation because of his role as an owner and investment adviser for the Sudan-based Islamic Dawa Organization, or IDO, and the organization’s umbrella group, the Muslim Brotherhood.
 …there’s more good info at
http://dogmaandgeopolitics.wordpress.com/2013/09/07/egypt-eyes-obamas-brother-for-terror-list-peas-in-pod/

– And YES, I know all and more, but please, WATCH THIS VIDEO of Judge Jeanine how she Destroys Obama About His War in Syria

Thank you.

US Elections: Netanyahu’s Dirty Trick


“All this bluff and corruptibility which came into the Israeli political life in an attempt to form a narrow government failed not only tactically but also conceptually”-Yitzhak Rabin, 1992

Four catchy phrases ruined Shimon Peres political life, relegating him to the simple formalities of Israel’s Presidency. “Yes and No” was coined by Sefy Rivlin, and cost Peres the 1981 and 1984 elections. A Peres puppet was shown answering “yes and no” to every question asked. Before that, in 1977, Yitzhak Rabin called Peres an “indefatigable conspirator.” Since this article is in English, I won’t analyze the brilliance of the Hebrew saying; in the feat of his lifetime, Rabin ruined Peres with three words. The other two phrases are related to Shimon Peres attempt in 1990 to replace Shamir’s government—of which he was Minister of Finances—by a narrow government led by Labor and supported by ultra-Orthodox parties. Peres failed, and Rabin hit again. He called the affair the “Dirty Trick” (literally “The Stinking Exercise”). In the popular protests that followed, the fourth slogan appeared: “Mush’hatim, nim’astem!” (roughly “corrupt people, we’re fed up with you!”). Rabin used it as the Labor slogan for the 1992 election, which he won. It was obvious that he included Peres in the culprits at whom the slogan was aimed.

Rabin and PeresRabin and Peres

Aryeh Deri and Ovadia Yosef Aryeh Deri and Ovadia Yosef

The Unbearable Stench of the Dirty Trick

At the beginning of March 1990, Peres drafted a secret agreement with Aryeh Deri from the Haredi-Mizrahi Shas party to support the dissolution of the government. Subsequently Peres issued a motion of no confidence against the government, and Shamir fired Peres. On March 15, the government was dissolved by a vote of 60 to 55; it was the first time in Israeli history that a government lost a confidence vote. Shas—the partner to the conspiracy to remove Shamir—oddly abstained in the vote; this was the first sign something went wrong in the plan. Agudat Yisrael—the second Haredi party involved in the Dirty Trick—supported the vote. In the aftermath, President Chaim Herzog chose Peres to form the new government; however, Peres found it difficult to sign an agreement. The most humiliating issue was that potential partners requested from him cash-securities in order to secure the political agreement. Nobody trusted Peres. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef—Shas mentor—refused to allow its party members to join such a government. Rabbi Elazar Shach, the spiritual leader of a third Haredi party called “Degel HaTorah” called not to tolerate a coalition with the secular “eaters of hares and swine.”

The new government was to be approved on April 11. In the closest thing to a public execution in the Israeli political life, Peres lost the vote at the Knesset after two members of his proposed coalition disappeared without explanations. Later it was discovered that Eliezer Mizrahi and Avraham Verdiger, both from Agudat Yisrael, were absent due to Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson’s ruling not to support any concession of an Israeli territory. Following a long saga, Shamir presented a new government on June 11. Peres had proved truth his “indefatigable conspirator” image.

Twenty-two years later the saga is still alive. Two of the Dirty Trick Affair leaders are running in the upcoming elections after a long absence from political life. Aryeh Deri from Shas—who had closed the deal with Peres without the approval of Rabbi Yosef—returned to the party’s leadership. Eliezer Mizrahi—one of the disappeared Knesset members during the vote—announced on November 8 that he is running again; he is conducting negotiations with various parties of the extreme right. Following the elections, Peres may get an almost daily unpleasant reminder of his own questionability. Over the years, participants of the Dirty Trick said in interviews that nothing was evil because it was a legal political move. There are no doubts on the legality; however, it is considered illegitimate because Peres conspired against the government of which he was a senior member. As said, he proved being an “indefatigable conspirator;” after that he served as Prime Minister for a short period after Rabin’s assassination but his political career was over.

Dirty Tricks

Dirty Tricks | Israel’s Only Truth

 

Dirty Trick 2012

This long introduction was essential. It shows an intrinsic pattern of the Israeli society and its political echelons. Dirty Tricks are the norm there, regardless specific party affiliations. Given the dramatic characteristics of the Dirty Trick, one would expect from all political players to study the case and avoid similar errors. Netanyahu obviously learned its details because he replicated them in 2012. However, instead of acting against his own government, he acted against the American one by purposely intervening in the 2012 elections. I analyzed in Obama’s Victory Shocks Israel how Netanyahu openly supported Romeny in a variety of ways. This was an unusual intervention in another country’s elections, especially considering that the USA is Israel’s main ally. Netanyahu may win the upcoming elections, but he has publicly lost his own version of the Dirty Trick and may become a serious competitor for the position of president, the Siberia of Israeli politics. Should Obama’s Administration consider Israel a hostile country?

Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin Netanyahu

Obama’s Victory Shocks Israel ???


Yedioth Aharonot: “An Ugly Victory”

Emphasizing the wild reaction of the Hebrew media and Israel’s upper echelon of politicians to Obama’s victory, Mossad opened on the same day a recruiting campaign over the internet. Its ads appeared next to pictures illustrating the victory, creating an eerie image. Is Mossad about to gear up sinister old plans for a presidential assassination? Beginning this article in such a fashion is justifiable due to the violent reactions voiced in Israel. One of the softest belonged to Yedioth Aharonot—Israel’s largest newspaper—which read “An Ugly Victory.” The most quoted reaction belonged to Likud Knesset Member Danny Danon, who said “the State of Israel will not surrender to Obama. We have no one to rely on but ourselves.”

Netanyahu - ObamaNetanyahu – Obama

Mossad Recruiting Ad Mossad Recruiting Ad

This was the unsuccesful end of Netanyahu’s open campaign for Republican candidate Mitt Romney. The support included a well-advertised visit to Jerusalem, supporting articles in the Israeli and Jewish media, the disclosure of their old personal friendship which dates back to 1976 (see Romney, Obama, and the Israeli Vote), and the inclusion of Netanyahu in Romney’s adds. Moreover, the main financial supporter of Netanyahu is Sheldon Adelson, an American Jew who is among America’s richest men, his businesses are centered on the Chinese gambling industry. He openly endorsed Romney and contributed at least $40 million to his presidential elections campaign. This unusual intervention in other country’s elections was aimed at placing in the White House a president that will be more receptive to Israel’s plans to attack Iran (see Romney’s Key in Israeli Attack on Iran). On August 30, 2012, the International Atomic Energy Agency published a report on the nuclear program of Iran. The report claims that Iran is speeding up its uranium enrichment program, having placed more than three quarters of the centrifuges it needs for completing it in a practically impenetrable underground installation, beneath a mountain outside Qum. This means that Iran is close to crossing what Israel had defined as its red line: the capability to produce nuclear weapons in a safe location. With Obama in the White House, Israel’s belligerency is likely to be blocked.

Netanyahu’s campaign was more successful at home. Israeli Channel 2 performed a poll just before the elections in the USA; 50% of all Israelis backed Romney, versus 26% for Obama. A similar poll conducted by the ultra-Orthodox Channel 10 showed that 50% of secular Jews favored Obama, and 50% Romney; however, religious Jews favored Romney, giving him 85% of their voices. Unluckily for Romney, neither group could vote in the USA.

Mavi Marmara

Mossad Recruiting Ad | “Anger in the USA on Rabbis who supported Obama”

Panic in Jerusalem

The reason why abovementioned Danny Danon became the main politician quoted on the issue despite his relative obscurity was that Netanyahu panicked after the first reactions were published. Interior Minister Eli Yishai, Chairman of Shas Party, said “This is probably not a very good morning for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” The reason for this statement is clear; if until now the relations between Netanyahu and Obama were not particularly friendly, from now onwards, Netanyahu can count on open hostility. Netanyahu was fast to react, ordering all of his party’s ministers and Knesset members to avoid commenting on Obama’s re-election without coordinating their statements with the Prime Minister’s Bureau. “Don’t talk about Obama,” Netanyahu was quoted by local media.

In parallel, a witch hunt begun among American Jewry. the picture above was taken from the settler Channel 7. It shows the abovementioned Mossad ad next to the main reaction of the channel to the elections. The headline reads “Anger in the USA on Rabbis who supported Obama.” The article brings an analysis of David Badin (English spelling may vary), director of a news agency and of a political research center active in Boston and Jerusalem. He explains how his organizations approached hundreds of rabbis all over the US, trying to convince them to endorse Romney and to “teach how much Obama is dangerous to Israel, this would have change the picture, and Romney would have won.” He claims that the rabbis could have changed the situation in several key states. He ends his analysis claiming that if these American Jews “put tfilin (while praying), pray three times a day (in weekdays), but vote Obama, there are serious questions on their ways.” He continues “there was here a president who made terrible things. He put anti-Semites in senior positions. He supported Islam… All this must force us to consider the relations between religious-Jews in Israel and America, and why there is such a disconnection between them.” This is the closest thing to a formal statement of the settlers on their position. It is unlikely they will find any sympathy in Obama’s next term.

Netanyahu is under serious political pressure, due to the upcoming elections on January 22, 2013. He is facing serious social protests at home and needs a war to distract the electorate. It always works. A war with Iran is not possible right now. Yet, Obama’s victory may have provided him with a poorman’s war. Danny Danon’s statement opening this article was not random, and probably was coordinated with Netanyahu. From now until the elections Netanyahu will claim that the USA has become unfriendly and thus the people must unify and brace themselves for hard times. A words’ war with America is almost as good as one with Iran.

SHALOM

Whichever of Obama or Romney wins, US dealings with the Arab world will change


Robert Fisk – The Independent Oct 29, 2012

After last week’s Obama-Romney love-fest for Israel, the Arabs have been slowly deciding which of the two men would be best for the Middle East. It looks like Barack Obama is their man; but the problem – as always – is the sad, pathetic and outrageously obvious fact that it doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference.

George Bush invaded Iraq after giving Ariel Sharon permission to go on colonising the occupied West Bank. Obama got out of Iraq, increased drone strikes on the Pakistan-Afghan border and then behaved like a dog when Benjamin Netanyahu told him there would be no discussion about Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders. Instead of saying, “Oh yes there will”, like a strong and independent president, Obama sat cowed in his White House seat as the Israeli prime minister effectively told him that UN Security Council resolution 242 – the very basis of the non-existent “peace process” – was a non-starter.

Since then, of course, Mitt Romney, who seems to have as much understanding of the Middle East as the Texas preacher who burned a Koran, has said the Palestinians “have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace” and has still not satisfactorily explained why, back in 2005 as governor of Massachusetts, he appeared rather keen on wire-tapping mosques. So good luck to the Arabs.

The truth, however, is that the next president is not going to have the freedom to decide his policy on the Middle East. The old love affair with Israel will continue – unless Israel attacks Iran and drags America into another Middle East war – but for the first time in American history, a successful presidential candidate is going to have to deal with a new Arab world; indeed, a new Muslim world.

The critical point is that the Arab Awakening (please let’s forget the “Spring” bit) represents a people calling for dignity. It includes non-Arab Muslims as well – what else was the mini-green revolution after the last Iranian elections? – and it means that the millions who live in the part of the world we still like to call the Middle East – it doesn’t feel very “middle” when you live there – now intend to make their own decisions, based on their wishes, not on those of their former satrap presidents and – in turn – their masters in Washington. La Clinton still seems not to have grasped this. Maybe Obama does. Romney? I bet he couldn’t draw a map of the nations in the area, except for one, of course.

Contrary to the Western belief that the Arabs are all struggling for “democracy”, the battle and the tragedy of the Middle East today – whether in the aftermath of the “soft” revolution in Tunisia or the butchery of Syria – is about that word dignity, about the right as a human being to say what you like about whomever you want and not to let a despot take personal ownership of a whole country (as long as he has the permission of the United States) and treat it as his private property.

Yes, revolutions are messy. The Egyptian revolution didn’t go quite the way we thought it would. Libya can easily break apart. Syria is a cataclysm. But the Arab people are speaking out at last and they will now ensure that their presidents and prime ministers abide by their wishes, not by the word of Washington or Moscow. Contrary to the Romney-style belief that there is a lack of civilisational values among the Arabs – viz his extraordinary remarks on Israel’s civilisation – the people of the Middle East are demonstrating quite the opposite. It is a slow business: every reader of this article will be dead of old age before the Arab “revolution” is complete.

But the days when US presidents instruct the potentates of the Middle East what to say and do are coming to an end. It will be a long time before the Saudi regime crumbles, along with all the other gas stations in the Gulf. And I suppose it must be said that the tragedy of the Palestinians probably lies at the heart of the Arab Awakening.

Alas, the Palestinians are the only ones not to benefit from the Arab revolutions. There is not enough land left for them to have a state. This is a fact beyond peradventure (as Enoch Powell used to say). Anyone doubting these words should book a flight to Israel and take a look at the West Bank. There is no place left for Palestine; this is the real tragedy that US presidents must face in the coming years.

Source

Obama Information Czar Confronted Over “Ban Conspiracy Theories” Paper


Claims to have no memory of saying free speech should be taxed

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
May 1, 2012

Obama Information Czar Confronted Over Ban Conspiracy Theories Paper  16Sunstein span articleLarge

During a rare public appearance, the Obama Administration’s Information Czar Cass Sunstein told a crowd gathered at he NYU Law School in NYC yesterday that he has little recollection of writing a 2008 paper that called for a ban on conspiracy theorizing.

In the question and answer portion of the lecture, We Are Change founder Luke Rudkowski confronted Sunstein concerning his avocation of a “provocateur” style program to silence what have become the government’s most vociferous and influential critics.

With tongue firmly in cheek, Rudkowski introduced himself as “Bill de Berg from Brooklyn college”, before directly asking Sunstein to explain his comments.

“I know you wrote many articles, but I think the most telling one about you is the 2008 one called ‘Conspiracy Theories’. Where you openly advocated government agents infiltrating activist groups for 9/11 truth, and also to stifle dissent online.” Rudkowski stated.

“Why do you think the government should go after family members and responders who have questions about 9/11?” he asked Sunstein.

“I’ve written hundreds of articles and I remember some and not others.” Sunstein replied, denying that he has a firm recollection of the paper

“I hope I didn’t say that, but whatever was said in that article, my role in government is to oversee federal rulemaking in a way that is wholly disconnected from the vast majority of my academic writing, including that.” Sunstein added.

“I know that, I’m just asking because you may be the next Supreme Court Justice if Obama appoints you, and you did write those things.” Rudkowski replied.

“I may agree with some of the things I have written but I’m not exactly sure. I focus on what my boss wants me to do.” Sunstein said, intimating that he was just following orders.

When Rudkowski asked if Sunstein would retract his comments about banning opinions that differ from those of the government, Sunstein again claimed he did not remember the article he had written and his personnel intervened to prevent Rudkowski pressing him on the matter.

Watch the video:  http://youtu.be/4OIiOztc52g

Within his infamous paper, which can be downloaded here, Sunstein outlined plans for the government to infiltrate “conspiracy groups”, including the 9/11 Truth Movement, in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings.

The specifics of the plans must be read in full in order to gauge their extreme nature and the threat Sunstein poses to the freedom in America.

On page 14 of  the paper, he proposed that “under imaginable conditions” the government “might ban conspiracy theorizing” and could “impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.”

In effect, Obama’s information czar called for taxing or banning outright, as in making illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn’t approve of.

Sunstein’s definition of a “conspiracy theorist” encompasses those who question manmade global warming and, most bizarrely, anyone who believes that sunlight is healthy for their bodies.

Presumably if Sunstein had been in power in the latter middle ages he would have attempted to tax and then ban the work of Galileo Galilei for subscribing to the theory that the Earth was not the centre of the universe and that it actually revolved around the Sun.

When he’s not going after those evil sunlight lovers, Sunstein  ( Here ) advocates Internet censorship via enforced and regulated links in news pieces to opposing opinions.

Sunstein himself later retracted that proposal, explaining that it would be “too difficult to regulate [the Internet] in a way that would respond to those concerns”, and admitting that it was “almost certainly unconstitutional.”

Sunstein has also called for the re-writing of the First Amendment, and has even proposed a mandatory celebration of ( Here ) tax day in America.

His views on the Second Amendment have also raised serious concerns. In his book “Radicals in Robes,” he wrote: “[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine.”

Sunstein is on record attacking the Second Amendment. Watch in the following clip as he says “The Supreme Court has never suggested that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to have guns.”

Watch the video:   http://youtu.be/flfHZgT-SeI

Given his extreme actions and stated intentions, Cass Sunstein should be forced out of office and barred from practicing law with immediate effect. If president Obama has his way, however, we may very soon see his good buddy Sunstein elevated to the highest judicial position in the country.

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.