viernes, 28 de febrero de 2014

Lyndon LaRouche-allied Senate candidate gives Texas Democrats the wrong kind of blues

http://washingtonexaminer.com/lyndon-larouche-allied-senate-candidate-gives-texas-democrats-the-wrong-kind-of-blues/article/2544757

OPINION: COLUMNISTS

Lyndon LaRouche-allied Senate candidate gives Texas Democrats the wrong kind of blues

BY DAVID FREDDOSO | FEBRUARY 26, 2014 AT 7:24 PM

If you follow politics, you've probably read at least two articles in the last year on how Democrats hope, expect, and/or are working to turn Texas from a Republican-dominated state into a Democratic one.

It's a legitimate story based on the state's rapidly changing demographics. Texas' population is becoming more Hispanic over time thanks to immigration and higher birth rates. Although Texas Hispanics tend to vote more Republican than Latinos in all other states but Florida, Republicans have a lot of ground to make up with this fast-growing ethnic group — if they're going to remain dominant – or even viable – in the long run. It's a reality acknowledged by most Republicans, even though no Democrat has won a statewide race in 20 years.

A constellation of Democratic groups has sprung up to raise money and organize to change the Lone Star State's politics. These groups have names like Battleground Texas, Turning Texas Blue and The Texas Future Project, whose formation was reported on this week by the Houston Chronicle.

But one symptom of a healthy, vibrant, growing party is that it fields candidates – even underdogs – that people can be proud to vote for. Think how many people became Republicans because of Ronald Reagan, or Democrats because of FDR or President Obama.

In this department, Texas Democrats are having some serious trouble in 2014.

In the case of Sen. Wendy Davis, the outspoken abortion advocate who will likely win the gubernatorial nomination, there's some debate about her viability. Despite her already having 85 percent name recognition, a new poll from the Texas Tribune puts her 11 points behind her Republican foe and at 36 percent - closer to the Democrats' modern floor in governor's races than to their ceiling (42 percent in 2010).

But if there's debate about Davis' quality as a statewide candidate, there is none about the Democrats' leading contender for U.S. Senate. No one expected them to make too serious a run at Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, but it will be pretty embarrassing if Texas Democrats nominate someone who favors Obama's impeachment and once called him a “genocidal narcissist” in a campaign-generated musical video (to the tune of a Mary Poppins song).

Yes, that candidate, twice a Democratic nominee for the U.S. House in the Houston area, leads the Democratic field for Senate in next week's primary election and is very likely at least to make the runoff.

This week's Tribune poll has Kesha Rogers, a member of the left-wing Lyndon LaRouche movement, in first place for Tuesday's election at 35 percent. The LaRouche people are best known for unhinged rhetoric, anachronistic campaign tactics (in 2004, they drove a car with a mounted megaphone through my D.C. neighborhood blaring LaRouche speeches) and for exceeding the Tea Party in their hatred of Obama. They favor a single-payer health care system and unabashedly call Obamacare a “Nazi Health Plan.” Rogers once said in an interview that it was “explicitly modeled” on a 1939 plan by Adolf Hitler.

Innocent (and by comparison, Obama-loving) Tea Partiers have been repeatedly and wrongly blamed in the news media for the LaRouche people's well-produced Hitler/Obama signs, one of which Rogers has been spotted carrying around proudly in Houston.

This is a silly story, to be sure, and people will be laughing Tuesday if she finishes first – but it's a lot like the story we hear so often about Tea Partiers.

More to the point, it's a sign of a state party with more pressing problems than how quickly they can turn a red state blue. If you're looking for that story, come back in a few years and ask again.

DAVID FREDDOSO, a Washington Examiner columnist, is the former Editorial Page Editor for the Examiner and the New York Times-bestselling author of "Spin Masters: How the Media Ignored the Real News and Helped Re-elect Barack Obama." He has also written two other books, "The Case Against Barack Obama" (2008) and "Gangster Government" (2011).

Perdedores demócratas temen que Kesha va a ganar esta campaña

http://spanish.larouchepac.com/node/21208

Perdedores demócratas temen que Kesha va a ganar esta campaña

28 de febrero de 2014 (LaRouchePAC) — Kesha Rogers, la candidata que va a la cabeza, de acuerdo a la encuesta del Texas Tribune, con un 35% de apoyo, cuando nos acercamos a las elecciones primarias del Partido Demócrata al Senado el 4 de marzo, con su llamado a llevar a juicio político a Obama está haciendo temblar a la burocracia demócrata del partido a nivel nacional. La comparación de Obama con Hitler, con su programa para matar a los enfermos, crear hambruna general, y una guerra termonuclear, ha tenido enorme eco entre los texanos, que quieren que Obama se vaya. La prensa se mueve aceleradamente para detenerla:

* Daily Beast, 27 de Febrero, Michel Tomasky: "Texas: Where Crazy Gets Elected" [1] (Texas: Donde elijen a los locos). "La candidata que encabeza el campo demócrata por el derecho a ocupar el sitio del senador John Cornyn es una mujer cuyo nombre es Kesha Rogers. ¿Dos de sus principales ideas? Hacer un juicio político a Obama y revocar la Ley de Atención Médica Asequible. Si, está leyendo bien. Ella es la candidata demócrata que va a la cabeza. Además ella es una LaRouchie, cosa que lejos de esconderlo parece que se propone restregárselo en la cara a los otros candidatos: Puedo divagar sobre locas conspiraciones bancarias mundiales todo lo que quiera, parece que ella estuviera diciendo, pero en tanto yo quiera enjuiciar políticamente a Obama y derogar el Obamacare, ¡no me puedes tocar! Hay locos, y hay texanos locos".

* San Antonio Express-News, 27 de febrero, en su primera página, a la izquierda, en la mitad superior, junto a una foto de suelo árido, con el titular siguiente "San Antonio podría enfrentar su mayor sequía nunca vista", tiene un artículo sobre Kesha Rogers. Gilbert Garcia intenta crear confusión entre Kesha y una estrella de hip-hop, que tiene una canción que dice así "Si eres un demócrata de Texas, las elecciones demócratas al Senado de EUA solo existen para burlarse y para atormentarte... Kesha es la #1 en las encuestas. La gente puede malinterpretar quien es ella". Y luego se desbarata en calumnias y mentiras.

* The Examiner de Washington, DC, publicó una calumnia desesperada el miércoles, escrito por David Freddoso, "Lyndon LaRouche-allied Senate candidate gives Texas Democrats the wrong kind of blues" [2] (Candidata al Senado, aliada de LaRouche, le da a los demócratas de Texas una mala canción). Dice que "los demócratas esperan retornar a Texas desplegando buenos candidatos, incluso si son unos perdedores. Pero los demócratas tienen serios problemas al hacer esto". Y agrega que "el contendiente demócrata por el Senado de EUA que va a la cabeza... será muy vergonzoso si los demócratas de Texas eligen a alguien que está a favor de enjuiciar políticamente a Obama y que una vez en una canción con música de Mary Poppins le llamó narcisista genocida... Si, ese candidato... es muy posible que al menos llegue hasta la segunda vuelta". Informes de que la encuesta del Texas Tribune la tiene como la #1 con un 35%, luego de que ella "descaradamente calificó el Obamacare como un 'plan nazi de salud' ". Y termina diciendo que "a los miembros del Tea Party (inocentes y por comparación amantes de Obama) los han estado culpando en los medios noticiosos repetida y erróneamente de ser los creadores de las bien elaboradas pancartas de los larouchistas con Obama como Hitler, una de las cuales Kesha Rogers pasea por Houston con mucha honra".

* The Baylor University Lariat publicó una foto enorme de Ben Tatro, miembro del equipo de Kesha, hablando con un estudiante el jueves, informando que, "dos representantes de campaña de... Kesha... parados detrás de una foto del presidente Barack Obama a la que le pintaron un bigote como el de Adolfo Hitler. Miembros movimiento larouchista de Rogers le piden a los estudiantes de Baylor que enjuicien políticamente a Obama para finales de esta semana. La campaña de Rogers y su plataforma de partido se centra en trono a ideas como el restablecimiento de la Ley Glass-Steagall... y hacer juicio político al presidente".

"Algunos carros pasaron tocando corneta en el cruce, a modo de reconocimiento de las provocativas pancartas de campaña, 'Juicio Político a Obama'. Cuando los peatones se detienen en la mesa, los activistas hablan sobre la política exterior del gobierno, y llaman la atención a que el gobierno respalda a los grupos rebeldes de Ucrania y Libia".

* Radio News One con Roland Martin, una estación de radio dedicada a la comunidad afroamericana, transmitió una noticia el 25 de febrero, "Kesha Rogers la texana agitadora, una afroamericana que compite como demócrata para el Senado de Estados Unidos, quiere que Obama sea llevado a juicio político y aparentemente también se alegra de pintarle bigotes de Hitler a sus fotos". Dice que aunque ella lleva la delantera en las encuestas, los demócratas se quieren distanciar de ella, y señala que Kesha ganó las primarias demócratas para el Congreso en el 2010 y el 2012, y termina con una calumnia contra LaRouche.

* Burnt Orange Report del 27 de febrero, que afirma ser el blog político más grande de Texas, dice que Kesha es el candidato equivocado para Texas, y solo lleva el lugar #1 porque recuerdan su nombre de haber ganado las dos primarias pasadas (¡casi nada!).

Enlaces:

[1] http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/26/texas-where-crazy-gets-elected.html

[2] http://washingtonexaminer.com/lyndon-larouche-allied-senate-candidate-gives-texas-democrats-the-wrong-kind-of-blues/article/2544757

Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine? Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine.

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/us-backing-neo-nazis-ukraine

Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?

Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine.

303 COMMENTS303 COMMENTS

digg

February 24, 2014 |

As the Euromaidan protests in the Ukrainian capitol of Kiev culminated this week, displays of open fascism and neo-Nazi extremism became too glaring to ignore. Since demonstrators filled the downtown square to battle Ukrainian riot police and demand the ouster of the corruption-stained, pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovich, it has been filled with far-right streetfighting men pledging to defend their country’s ethnic purity.

White supremacist banners and Confederate flags were draped inside Kiev’s occupied City Hall, and demonstrators have hoisted Nazi SS and white power symbols over a toppled memorial to V.I. Lenin. After Yanukovich fled his palatial estate by helicopter, EuroMaidan protesters destroyeda memorial to Ukrainians who died battling German occupation during World War II. Sieg heil salutes and the Nazi Wolfsangel symbol have become an increasingly common site in Maidan Square, and neo-Nazi forces have established “autonomous zones” in and around Kiev.

An Anarchist group called AntiFascist Union Ukraine attempted to join the Euromaidan demonstrations but found it difficult to avoid threats of violence and imprecations from the gangs of neo-Nazis roving the square. “They called the Anarchists things like Jews, blacks, Communists,” one of its members said. “There weren’t even any Communists, that was just an insult.”

“There are lots of Nationalists here, including Nazis,” the anti-fascist continued. “They came from all over Ukraine, and they make up about 30% of protesters.”

One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector.

Right Sector is a shadowy syndicate of self-described “autonomous nationalists” identified by their skinhead style of dress, ascetic lifestyle, and fascination with street violence. Armed with riot shields and clubs, the group’s cadres have manned the front lines of the Euromaidan battles this month, filling the air with their signature chant: “Ukraine above all!” In a recent Right Sector propaganda video [embedded at the bottom of this article], the group promised to fight “against degeneration and totalitarian liberalism, for traditional national morality and family values.” With Svoboda linked to a constellation of international neo-fascist parties through the Alliance of European National Movements, Right Sector is promising to lead its army of aimless, disillusioned young men on “a great European Reconquest.”

Svoboda’s openly pro-Nazi politics have not deterred Senator John McCain from addressing a EuroMaidan rally alongside Tyahnybok, nor did it prevent Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland from enjoying a friendly meeting with the Svoboda leader this February. Eager to fend off accusations of anti-Semitism, the Svoboda leader recently hosted the Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine. “I would like to ask Israelis to also respect our patriotic feelings,” Tyahnybok has remarked. “Probably each party in the [Israeli] Knesset is nationalist. With God’s help, let it be this way for us too.”

In a leaked phone conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland revealed her wish for Tyahnybok to remain “on the outside,” but to consult with the US’s replacement for Yanukovich, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “four times a week.” At a December 5, 2013 US-Ukraine Foundation Conference, Nuland boasted that the US had invested $5 billion to "build democratic skills and institutions" in Ukraine, though she did not offer any details.

OBAMA SHOULD STEER CLEAR OF UKRAINE by Sheldon Richman February 26, 2014

http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/obama-should-steer-clear-ofukraine/

FFF ARTICLES

OBAMA SHOULD STEER CLEAR OF UKRAINE

by Sheldon RichmanFebruary 26, 2014

President Obama insists he does not regard the conflict in Ukraine “as some Cold War chessboard in which we are in competition with Russia.”

He’d be more credible if he were not following his predecessors in acting as though the Cold War still exists. Although the Soviet empire, including its Warsaw Pact alliance, disbanded beginning in 1989, Republican and Democratic presidents have pursued aggressively anti-Russian policies up to the present.

Most glaringly, NATO, the Western alliance created after World War II ostensibly to deter a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, did not also disband. On the contrary, at U.S. insistence and in violation of promises to Russia’s leaders, the alliance has grown and found new missions, such as intervening militarily against Russia’s ally Serbia and in Afghanistan and Libya.

That would have been bad enough, but former members of the Soviet bloc, as well as former Soviet republics, have been admitted to NATO: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Besides that, U.S. officials have talked up two other former Soviet republics, Georgia and — surprise! — Ukraine, as potential members of the alliance.

Moreover, the U.S. government had a hand in the Georgian and Ukrainian “color revolutions,” which brought pro-U.S. politicians to power, at least for a time. The Obama administration is still at it today.

The hostile push of NATO up to the doorstep of Russia (along with other threatening measures) has not gone unnoticed in Moscow. One can imagine the howls we’d hear from American politicians, not least of all the ever-belligerent Sen. John McCain, if Russia were doing something similar in the vicinity of the United States.

The sorry fact is that America’s rulers did much more than spike the football when the Soviet Union peacefully disintegrated. In every conceivable way, they exploited the occasion to assure that the United States would maintain its status as sole superpower and global hegemon. They humiliated Russia’s leadership, apparently not caring that it would never passively accept the insult.

It’s about time American politicians saw how their foreign policies look to those on the receiving end.

What’s happening in Ukraine is sad. The country is divided between those who want closer ties to Western Europe and those who want closer ties to Russia. Since becoming independent of Russia, Ukraine has suffered corruption and worse offenses at the hands of legal plunderers. Now demonstrations in the streets — even mob rule featuring neo-Nazis — have resulted in turmoil and death, and the Russia-leaning president, Viktor Yanukovich, has fled the capital, while the parliament has named an interim replacement. To make things worse, outsiders won’t keep their hands off.

One thing we can know for sure — and one need not be an admirer of Russian president Vladimir Putin to see it — is that the United States should steer clear of Ukraine. It is none of the U.S. government’s business whether that country is economically closer to Russia or the European Union (EU). The Obama administration should not only forswear direct and covert intervention, it should also shut up. American presidents must learn to mind their own business, even where Russia is concerned. The potential for a nuclear confrontation is nothing to take lightly.

It would be best if Russia and the EU did not press agreements on Ukraine – Europe appearsmore guilty here than Putin – but that is not for the U.S. government to decide. Someday, if we’re lucky, people will stop thinking of trade as a matter of state policy. Why must Ukraine — meaning its politicians — sign an agreement with either the EU or Russia? Why can’t individual Ukrainians and private Ukrainian companies trade freely with whomever they want? (This question also applies to America and every other country.)

There are many sources of political tension in the world, but historically a principal one has been the idea that governments must set the terms of trade with people in other nations. Bad idea. Free trade should mean individual freedom.

In the meantime, the Obama administration should steer clear of Ukraine. Despite what Americans have believed for over 200 years, the United States was not placed on this earth to right the world. Intervention is more likely to make things worse than better.

The Economist: Nuclear Confrontation Is Difficult, but Necessary February 28, 2014 • 10:29AM The Economist has again proven itself a loyal spokesman for the Empire, this time insisting that a nuclear confrontation with Russia "is difficult, but it has to be done." The cover of the Feb. 22-28 issue is a picture of the burning tires in the Maidan, with the title "Putin's Inferno." The lead editorial, certainly written by international editor Edward Lucas, who has been campaigning against Russia in The Economist for many years (including the infamous 2007 article predicting that Obama would threaten Russia with nuclear war over Ukraine in the second decade of this century), says: "Immediate responsibility for this mayhem lies with Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine's thuggish president. But its ultimate architect sits in the Kremlin: Vladimir Putin." It has a picture of Putin and Yanukovych shaking hands, with the caption: "Ukraine's ruler, and Viktor Yanukovich." But the cute stuff is not the point—rather, it is the open threat of nuclear war. The article concludes: "It is time for the West to stand up to this gangsterism. Confronting a country that has the spoiling power of a seat on the UN Security Council, huge hydrocarbon reserves and lots of nuclear weapons is difficult, but it has to be done. At a minimum, the diplomatic pretense that Russia is a law-abiding democracy should end. It should be ejected from the G8." U.S. Analysts Warn of Ukraine Nazis and Danger of Nuclear War A faction of U.S. political analysts is warning of the danger of a nuclear confrontation with Russia because of the fascist coup in Ukraine: Libertarian blogger Sheldon Richman, vice-president of The Future of Freedom warns on its website: "Obama Should Steer Clear of Ukraine." Richman writes, "The sorry fact is that America's rulers did much more than spike the football when the Soviet Union peacefully disintegrated. In every conceivable way, they exploited the occasion to assure that the United States would maintain its status as sole superpower and global hegemon. They humiliated Russia's leadership, apparently not caring that it would never passively accept the insult ... Now demonstrations in the streets — even mob rule featuring neo-Nazis — have resulted in turmoil and death ... The Obama administration should not only forswear direct and covert intervention, it should also shut up. American presidents must learn to mind their own business, even where Russia is concerned. The potential for a nuclear confrontation is nothing to take lightly." Max Blumenthal writes on Alternet on Feb. 24, "Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?" It leads, "As the Euromaidan protests in the Ukrainian capitol of Kiev culminated this week, displays of open fascism and neo-Nazi extremism became too glaring to ignore." He reports Sen. John McCain having stood at Svoboda leader Tyahnybok's side at a Maidan rally; Nuland's meeting with Tyahnybok this month; and Nuland's scheming phone call with the U.S. Ambassador. Blumenthal reports that "Tyahnybok's deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels and Stepan Bandera." On Feb. 25, Paul Craig Roberts writes again on "The Crisis In Ukraine," beginning: "In 2004 Hungary joined the EU, expecting streets of gold. Instead, four years later in 2008 Hungary became indebted to the IMF," linking to the band Mouksa Underground's song, "Instead of wealth we have poverty, unrestrained exploitation..." Had the Kiev students listened to this song instead of to Washington's NGOs, "Ukraine would not be in turmoil and headed toward destruction." Says Roberts, "There is no doubt whatsoever that the coup is a strategic move by Washington to weaken Russia. Washington tried to capture Ukraine in 2004 with the Washington-funded 'Orange Revolution,' but failed... The loss of Ukraine to the EU and NATO would mean the loss of Russia's naval base on the Black Sea and the loss of many military industries. If Russia were to accept such strategic defeat, it would mean that Russia had submitted to Washington's hegemony." Did Washington miscalculate and lose control of the coup to the neo-Nazis, or have "the Washington neocons been working with the neo-nazis for years," Roberts poses. "If Washington has lost control of the coup and is unable to restore control to the moderates whom it has aligned with the EU and NATO, war would seem to be unavoidable. There is no doubt that the Russian provinces would seek and be granted Russia's protection. Whether Russia would go further and overthrow the neo-nazis in western Ukraine is unknown. Whether Washington, which seems to have positioned military forces in the region, would provide the military might for the moderates to defeat the neo-nazis is also an open question, as is Russia's response. The entire world should be alarmed at the reckless and irresponsible interference by Washington in Ukraine. By bringing a direct strategic threat to Russia, the crazed Washington hegemon has engineered a Great Power confrontation and created the risk of world destruction."

http://larouchepac.com/node/30021

The Economist has again proven itself a loyal spokesman for the Empire, this time insisting that a nuclear confrontation with Russia "is difficult, but it has to be done."

The cover of the Feb. 22-28 issue is a picture of the burning tires in the Maidan, with the title "Putin's Inferno." The lead editorial, certainly written by international editor Edward Lucas, who has been campaigning against Russia in The Economist for many years (including the infamous 2007 article predicting that Obama would threaten Russia with nuclear war over Ukraine in the second decade of this century), says: "Immediate responsibility for this mayhem lies with Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine's thuggish president. But its ultimate architect sits in the Kremlin: Vladimir Putin." It has a picture of Putin and Yanukovych shaking hands, with the caption: "Ukraine's ruler, and Viktor Yanukovich."

But the cute stuff is not the point—rather, it is the open threat of nuclear war. The article concludes:"It is time for the West to stand up to this gangsterism. Confronting a country that has the spoiling power of a seat on the UN Security Council, huge hydrocarbon reserves and lots of nuclear weapons is difficult, but it has to be done. At a minimum, the diplomatic pretense that Russia is a law-abiding democracy should end. It should be ejected from the G8."

U.S. Analysts Warn of Ukraine Nazis and Danger of Nuclear War

A faction of U.S. political analysts is warning of the danger of a nuclear confrontation with Russia because of the fascist coup in Ukraine:

Libertarian blogger Sheldon Richman, vice-president of The Future of Freedom warns on its website: "Obama Should Steer Clear of Ukraine." Richman writes, "The sorry fact is that America's rulers did much more than spike the football when the Soviet Union peacefully disintegrated. In every conceivable way, they exploited the occasion to assure that the United States would maintain its status as sole superpower and global hegemon. They humiliated Russia's leadership, apparently not caring that it would never passively accept the insult ... Now demonstrations in the streets — even mob rule featuring neo-Nazis — have resulted in turmoil and death ... The Obama administration should not only forswear direct and covert intervention, it should also shut up. American presidents must learn to mind their own business, even where Russia is concerned. The potential for a nuclear confrontation is nothing to take lightly."
Max Blumenthal writes on Alternet on Feb. 24, "Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?" It leads, "As the Euromaidan protests in the Ukrainian capitol of Kiev culminated this week, displays of open fascism and neo-Nazi extremism became too glaring to ignore." He reports Sen. John McCain having stood at Svoboda leader Tyahnybok's side at a Maidan rally; Nuland's meeting with Tyahnybok this month; and Nuland's scheming phone call with the U.S. Ambassador. Blumenthal reports that "Tyahnybok's deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels and Stepan Bandera."
On Feb. 25, Paul Craig Roberts writes again on "The Crisis In Ukraine,"beginning: "In 2004 Hungary joined the EU, expecting streets of gold. Instead, four years later in 2008 Hungary became indebted to the IMF," linking to the band Mouksa Underground's song, "Instead of wealth we have poverty, unrestrained exploitation..." Had the Kiev students listened to this song instead of to Washington's NGOs, "Ukraine would not be in turmoil and headed toward destruction."
Says Roberts, "There is no doubt whatsoever that the coup is a strategic move by Washington to weaken Russia. Washington tried to capture Ukraine in 2004 with the Washington-funded 'Orange Revolution,' but failed... The loss of Ukraine to the EU and NATO would mean the loss of Russia's naval base on the Black Sea and the loss of many military industries. If Russia were to accept such strategic defeat, it would mean that Russia had submitted to Washington's hegemony."

Did Washington miscalculate and lose control of the coup to the neo-Nazis, or have "the Washington neocons been working with the neo-nazis for years," Roberts poses. "If Washington has lost control of the coup and is unable to restore control to the moderates whom it has aligned with the EU and NATO, war would seem to be unavoidable. There is no doubt that the Russian provinces would seek and be granted Russia's protection. Whether Russia would go further and overthrow the neo-nazis in western Ukraine is unknown. Whether Washington, which seems to have positioned military forces in the region, would provide the military might for the moderates to defeat the neo-nazis is also an open question, as is Russia's response. The entire world should be alarmed at the reckless and irresponsible interference by Washington in Ukraine. By bringing a direct strategic threat to Russia, the crazed Washington hegemon has engineered a Great Power confrontation and created the risk of world destruction."

Rusia declara que actúa en Crimea según el acuerdo suscrito con Ucrania

Publicado el 28/02/2014

Moscú se opone a la creación de una misión internacional de mediación en Crimea, tal y como propone Washington. Así lo declaró el representante permanente de Rusia ante la ONU, Vitali Churkin, tras la reunión privada del Consejo de Seguridad sobre la situación en Ucrania, de la que responsabilizó a Occidente.

"Esto tiene que ser analizado. Tenemos que preguntar a las autoridades de Crimea. Nos oponemos a la imposición de una mediación", subrayó. Con anterioridad la embajadora estadounidense en la ONU, Samantha Power, declaró que Washington propone enviar a Crimea una misión mediadora para regular la situación.

Churkin añadió que cualquier movimiento de militares rusos en Crimea está en consonancia con los acuerdos existentes con Ucrania sobre despliegue de militares en la exrepública soviética, saliendo así al paso de las especulaciones de los medios de comunicación sobre despliegues militares en la zona. Churkin explicó que la postura de Rusia en Crimea se basa en los acuerdos básicos sobre la Flota del Mar Negro. "Tenemos acuerdos con Ucrania sobre la presencia de la Flota rusa en el Mar Negro en Sebastopol y actuamos en el marco de estos acuerdos", señaló.

Rusia moviliza sus tropas tras los enfrentamientos en Crimea

http://www.eleconomista.es/internacional/noticias/5577023/02/14/Rusia-moviliza-sus-tropas-tras-los-enfrentamientos-en-Crimea.html

Rusia moviliza sus tropas tras los enfrentamientos en Crimea

A. Muñoz| H. Mendonça

7:29 - 27/02/2014

6 comentarios

Puntúa la noticia :

Nota de los usuarios: 3.7 (3votos)

Más noticias sobre:

Enlaces relacionados

Yanukovich podría estar a las afueras de Moscú

Enviar por e-mail
Suscribirse al boletín
Imprimir
Aumentar texto
Reducir texto
Haga doble click sobre una palabra para ver su signifcado
Sudoku: Juega cada día a uno nuevo
El tiempo: Consulta la previsión para tu ciudad

EcoTablet - ¡Gratis en App Store!

La plataforma más completa de información y servicios económicos para iPad.

El presidente ruso, Vladimir Putin, ordenó ayer la puesta en alerta de las unidades militares en el oeste y centro del país para comprobar su disposición combativa. Pese a que niegan que tenga "nada que ver" con lo que ocurre en Ucrania, el ministro de Defensa ruso, Sergei Shoigu, ha anunciado que están reforzando la seguridad de sus arsenales y sus instalaciones en Crimea -donde la población de procedencia rusa situada al este del país se alzó contra el nuevo poder en Ucrania-.

El hecho que ha dinamitado estos enfrentamientos fue que Kiev rebajó el estatus de la lengua rusa en algunas de las regiones del país, motivando la protesta de diversas regiones rusófonas, como es el caso de Crimea. Además, este lugar es donde se ubica la base militar rusa en el Mar Negro, flota que Putin no está dispuesto a perder.

De esta forma, más de 5.000 personas en Crimea se han lanzado palos y piedras ayer frente al Parlamento, mientras que en el interior los legisladores rechazaban debatir la ruptura de la región con el régimen de Kiev. Además, se produjo una explosión cerca de la Cámara y hubo linchamientos en plena calle.

Ayuda financiera para el país

Mientras el país está al borde de la bancarrota Ucrania solicitó al Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI) un nuevo plan de asistencia financiera, según comunicó el gobernador del Banco Nacional de Ucrania (NBU), Stepan Kubiv. El nuevo responsable del instituto emisor ucraniano asegura que el Gobierno hará público su propio programa de medidas "anticrisis". Kubiv indica que la entidad intentará frenar la fuga de depósitos.

En la Eurocámara, grupos políticos defendieron ayer la necesidad de que la Unión Europea preste ayuda financiera a Ucrania. El eurodiputado alemán, Elmar Brok, reclamó que la UE aporte "tanta asistencia como pueda", trás elogiar "la valentía" de la oposición y de los activistas que han luchado a favor de la democracia.