Support for Zelensky/Ukraine is support for Biden/Deep State

Needs more pictures of mustache man.

Supporting Russia’s attack on Ukraine has nothing to do with or against the “Deep State”.

It has everything to do with it. To think otherwise is to be naive. You do not understand the nature of the Deep State. They took control of Ukraine and the derps are using it as a foil against the last major power to stand against them. Its as simple as that.

Do you realize you are using a national political excuse to condone military conquest by another country’s nuclear-armed military?

Do you realize that the Deep State is not just a 'national political' issue? The Deep State is international and is everwhere.

#BiggerThanYouKnow

Needs more pictures of mustache man.

You do like your moustache men.

***flashback to Humblegunner's childhood when Uncle Chestergunner would come over for Thanksgiving***

I give you credit.

You’re debating points with a group of FReepers that include one that suggested that President Trump was trying to impart a hidden message to Americans based on him using two hands to hold a glass of water. Yes. Really.

When you can conjure up that sort of theory, there’s NO theory or hypothetical that’s out of reach.

The Deep State is international and is everwhere.

Just like that danged French rat.

Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. ... In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated.

The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith.

Here let us stop. ... Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the Government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

The bastards in DC are a vile lot. George would have no truck with Ukraine.

It is enlightening to see how pugnacious the U.S. establishment, led by a Peace Laureate, has been in dealing with the Ukraine crisis. The crisis arguably began when the Yanukovich government rejected an EU bailout program in favor of one offered by Russia. The mainstream media (MSM) have virtually suppressed the fact that the EU proposal was not only less generous than the one offered by Russia, but that, whereas the Russian plan did not preclude further Ukrainian deals with the EU, the EU plan would have required a cut-off of further Russian arrangements. And whereas the Russian deal had no military clauses, that of the EU required that Ukraine affiliate with NATO. Insofar as the MSM dealt with this set of offers, they not only suppressed the exclusionary and militarized character of the EU offer, they tended to view the Russian deal as an improper use of economic leverage, “bludgeoning,” but the EU proposal was “constructive and reasonable” (Ed., NYT, November 20, 2014). Double standards seem to be fully internalized within the U.S. establishment. The protests that ensued in Ukraine were surely based in part on real grievances against a corrupt government, but they were also pushed along by right-wing groups and by U.S. and allied encouragement and support that increasingly had an anti-Russian and pro-accelerated regime change flavor. They also increased in level of violence. The sniper killings of police and protesters in Maidan on February 21, 2014 brought the crisis to a new head. This violence overlapped with, and eventually terminated, a negotiated settlement of the struggle brokered by EU members that would have ended the violence, created an interim government, and required elections by December. The accelerated violence ended this transitional plan, which was replaced by a coup takeover along with the forced flight of Victor Yanukovich.

There is credible evidence that the sniper shootings of both protesters and police were carried out by a segment of the protesters in a false-flag operation that worked exceedingly well, “government” violence serving as one ground for the ouster of Yanukovich. Most telling was the intercepted phone message between Estonia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Urmas Paet, and EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Upton, in which Paet regretfully reported compelling evidence that the shots killing both police and protesters came from a segment of the protesters. This account was almost entirely suppressed in the MSM. For example, the New York Times never mentioned it once through the following two months. It is also enlightening that the protesters at Maidan were never called “militants” in the MSM, although a major and effective segment was armed and violent—that term was reserved for protesters in Eastern Ukraine, who were commonly designated “pro-Russian” as well as militants (for details see the tabulation in Herman and Peterson, “The Ukraine Crisis and the Propaganda System in Overdrive,” in Stephen Lendman, ed,, Flashpoint in Ukraine). There is also every reason to believe that the coup and establishment of a right-wing and anti-Russian government were encouraged and actively supported by U.S. officials.

Victoria Nuland’s intercepted “fuck the EU” words express her hostility to a group that, while generally compliant and subservient, departed from neocon plans for a proper government in Kiev headed by somebody like “Yats.” So she would surely have been pleased when the EU-supported February compromise plan was ended by the violence and coup. The U.S. support of the coup government has been enthusiastic and unqualified. Whereas Kerry and company delayed recognition of the elected government of Maduro in Venezuela,and have strongly urged him to dialogue and negotiate with the Venezuelan protesters—in fact, threatening him if he doesn’t—Kerry and company have not done the same in Ukraine where the Kiev government forces have slowly escalated their attacks on the Eastern Ukraine, but not on “protesters,” only on “militants.”

The Kiev government’s military is now using jets and helicopters to bomb targets in the East and heavy artillery and mortars in its ground operations. Its targets have included hospitals and schools. As of June 8, civilian casualties have been in the hundreds. A dramatic massacre of 40 or more pro-Russian protesters in Odessa on May 2 by a well-organized cadre of neo-Nazi supporters, possibly agents of the Kiev government, was an early high point in this pacification campaign. No investigation of this slaughter has been mounted by the Kiev government or “international community” and it has not interfered in the slightest with Western support of Kiev. In parallel, the MSM have treated it in very low key. (The New York Times buried this incident in a back page continuation of a story on “Deadly Clashes Erupt in Ukraine,” May 5, which succeeds in covering up the affiliation of the killers). Kerry has been silent, though we may imagine his certain frenzy if Maduro’s agents had carried out a similar action in Venezuela. Recall the “Racak massacre,” where the deaths of 40 alleged victims of the Serb military created an international frenzy. But in that case the United States needed a casus belli, whereas in the Odessa case there is a pacification war already in process by a U.S. client, so MSM silence is in order.

It is an interesting feature of media coverage of the Ukraine crisis that there is a regular focus on alleged or possible Russian aid, control of and participation in the actions of the protesters/militants/insurgents in Eastern Ukraine. This was evident in the Times’s gullible acceptance of a claim that photos of insurgents included a Russian pictured in Russia, later acknowledged to be problematic (Andrew Higgins, Michael Gordon, and Andrew Kramer, “Photos Link Masked Men in East Ukraine to Russia,” NYT, April 20, 2014) and another lead article, which was almost entirely speculation (Sabrina Tavernise, “In Ukraine Kremlin Leaves No Fingerprints,” NYT, June 1, 2014). But this interest in foreign intrusion in Ukraine affairs, with the implication of wrongdoing, does not extend to evidence of U.S. and other NATO power aid and control. Visits by Biden, Cain, Nuland and intelligence and Pentagon figures are sometimes mentioned, but the scope and character of aid and advice, of U.S. “fingerprints,” is not discussed and seems to be of little interest. It is in fact normalized so that, as with the aid plans in which Russian, proposals are “bludgeons” but U.S.- EU plans are “constructive and reasonable” the double standard is in good working order here as well.

herman-3Isn’t there a danger that Russia will enter this war on behalf of the pro-Russian majority of the eastern part of Ukraine now under assault? Possibly, but not likely, as Putin is well aware that the Obama-neocon-military-industrial complex crowd would welcome this and would use it, at minimum, as a means of further dividing Russia from the EU powers, further militarizing U.S. clients and allies, and firming up the MIC’s command of the U.S. national budget. Certainly there are important forces in this country that would love to see a war with Russia and it is notable how common are political comments, criticisms, and regrets at Obama’s weak response to Russian “aggression” (e.g., David Sanger, “Obama Policy Is put to Test: Global Crises Challenge a Strategy of Caution,” NYT, March 17, 2014). But so far Putin refuses to bite.

In response to this pressure from the powerful war-loving and war-making U.S. constituencies, Obama has been furiously denouncing Russia and has hastened to exclude it from the G-8, impose sanctions and penalties on the villain state, increase U.S. troops and press military aid on the near-Russia states allegedly terrified at the Russian threat, carry out training exercises, and maneuvers with these allies and clients, assure them of the sacredness of our commitment to their security, and press these states and major allies to increase their military budgets. One thing he hasn’t done is to restrain his Kiev client in dealing with the insurgents in eastern Ukraine. Another is engaging Putin in an attempt at a settlement. Putin has stressed the importance of a constitutional formation of a Ukraine federation in which a still intact Ukraine would allow significant autonomy to the Eastern provinces. There was a Geneva meeting and joint statement on April 17 in which all sides pledged a de-escalation effort, disarming irregulars, and constitutional reform. But it was weak, without enforcement mechanisms, and had no effect. The most important requirement for de-escalation would be the termination of what is clearly a Kiev pacification program for Eastern Ukraine. That is not happening, because Obama doesn’t want it to happen. In fact, he takes the position that it is up to Russia to curb the separatists in East Ukraine and he has gotten his G-7 puppies to agree to give Russia one month to do this or face more severe penalties.

This situation calls to mind Gareth Porter’s analysis of the “perils of dominance,” where he argued that the Vietnam war occurred and became a very large one because U.S. officials thought that, with their overwhelming military superiority North Vietnam and its allies in the south would surrender and accept U.S. terms—most importantly a U.S.-controlled South Vietnam—as military escalation took place and a growing toll was imposed on the Vietnamese (see his Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam). It didn’t work. In the Ukraine context, the United States once again has a militarily dominant position. On its own and through its NATO arm it has encircled Russia with satellites established in violation of the 1990 promise of James Baker and Hans-Dietrch Genscher to Mikhail Gorbachev to not move eastward “one inch,” and it has placed anti-missile weapons right on Russia’s borders. And now it has engineered a coup in Ukraine that empowered a government openly hostile to Russia, threatening both the well-being of Russian-speaking Ukrainians and the control of the major Russian naval base in Crimea. Putin’s action in reincorporating Crimea into Russia was an inevitable defensive reaction to a serious threat to Russian national security. But it may have surprised the Obama team, just as the Vietnamese refusal to accept surrender terms may have surprised the Johnson administration. Continuing to push the Vietnamese by escalation didn’t work, although it did kill and injure millions and ended the Vietnamese alternative way. Continuing and escalating actions against Russia in 2014 may involve a higher risk for the real aggressor and for the world, but there are real spinoff benefits to Lockheed and other members of the MIC.

War Is Our Business and Business Looks Good
Edward S Herman July 12 2014

Dat, have you seen this video? Our Deep State actors work behind the scenes, which you will never see or read about about in the main stream media news. I held a Top Secret Clearance in the USAF. That little kick in the head let me know the world you see is not reality.

Lindsey Graham & John McCain in Ukraine - Preparing for a proxy war with Russia (2016)

We are continually being played.

Videos are showing small arms fire going off all over the place and in every direction in Kiev trying to shoot those little kamikaze drones down, and nothing. I haven’t seen any film of anybody actually hitting one of them with an AK so far. They CAN be shot down with missiles but, then, what yuou’ve actually accomplished is to expend a million dollar missile shooting a $5K toy airplane down.

p

I have files... I’ll drop a some stuff on this thread.

Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Battalion attempts rebranding’
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/06/03/ykgh-j03.html

British Media ‘Whitewashing’ Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: UK Editor’
https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/British-Media-Whitewashing-Ukrainian-Neo-Nazis-UK-Editor-20220530-0001.html

Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis
https://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/en/NewsDetail/index/6/21533/Ukraines-Neo-Nazis?infinitescroll=1

Jon Stewart, DOD Honor AZOV BATTALION NAZI At Disney World
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zoB_6c0cag

Adam Schiff meets with members of Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Battalion
https://www.worldtribune.com/adam-schiff-meets-with-members-of-ukraines-neo-nazi-azov-battalion/

Zelensky Speech With Nazi AZOV BATTALION Prompts Greek Lawmakers To WALK OUT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0tAWaNEhU8

Start at the 4:58 mark - Ukrainian school books glorifying Nazis:
‘RT News - Sep 19 2022’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtB_r5yazsg

The ideology of the Banderists (Bandera idolized today in Ukraine, a big Nazi supporter in history)
https://www.voltairenet.org/article217363.html

Excellent article on background of Ukrain/Biden family and others corruption.

https://patelpatriot.substack.com/p/devolution-part-17

We’re all trying to make sense of the madness in Ukraine right now. It’s nearly impossible to do so without a free and fair press as well as a legitimate administration calling the shots. One thing we do know for certain, is that Ukraine is the epicenter of decades-long political corruption.

Trump entered office knowing Ukraine would be a major battleground in his war against the Deep State. As he did many times before, he made the proper moves and implemented the executive order necessary to dismantle the corrupt network. In this article, I will give you a clear idea of how Trump defeated all this fraud and corruption.

First, a recap.

Bidens and Burisma
Before I really dig in, let’s get a refresher on Hunter Biden/Burisma situation because it provides crucial context to the story. On September 23rd, 2020, the Senate Homeland Security and Finance Committees released a report on their joint investigation into Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. Let’s examine part of the executive summary:

[Many images of documents, have to be read at link]

The EU spent the better part of a decade trying to lure Ukraine into a free-trade pact but instead they decided to make a deal with Putin and Russia. So, what did the EU do? They used their playbook, implemented a color-revolution, and installed a leader - Poroshenko - who would play ball. Shortly after the regime change, Biden became the public face of the Obama administration’s handling of Ukraine, and his son Hunter joined the board of Burisma.

Let’s look a little closer at what exactly happened surrounding the investigation into Burisma holdings. Here is a brief summary from clintonfoundationtimeline.com that provides the sources to back up the story:

[More images of documents etc at link]

Much, much more info, very detailed. Well worth reading the entire article.

Excellent article on background of Ukrain/Biden family and others corruption.

https://patelpatriot.substack.com/p/devolution-part-17

We’re all trying to make sense of the madness in Ukraine right now. It’s nearly impossible to do so without a free and fair press as well as a legitimate administration calling the shots. One thing we do know for certain, is that Ukraine is the epicenter of decades-long political corruption.

Trump entered office knowing Ukraine would be a major battleground in his war against the Deep State. As he did many times before, he made the proper moves and implemented the executive order necessary to dismantle the corrupt network. In this article, I will give you a clear idea of how Trump defeated all this fraud and corruption.

First, a recap.

Bidens and Burisma
Before I really dig in, let’s get a refresher on Hunter Biden/Burisma situation because it provides crucial context to the story. On September 23rd, 2020, the Senate Homeland Security and Finance Committees released a report on their joint investigation into Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. Let’s examine part of the executive summary:

[Many images of documents, have to be read at link]

The EU spent the better part of a decade trying to lure Ukraine into a free-trade pact but instead they decided to make a deal with Putin and Russia. So, what did the EU do? They used their playbook, implemented a color-revolution, and installed a leader - Poroshenko - who would play ball. Shortly after the regime change, Biden became the public face of the Obama administration’s handling of Ukraine, and his son Hunter joined the board of Burisma.

Let’s look a little closer at what exactly happened surrounding the investigation into Burisma holdings. Here is a brief summary from clintonfoundationtimeline.com that provides the sources to back up the story:

[More images of documents etc at link]

Much, much more info, very detailed. Well worth reading the entire article.

And, in case anyone wants to know some background on Ukraine, two great videos.

Ukraine on Fire Part One
Ukraine. Across its eastern border is Russia and to its west-Europe. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and access to the Black Sea. 2014’s Maidan Massacre triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as the perpetrator by Western media. But was it? “Ukraine on Fire” by Igor Lopatonok..

Https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html

Part two:
Revealing Ukraine. This is why they want to hide their actions over the years.

https://rumble.com/vwy6pm-revealing-ukraine.html

thanx for dusting this off

bttt

Remember those occasions where Biden stuck his hand thru a reporter? Etc? I wonder if the reporters knew it was a hologram? How could they not at some point and distance?

A well made point. The drone menace. Need a cheaply made anti drone device to counter

Joe Biden Admits Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine (video 1 min 16 seconds)

PART I

PART II

PART III

PART IV

Ukraine Frantically Tries to Walk Back Zelensky Call for ‘Preemptive Strikes’ on Russia
	10/07/2022 7:55:14 AM PDT · by ChicagoConservative27 · 125 replies Breitbart ^ \| 10/07/2022 \| Frances Martel The presidential press office of Ukraine accused global media outlets of “nuclear hysteria” on Thursday for sharing remarks made by President Volodymyr Zelensky in which he asked the world for “preemptive strikes” on Russia to avoid nuclear war.