Skip to comments.Ukrainian pilot's powerful speech in Russian court: Full text
Posted on 03/09/2016 6:04:12 PM PST by annalex
click here to read article
If you want to be on this right wing, monarchy, paleolibertarianism and nationalism ping list, but are not, please let me know. If you are on it and want to be off, also let me know. This ping list is not used for Catholic-Protestant debates; all confessions are welcome.
From her statement, it sounds like she is guilty of the charge, and she is proud of what she did.
Why shouldn’t she be proud of serving her country that was invaded?
Because that’s what the putin’s troll said.
A petition to the European leaders to help free Nadezhda Savchenko
He probably is only dimly aware of what the “charge” is.
Really? Do you think she targeted those two journalists through her bombsight?
Really? Do you know anything about the case? (Rhetorical question - the answer is clearly ‘no’.
She was fighting with a neo-Nazi militia - the Aidar Battalion - when the journalists were murdered and when she was captured. The unit which she fought with has been accused of war crimes by Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur50/040/2014/en/
The initial charges that she was the observer who directed fire on the journalists from a tower. Ground based fire control officers aren’t generally said to be using bomb sights.
Even the Ukrainian government has expressed concerns about the unit and its leader.
No, it’s the Ukrainian side that’s talking about bomb sights here, and apparently think she was flying an aircraft when the journalists were killed.
By the way - how do you all feel about the pope cutting a deal with the Patriarch and selling out the Ukrainian Catholics at the Cuban summit?
“27. It is our hope that the schism between the Orthodox faithful in Ukraine may be overcome through existing canonical norms, that all the Orthodox Christians of Ukraine may live in peace and harmony, and that the Catholic communities in the country may contribute to this, in such a way that our Christian brotherhood may become increasingly evident.”
I suppose she was: she is a pilot.
how do you all feel about the pope cutting a deal...
I may comment on how I "feel" on a thread dedicated to my feelings, long overdue.
You can thank McInsane, Rubio, Lindsey Grahamnesty , Hitlary ,and the whole BO admin for this mess ...they provoked the Russians
You suppose wrong. You really should know what you are talking about before you start slurring other posters.
I don’t know about “provoked”. “Enabled”, — perhaps. I am not a fan of our leadership of both parties. I think, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was naked aggression objectively; the kidnapping and a trial of Nadiya Savchenko is in itself a war crime. She is a POW, not a criminal.
The Russians are not dumb animals that one should not provoke. They are moral agents like any other nation. This is why they need to be responsible for their war crimes.
In fact, the reason the Russian Federation is continuing in the pattern of aggression against its neighbors is because the Russian Federation was never brought to justice for its behavior in 1939 - 1945, 56, 68, 2008. It is not that someone provokes them: the know they can get away with it.
Savchenko is not a war pilot?
Here are my questions:
1) Why is she being held illegally in Russia?
2) Since she committed no crime in Russia where does Russia get off trying her for a “crime” supposedly committed in Ukraine?
3) She is a military officer and was seized in uniform by Russian regulars and pro-Russian irregulars. Where in law do they have the authority to send her to a foreign country?
4) Is she being tried by a military court? After all she is a military officer and was seized in uniform and during combat?
5) The two “reporters” were killed in a mortar attack on a rebel checkpoint. How is being unfortunate enough to get yourself killed in combat in a war zone while hanging out with rebels a crime on her part?
6) If the billing data from her phone is correct - and it is because how could it not be - then she was seized one hour before the mortar attack so why is she under arrest then?
7) Why are the Russian lying and saying she voluntarily crossed the border as a refugee when they earlier reported they had captured her?
8) Why are the Russians resorting to their old commie trick of sending people who oppose them for “forensic psychological” stays in mental hospitals with this woman?
9) If they believed she needed a month long stay in a mental hospital, how could they turn around and assume or pretend she was competent for trial?
10) Why does the official Russian investigation report claim she voluntarily walked across the border - which makes no sense to anyone - when the Donetsk rebel entity said the exact opposite was the case from the very beginning? Who’s more trustworthy - those who did the capturing and delivering over to Russia of this woman AND ADMITTED IT FROM THE BEGINNING of the lying sack-o-crap Russians who had to back falsify their own official statements and media reports after the fact?
You tell me since you’re such an expert on the case.
Thank you. Your questions, with answers obvious to all, is a testimony how the Putin’s regime has lost all contact with reality.
Soon, no trace of them will remain.
This brave pilot and warrior has read Solzhenitsyn. She was fighting for her country. If there were but a thousand like here in 1917, the evil empire of the bolsheviks would have never came to be. Pray for her.
The heroes of the White Movement were like her. They fought bravely and died bravely. Also, the putinista are every bit like the Lenin-Trotsky reds: cowards when they are few, dumb and cruel when they are many. Both in 1917 and today, they are way too many.
1. Not supported by your evidence.
2. Many countries, including the US, permit the criminal prosecution of attacks against their citizens on foreign soil.
3. Ever hear of ‘rendition’? Ever hear of Eichmann? And have you ever heard of Adolf Eichmann?
4. Would you really prefer her to have been tried by a more efficient court martial where she wouldn’t have had a platform for her posturing?
5. In the statement here, she seems to be targeting for the content of their reporting. “They are guilty of lying and of providing false, distorted information regarding events in Ukraine, the world, and in Russia.”
6-7 She doesn’t seem to be asserting such claims in her closing statement.
8. You probably need to re-word that one so it makes sense in English.
9. The purpose of a psychiatric evaluation is to determine whether someone is competent for trial. If they are competent, you try them. If they aren’t, they should be treated in an effort to make them competent. This is a separate determination from that as to whether they are not guilty by reason of insanity.
10. She appears to have abandoned any such claims in her closing argument.
By the way - who is George Soros pulling for in the current US elections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.