EP: the Residence of Hypocrites

Here's what they say (and do):

Scottish MEP's standing ovation in European Parliament

28 June 2016 Last updated at 12:14 BST

A Scottish MEP has received a standing ovation in the European Parliament.
SNP MEP Alyn Smith had asked members to back Scotland's position in the EU.
The response was a standing ovation by many in the chamber.

What do we see here? In plain words we do see a standing ovation, a storm of applause to a separatist claim.

In favour of the supernational state-like structure which the EU is, Mr. Smith stands for a separation of a UK part from the United Kingdom, and the idea is warmly welcomed by the vast majority of the EP members.

Well, I can understand the intention of the EU to have at least a part of the UK as a member, somehow softening the Brexit shock.

I just would like to get a clear answer: does that mean there is a good and acceptable separatism that's worth a standing ovation?

How comes that Scotland coming to (or, for the matter, staying in) the EU is good and deserves a standing ovation of the EP members, and the Crimea and Donbass region coming to Russia is bad and deserves anti-Russian sanctions and Russophobic rhetorics in favour of an openly Banderite (=Nazi) regime of Kiev?

Such a hypocrisy surely can lead to some short-term benefit and profit. But strategically it cannot; and the problem of refugees is just one fair compensation Western Europe is getting for its political approach of the last 25 years, and quite a logical fruit thereof.

Looks like the big West desided to go to hell by all means.

The only problem is our Earth is too small, and if a part of it goes to hell, no other part survives.

Mogherini’s Tear and Milica Rakić

The following text wrote recently my Facebook friend Eva Merkuryeva (link below). I couldn't write it better, so my conribution is translation.


It was exactly 17 years ago that 14 NATO countries brought democracy and freedom to the country of this little girl. 78 days of democratization…

And when splinters of a democratic shell hit the house of this girl — Milica Rakić — none of European officials in Brussels cried.

Milica Rakić (1996—1999), one of the victims of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia.

The democratic air force included 10 planes from Belgium; 42 airplanes from Italy (the homeland of crying Federica Mogherini) brought to Yugoslavia democratic bombs as well, and the total of 559 airplanes participating in the operation “Allied Force” used Italian air bases.

To celebrate freedom and democracy, the American and European “democratizers” decided to destroy the country of this child and to kill her personally.

Fighting back tears following the Brussels terrorist attacks, Europe's foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini abruptly walked out of a news conference in Jordan saying 'today is a difficult day'. Image source.

Therefore the tears of the EU High Representative for foreign affairs and a security policy are those of a crocodile. You should cry when Yugoslavia was bombed. Now, after those terroristic attacks in Brussels, Mogherini’s tears are tears for the security policy which does not exist in Europe any more. And the European officials do not see or rather pretend they do not see the direct cause-effect relationship between local wars and colour revolutions supported warmly by Europe, and the present lack of European security.

All those common people drawing hearts on asphalt of European squares are hostages of that “security policy”. Nobody guarantees them safety. The only thing guaranteed is crocodile tears.

Mogherini considers it is necessary to stop the war in Syria for security. However, she hasn’t spelled a word they shouldn’t even start “democratizing” Syria in 2011.

The terroristic attacks are a direct consequence of that “democratization”; interventions in life of other people; transformation of other countries into ruins and destruction of histories that differ.

If Yugoslavia existed today on the map, if peaceful cities of Syria shone with evening lights, the people who died in Brussels would safely reach their homes, offices, friends...

And three-year-old Milica Rakić, killed with a splinter of a NATO shell, would be twenty now.

Live twenty-year-old Milica would be a guarantee of European security policy.

But when Milica was three, Europe killed its security; and went on killing it in the following 17 years.


The original Russian text.

Will Europe Stop It? Or What?

Having read first coverages of the terroristic attack in Brussels (I love this city; I was thereto about 30 years ago, in 1985 and 1986. I undertsand the city has surely changed meanwhile, yet I do love the you know sweet remembrances of youth) in major media, I remembered an old piece from the Washington Post. It's rather small; I quote it in full.

Why Russia can't stop terrorists
Thursday, January 27, 2011; 8:04 PM
THE HORRIFIC suicide bombing at Moscow's Domodedovo Airport on Monday underlined a couple of sad conclusions about Russia's battle against terrorism. One is that the country's security services, unlike their counterparts in Europe and North America, have failed to develop the means to uncover terrorist networks, prevent attacks or protect public spaces such as airports and subway systems. No country's police can guarantee security. But in Russia over the past decade, as Vladimir Putin has cited the threat of terrorism in consolidating a domestic police state, Moscow alone has suffered eight major attacks, along with the destruction of two airplanes that took off from Domodedovo. Casualties have been heavy: At least 35 died and more than 200 were injured in the latest strike.
Second, Mr. Putin's autocratic form of rule and imperialist policy toward non-Russian nations has made it impossible for him to resolve - or even seriously address - the underlying problem that fuels most of the attacks. That is the restiveness of the mostly Muslim republics of the North Caucasus, including Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan, which for the past two decades have been seeking more autonomy from Moscow. Russia's brutal response, including Mr. Putin's scorched-earth campaign in Chechnya, fueled the rise of Muslim extremist groups that have been growing steadily stronger despite nonstop counterterrorism operations. According to official Russian reports, the number of terrorist attacks in the Caucasus doubled in 2010 - though the bloodshed gets little attention when it occurs outside Moscow or other Russian cities.
Mr. Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev sometimes seem to recognize that sweeps by security forces will never stop the terrorists. Mr. Medvedev has blamed the "economic backwardness" of the Caucasus, and Mr. Putin has promoted a development plan under which the central government will invest $13 billion in the region over the next decade. That could do some good if the programs don't fall victim to Russia's endemic corruption. But the Kremlin leaders won't seriously address the issue of self-rule for the republics. Nor are they willing to take on the federal secret police and other security services, which are more skilled at protection rackets and the persecution of political dissidents than in detecting terrorist plots. It was telling that in the aftermath of the bombing, Mr. Medvedev blamed the management of the privately operated airport rather than federal officials responsible for counterterrorism.
What's particularly worrying about the regime's failures is that Russia is due to host the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, on the edge of the Caucasus. The International Olympic Committee's unwise decision to accept Russia's bid means that athletes and governments around the world have to depend on the Putin-Medvedev regime to prevent terrorist disruption of the Games. Monday's attack was a reminder of how risky a bet that is.

It's an unsigned editorial piece; I take it for, say, an official position and viewpoint of the editorial office.


Having the recent events in Brussels on mind, I dare to put up some notes and questions, going backwards through the text above.

Cameron's 70,000 Moderate Fighters and Freedom of Speech

Sometimes reading Western media reveils true gems of journalism (albeit seldom without some specific Western taste).

Now it's Independent and an article of Robert Fisk titled "David Cameron, there aren't 70,000 moderate fighters in Syria - and whoever heard of a moderate with a Kalashnikov, anyway?". You are very welcome to follow the link and read it yourself, it well worth it.

However, the author cannot just pass by, leaving Russia untouched.

Vladimir Putin comprehends this. He knows that Turkey is helping Isis – this is why he is going to destroy the Isis oil smuggling route to Turkey – and, as a former serving KGB officer, he understands the cynicism of any crisis. If an American aircraft had strayed into Turkish airspace, he asked at his Kremlin press conference with François Hollande last week, does anyone believe that Turkey would have shot down the US pilots? We all know the answer to that. If Turkey wished to destroy Isis, why does it bombard Isis’ Kurdish enemies? Why does it imprison two of Turkey’s top journalists for reporting how the Turkish intelligence service smuggled weapons to Islamist fighters in Syria? And Putin is hardly going to object if the EU is bent on suicide-through-fear.

You know what?

The EU members do remember, I hope, advantages of unification and joining forces. So do we, former citizens of the Soviet Union. It's just natural, for people to unite. And unnatural — to disintegrate. The USSR fell apart due to problems carefully fed up by external forces using hot and cold warfare; and it became a geopolitical tragedy that cost tens millions of lives; at least 13 millions for Russia alone; quite close to losses in the WW2.

Now some external forces are striving to blast the EU from inside. And it looks like some people see some profit Russia could get of it. I would greatly appreciate if you explain me the reasons of such thoughts; I just do not see any advantages for Russia from Europe in flames.

It looks like authors are just obliged to bite Russia and/or Putin at least once. In the "world of democratical rights and freedoms" only that speech is free, which is politically correct and meets some "corporate standards", isn't it?

No Amnesty for Hypocrisy

In their recent news release, the Amnesty International inform about current situation with Syrian refugees.

Refugees in the region

More than 4 million refugees from Syria (95%) are in just five countries Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt:

• Lebanon hosts approximately 1.2 million refugees from Syria which amounts to around one in five people in the country
• Jordan hosts about 650,000 refugees from Syria, which amounts to about 10% of the population
• Turkey hosts 1.9 million refugees from Syria, more than any other country worldwide
• Iraq where 3 million people have been internally displaced in the last 18 months hosts 249,463 refugees from Syria
• Egypt hosts 132,375 refugees from Syria

June 22 and the New Sanctions

As you may know, on June 22, 2015 the Council of the European Union took the decision (CFSP) 2015/971, correspondingly, of 22 June 2015, amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine.

That is, the EU adopted some new sanctions against Russia and/or extended older ones.

Whether you like and agree with reincorporation of Crimea into Russia (what you call annexation, and we do not in no case); whether you like the new Nazi government of Kiev, Ukraine, bloodily oppressing the anti-Junta rebellion in Donbass region of Ukraine, you have to admit one simple thing:

no one could ever invent a better date to deeper spoil relations and widen the gap between Russia and the EU.

Just because this date has a deeply sacral meaning for ALL RUSSIANS.

On June 22б 1941 the second version of the European Union, EU v2.0 (taking the Napoleonic Europe for the EU v1.0), headed by Adolf Hitler, attacked the USSR and so started what we call the Great Patritic War. On the one hand, the War brought immense suffering and bloodshed to our people and lead to the invention of the "Final Solution" by the Hitlerites.

A still from "The Unknown War" of 1978, a joint USA/UK/USSR production TV-series with Burt Lancester as narrator. Many years after, the Great Patriotic War still remains generally unknown to the Western audience.

The consequences of the GPWar were way heavier for the country, than any volume of modern sanctions. Yet we not only won the war and survived as a great Soviet nation (of many many ethnicities); we restored our economy and wellbeing all by ourselves, without any foreign assistance. For the USSR, there was nothing like the Marshall Plan for Europe.

And now some big but stupid Euroguys put on us more sanctions on this day?

Fuck you the EU Council. Fuck off Frau Mogherini.

Just like Napoleon or Hitler, you failed at that very moment when you decided to fight Russia.

Today there was the War

74 years ago the War began. The Great Patriotic War.

For my country it was the most cruel and devastating war in history.

In fact, the USSR fought against the European Union v.1.0. Sounds unexpected? Check the list of countries that supported Hitler this or that way, or were his allies, or were conquered and worked for him.

"The Sacred War", performed by our popular singer Elena Vaenga, in just two or three days after the Hitler invasion became an informal anthem of the fighting country.

Arise, vast country,
Arise for a fight to the death
Against the dark fascist forces,
Against the cursed hordes. 

Chorus:

Let noble wrath
Boil over like a wave!
This is the peoples' war,
A sacred war! 

We shall repulse the oppressors
Of all ardent ideas.
The rapists and the plunderers,
The torturers of people. 

Chorus 

The black wings shall not dare
Fly over the Motherland,
On her spacious fields
The enemy shall not dare tread! 

Chorus 

We shall drive a bullet into the forehead
Of the rotten fascist filth,
For the scum of humanity
We shall build a solid coffin! 

Chorus

Hearing this song even I, a grandson of the fighting generation, feel an immense desire to kill Nazis, and my fingers make fists all by themselves.

My eternal gratitude to all those who fought, and suffered, and won.

Woe Is the Land of Gen. Scales

Let me speak from my heart: I have honour to consider ex-US Army Major General Robert H. Scales a dumb fuck, a purulent lues, and a pure great shame of America.

Listen to and watch what this brave, yet retired warmonger shits out of his dirty mouth (go straight to 3:17).


I transcript his words for those who still don't believe their eyes and ears.

... The only way the United States can have any effect in this region [Ukraine/Donbass] and turn the tide is start killing Russians. Killing Russians by… Killing so many Russians that even Putin’s media can’t hide the fact that Russians are returning to their motherland in body bags...

I don't know how he got his stars. I don't know what he was taught at West-Point and if he had a course of world's history there (or anywhere else).

But the truth is that Americans do have already a certain experience of killing Russians.

Do You Know What the War Is?

I put it straighter: do you know what the WW2 was for the Soviet Union? You could hear that the war the USSR took part in was called "The Great Patriotic War", but do you know this is not a propaganda trick for a purpose, but the absolute truth?

Do you know the real meaning of the following phrase from a Soviet period history textbook:

On 6 June, 1944, the Allied forces, commanded by General Eisenhower, landed in Normandy (Northern France). The Anglo-American forces met with practically no opposition from the Hitlerites, and advanced into the heart of France.

Jan Trowbridge Dykman of the Eisenhover Institute wrote about the Soviet experience in WW2 a concise, albeit very cognitive article. Please spend some minutes to read it.

There are some points to add and correct, though.

Whose Heir is Latvia?

Valsts valodas centrs (Center of the State Language) states on January 16:

Since now on use of foreign languages is unaceptable. The Russians, talking to each other in Russian, are threatening the Latvian language and show irrespect to the Latvians. It is cannot be tolerated when employers doing their service and professional duties are communicating in a foreign language.

According to the newly establishe requirement, if some employers' communication is heard by other people (e.g. in public transport, shops or offices), they are allowed to speak the one and only state language of Latvia, i.e. Latvian.

Here it should be metioned that according to the census of 2011 there are 26,9% Russians in the total population of Latvia, and 33,75% of Latvian population speak Russian at home.

A question arise: why is there only one state language in the country? At the same time there is no question why this Center is called by locals the "Language Gestapo".

For those who think Latvia is a European country duly presiding the EU I propose to check (at least in Wikipedia) the positions of Sweden in Finland and, say, German in Belgium. Have you noticed these language are spoken by considerably lesser part of population than Russian in Latvia? Do you know how long the territory now known as the Republic of Latvia was a part of Russia (whether the Russian Empire or the USSR)?

Well, taking into account the aforesaid, there is nothing to be surprised in the following info:

Poster of the exhibition that won't open in Paris....

Latvia blocked an exhibition in UNESCO devoted to the history of Holocaust. The title of the exhibition reads "The Hijacked Childhood: Holocaust Victims as Seen by Children Prisoners of the Nazi CC Salaspils"; all the materials for the exhibitions were delivered to Paris, yet the Riga officials decided the exhibition would spoil "the image of Latvia" during its presidency in the EU.

Salaspils was not a regular Konzentrationslager. One of its specialties was blood collecting from children for wounded Wehrmacht soldiers; witnesses reported, up to 500 ml at a time on a daily basis, till unavoidable and quick death. The report of investigating commission signed on May 5, 1945, read, in particular:

Having explored 2500 sq.m of territory at Salaspils camp and excavated just one fifth thereof, the commission found 632 child corpses supposedly from 5 to 9 years of age; the corpses were situated in layers...
At the distance of 150 m from this grave in the direction to the railway the commission discovered a place 25x27 m in size with the ground impregnated with an oily substance and mixed with ashes containing unburnt remains of bones of children from 5 to 9 years of age: teeth, articular heads of femoral and humeral bones, ribs, etc.