Saturday, January 30, 2016

Barack Obama Rushed To The Hospital – Media Downplays Incident

Barack Obama Rushed To The Hospital – Media Downplays Incident

Trump 'Disqualified' From Presidency: Josh Earnest
Trump 'Disqualified' From Presidency: Josh Earnest
With nothing on Obama’s schedule for the day, the presidential motorcade departed hastily just after 2 p.m., catching reporters off guard, for a rainy, 30-minute ride to the military hospital in Bethesda, Md. according to ABCnews.
CNN reported that Barack Obama simply underwent a “routine CT scan” Saturday afternoon while visiting Walter Reed National Military Medical Center because of a sore throat, according to the White House and his doctor.
When questioned, Capt. Ronny Jackson, a Navy physician who is Obama’s doctor, said the president’s symptoms “are consistent with soft tissue inflammation related to acid reflux and will be treated accordingly.”
As good as it may seem, Chief Medial and Health Editor Dr. Richard Besser thinks there is more to this story than we are being told.
“There’s a lot in this story that didn’t seem to hold true with what you’d normally see,” ABC News Chief Medial and Health Editor Dr. Richard Besser said.
“Normally for a sore throat, initially you’ll do a test for strep. If it goes on for a couple of weeks, you might do a scope, but not a CT. It may be that he is a former smoker, he’s the president of the United States — you’ll often see presidents get extra testing.”
It’s unusual for a president to seek medical care outside the White House, but Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisted to reporters via email, during the president’s visit to Walter Reed, that Obama’s condition was not serious.
Dr. Ronny Jackson, the president’s physician, had recommended Mr. Obama visit the facility for diagnostic tests.
According to the White House, Dr. Jackson said the tests were a matter of convenience and not a matter of urgency for the president.

BMW and Audi are controlled by Joseph Goebbels son-in-law Harald Quandt

Then and Now

Quandt Fam­ily Val­ues: BMW heir Har­ald Quandt (in uni­form) with his in-laws
COMMENT: A major ele­ment of dis­cus­sion on this blog has been the spawn­ing of the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work from the polit­i­cal and eco­nomic forces under­pin­ning Nazi Ger­many. Con­trol­ling the Ger­man core cor­po­ra­tions as well as pow­er­ful inter­ests around the world, the Bor­mann group is pre­em­i­nent on the world eco­nomic landscape.
Not­ing that BMW and Audi are con­trolled by the heirs of Joseph Goebbels (whose stepchild inher­ited the Quandt indus­trial empire), A Bloomberg story notes that Mercedes-Benz also has sig­nif­i­cant cap­i­tal par­tic­i­pa­tion by the Quandts.
In a series of com­ments on a blog, there was an exchange about BMW with­hold­ing ads when The Atlantic reviewed a book about the Holo­caust or WWII. BMW is owned by the Quandt firm, headed for years by Joseph Goebbels’ son-in-law.
To gain per­spec­tive on the bril­liant, far-sighted, thor­ough and alto­gether cyn­i­cal pol­icy real­ized by cor­po­rate Ger­many and the remark­able, deadly Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work that con­trols it, we recap Dorothy Thompson’s analy­sis of Germany’s plans for world dom­i­nance by a cen­tral­ized Euro­pean eco­nomic union. (In this, we can see the plans of pan-German the­o­reti­cian Friedrich List, as real­ized by the Euro­pean Mon­e­tary Union.) Ms. Thomp­son was writ­ing in The New York Her­ald Tri­bune on May 31, 1940! Her com­ments are repro­duced by Tetens on pages 92–93 .
“The Ger­mans have a clear plan of what they intend to do in case of vic­tory. I believe that I know the essen­tial details of that plan. I have heard it from a suf­fi­cient num­ber of impor­tant Ger­mans to credit its authen­tic­ity . . . Germany’s plan is to make a cus­toms union of Europe, with com­plete finan­cial and eco­nomic con­trol cen­tered in Berlin. This will cre­ate at once the largest free trade area and the largest planned econ­omy in the world. In West­ern Europe alone . . . there will be an eco­nomic unity of 400 mil­lion per­sons . . . To these will be added the resources of the British, French, Dutch and Bel­gian empires. These will be pooled in the name of Europa Germanica . . .”
“The Ger­mans count upon polit­i­cal power fol­low­ing eco­nomic power, and not vice versa. Ter­ri­to­r­ial changes do not con­cern them, because there will be no ‘France’ or ‘Eng­land,’ except as lan­guage groups. Lit­tle imme­di­ate con­cern is felt regard­ing polit­i­cal orga­ni­za­tions . . . . No nation will have the con­trol of its own finan­cial or eco­nomic sys­tem or of its cus­toms. The Naz­i­fi­ca­tion of all coun­tries will be accom­plished by eco­nomic pres­sure. In all coun­tries, con­tacts have been estab­lished long ago with sym­pa­thetic busi­ness­men and indus­tri­al­ists . . . . As far as the United States is con­cerned, the plan­ners of the World Ger­man­ica laugh off the idea of any armed inva­sion. They say that it will be com­pletely unnec­es­sary to take mil­i­tary action against the United States to force it to play ball with this sys­tem. . . . Here, as in every other coun­try, they have estab­lished rela­tions with numer­ous indus­tries and com­mer­cial orga­ni­za­tions, to whom they will offer advan­tages in co-operation with Germany.
Cer­tain con­di­tions will have to be met. No orders will be taken from or given by per­son­al­i­ties unfa­vor­ably regarded by the Nazis. No adver­tis­ing con­tracts will be placed with news­pa­pers directed by or pub­lish­ing the work of pro-Ally or anti-Nazi edi­tors or writ­ers.…
The Ger­man plan­ners pre­dict a stam­pede of the South to col­lab­o­rate with this sys­tem. This stam­pede will be fos­tered and directed by their agents.”…
. . .”

“US Admits Nazi / Islamic Role in Ukraine.”


Ukraine Merges Nazis and Islamists
January 29, 2016



From the Archive: Many defenders of Ukraine’s post-coup government dismiss reports about neo-Nazis playing key roles in the U.S.-backed regime, but even the most enthusiastic Western propagandists have occasionally glimpsed that reality – and worse, as Robert Parry reported last July.


By Robert Parry (Originally published on July 7, 2015)

In a curiously upbeat account, The New York Times reported that Islamic militants have joined with Ukraine’s far-right and neo-Nazi battalions to fight ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine. It appears that no combination of violent extremists is too wretched to celebrate as long as they’re killing Russ-kies.

The article by Andrew E. Kramer reported that there were three Islamic battalions “deployed to the hottest zones,” such as around the port city of Mariupol. One of the battalions is headed by a former Chechen warlord who goes by the name “Muslim,” Kramer wrote, adding:


The insignia of the Azov battalion, using the neo-Nazi symbol of the Wolfsangel.

“The Chechen commands the Sheikh Mansur group, named for an 18th-century Chechen resistance figure. It is subordinate to the nationalist Right Sector, a Ukrainian militia. … Right Sector … formed during [2014] street protests in Kiev from a half-dozen fringe Ukrainian nationalist groups like White Hammer and the Trident of Stepan Bandera.

“Another, the Azov group, is openly neo-Nazi, using the ‘Wolf’s Hook’ symbol associated with the [Nazi] SS. Without addressing the issue of the Nazi symbol, the Chechen said he got along well with the nationalists because, like him, they loved their homeland and hated the Russians.”

As casually as Kramer acknowledged the key front-line role of neo-Nazis and white supremacists fighting for the U.S.-backed Kiev regime, his article did mark an aberration for the Times and the rest of the mainstream U.S. news media, which usually dismiss any mention of this Nazi taint as “Russian propaganda.”

During the February 2014 coup that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych, the late fascist Stepan Bandera was one of the Ukrainian icons celebrated by the Maidan protesters. During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. At times coordinating with Adolf Hitler’s SS, OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of tens of thousands of Jews and Poles.

Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number and spearheaded much of the violence against the police. Storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party seized government buildings and decked them out with Nazi insignias and a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy.

Then, as the protests turned bloodier from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called “sotins” or “the hundreds,” led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives.

In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych.

At that point, virtually the entire U.S. news media put on blinders about the neo-Nazi role, all the better to sell the coup to the American public as an inspirational story of reform-minded “freedom fighters” standing up to “Russian aggression.” The U.S. media delicately stepped around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan’s “self-defense forces.”

Barbarians at the Gate

At times, the mainstream media’s black-out of the brown shirts was almost comical. In February 2015, almost a year after the coup, a New York Times article about the government’s defenders of Mariupol hailed the crucial role played by the Azov battalion but managed to avoid noting its well-documented Nazi connections.

That article by Rick Lyman presented the situation in Mariupol as if the advance by ethnic Russian rebels amounted to the barbarians at the gate while the inhabitants were being bravely defended by the forces of civilization, the Azov battalion. In such an inspirational context, it presumably wasn’t considered appropriate to mention the Swastikas and SS markings.

Now, the Kiev regime has added to those “forces of civilization” — resisting the Russ-kie barbarians — Islamic militants with ties to terrorism. In September 2014, Marcin Mamon, a reporter for the Intercept, reached a vanguard group of these Islamic fighters in Ukraine through the help of his “contact in Turkey with the Islamic State [who] had told me his ‘brothers’ were in Ukraine, and I could trust them.”

The Times article avoided delving into the terrorist connections of these Islamist fighters. But Kramer did bluntly acknowledge the Nazi truth about the Azov fighters. He also noted that American military advisers in Ukraine “are specifically prohibited from giving instruction to members of the Azov group.” [That prohibition was lifted in U.S. legislation passed in late 2015.]


Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine’s Azov battalion. (As filmed by a Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV)

While the U.S. advisers were under orders to keep their distance from the neo-Nazis, the Kiev regime has been quite open about its approval of the central military role played by these extremists – whether neo-Nazis, white supremacists or Islamic militants. These extremists are considered very aggressive and effective in killing ethnic Russians.

The regime has shown little concern about widespread reports of “death squad” operations targeting suspected pro-Russian sympathizers in government-controlled towns. But such human rights violations should come as no surprise given the Nazi heritage of these units and the connection of the Islamic militants to hyper-violent terrorist movements in the Middle East.

But the Times treated this lethal mixture of neo-Nazis and Islamic extremists as a good thing. After all, they were targeting opponents of the “white-hatted” Kiev regime, while the ethnic Russian rebels and the Russian government wear the “black hats.”

As an example of that tone, Kramer wrote: “Even for Ukrainians hardened by more than a year of war here against Russian-backed separatists, the appearance of Islamic combatants, mostly Chechens, in towns near the front lines comes as something of a surprise — and for many of the Ukrainians, a welcome one. … Anticipating an attack in the coming months, the Ukrainians are happy for all the help they can get.”

So, the underlying message seems to be that it’s time for the American people and the European public to step up their financial and military support for a Ukrainian regime that has unleashed on ethnic Russians a combined force of Nazis, white supremacists and Islamic militants (considered “brothers” of the Islamic State).[For more on the Azov battalion, see Consortiumnews.com’s “US House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine.”]

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon andbarnesandnoble.com).

Thursday, January 7, 2016

NATO: Who’s the Aggressor? By Michael Jabara CARLEY

NATO: Who’s the Aggressor?

Michael Jabara CARLEY 
There has been much discussion recently of NATO in the mainstream and alternate media. Why was NATO founded in the first place and why did it expand so rapidly after the collapse and dismemberment of the USSR in 1991. According to widely held views in the west, NATO originated as a defensive alliance against an aggressive, menacing Soviet Union after World War II.
There is nothing unusual about this post 1945 representation of the USSR. Western negative perceptions of Russia date back to the 19th century, if not earlier. After the October Revolution of 1917 western Russophobia was exacerbated by the Red Scare. For three years the «Entente» powers tried to throttle the nascent Soviet republic. When the foreign intervention failed, the Entente constructed a cordon sanitaire through the Russian borderlands from the Baltic to Black Seas. The idea was to keep the Bolshevik revolution from spreading into central Europe.
During the interwar years, Western-Soviet relations remained antagonistic. «Russophobia and Sovietophobia are a dense forest of hostility, into which no light penetrates», observed a Soviet diplomat in 1930.
It was «a clash of two worlds», according to one historian. Who said the cold war only began after 1945? Even Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 failed to provoke a western reappraisal of relations with the USSR. France and Britain were unable to sort out their security priorities. Soviet diplomatic efforts to build an anti-Nazi alliance foundered on open or disguised western sympathies for fascism. The crisis of capitalism in the 1930s made fascism attractive, but so did western Sovietophobia.
Even after the German invasion of the USSR in June 1941, the British government could not entirely shed its anti-Soviet enmity. War Office biases were so intense that British diplomats, who were not known for their love of Russia, warned of long-term damage to Anglo-Soviet relations. For a hundred years, said one Foreign Office official in 1944. Sovietophobia went right to the top of the British government. The prime minister, Winston Churchill, worried about Red Army victories. This was a surprising position since until June 1944 the Red Army did most of the fighting against the Wehrmacht. Cabinet colleagues were at times scandalised by Churchill’s anti-Soviet exclamations. In May 1945, a fortnight after VE-Day, the British Chiefs of Staff Joint Planning Committee produced the top secret Operation «Unthinkable», an outrageous, suicidal plan for a new Anglo-American war, backed by German troops in new uniforms, against the USSR. Across the Atlantic, the pragmatic President Franklin Roosevelt sought to calm Churchill and to rein in his own numerous Sovietophobes, though after his death in April 1945 they quickly recaptured control of US policy. Not that it was a hard sell for Harry Truman, FDR’s pedestrian successor and notorious Sovietophobe.
The USSR paid a huge price for victory, no one knows the exact human cost, but estimates are around 27 million civilian and military dead, plus the physical destruction of much of European Russia from Stalingrad in the east, to the Northern Caucasus and the Crimea in the south, to Leningrad and other points to the north, all the way to the Soviet Union’s western frontiers. Some 70,000 cities, towns and villages were laid waste during the war, not to mention tens of thousands of factories, collective farms, schools, hospitals and other public buildings. While the United States became rich and suffered few casualties in comparison to the Red Army, the Soviet Union emerged from the war poor and devastated. The most urgent priority was reconstruction, and for that, Soviet generalissimo Joseph Stalin hoped for help from the Anglo-American allies. Yet in the west the USSR was regarded as a post-war threat to European security. The Russians had let victory go to their heads; they had to be put in their place.
Stalin was aware of Anglo-American hostility, but tried nevertheless for a time to work with his putative «allies» without however sacrificing what he saw as Soviet vital interests. «I am not a propagandist», Stalin said to an American interlocutor, «I am a man of business». Soviet military policy was unprovocative and the huge Red Army was demobilised to approximately 25% of its maximum wartime strength. Big political issues were Poland and Germany. Poland was settled along Soviet lines, but Germany was under joint Allied occupation and there Stalin could not obtain whatever he wished. Having been invaded twice by Germany over the span of little more than a quarter century, Stalin did not want to see the rebuilding of a German state hostile to the USSR.
This was precisely what the United States had in mind. From 1946 onward the US government went about establishing a West German «partial state», integrated into a US dominated western anti-Soviet European bloc. Essentially, it was Churchill’s idea of building a new German counterbalance to the USSR, an idea first conceptualised in Operation «Unthinkable». The eventual Soviet countermove, the Berlin «blockade» in 1948, was a clumsy attempt to gain leverage over the United States to stop the establishment of a West German state. The so-called blockade did not work and served as a splendid pretext for setting up NATO in the following year. In Moscow NATO was viewed as an alliance aimed at the USSR. The West German entry into that alliance seemed like an obvious eventuality.
Funded generously by the United States, the polarisation of Europe continued into the 1950s, and West Germany became a NATO member in May 1955. This development provoked the formation of the Warsaw pact, led by the USSR. Believing western propaganda about an aggressive Soviet Union, an ill-informed person might think that the Warsaw pact provoked the organisation of NATO and not the other way ‘round.
After the collapse and dismemberment of the USSR, NATO ought logically to have been closed down. Even if you accept the NATO line that the alliance was organised for purely defensive purposes against a Soviet threat, there was no USSR and no threat after 1991. It is well known moreover that the US Secretary of State James Baker promised Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand «one inch» toward the east, a promise that Presidents Bill Clinton and George W Bush did not keep. NATO post-Soviet expansion cannot logically be explained except as a movement to extend US hegemony eastward. It was an opportune moment. Russia was in turmoil and led by Boris Yeltsin who needed US backing to stay in power. Based on the principle «I can, therefore I will», NATO expanded quickly, inter alia, to include Poland and the Baltic states, former nesting grounds of interwar fascism and anti-Semitism and Russophobic to the core.
In Eastern Europe, NATO membership became a license for impunity: SS uniforms and banners came out of mothballs in the Baltics and a new atavistic wave of Russophobia swept over Poland.
NATO expanded to construct a new anti-Russian cordon sanitaire, suggesting that the US «Deep State» was not sure it had sufficiently weakened the much reduced Russian Federation. It was an insurance policy against any Russian resurgence, and an arm to be used against any state which failed to do US bidding.
Such was the case of Yugoslavia, a multi-national state torn apart by ethnic conflict encouraged by the United States and NATO. If you look at a map of Yugoslavia in 1941 after its partition by Nazi Germany, you will see similarities with the US/NATO dismemberment of «former Yugoslavia».
The west sided with neo-fascists in Croatia, Muslim fundamentalists in Bosnia and Kosovo, portraying its former wartime allies, the Serbs, as villains, aggressors, and perpetrators of genocide. US and NATO bombers attacked Serbia in 1999 to subdue resistance against the loss of the Serbian province of Kosovo. In a flagrant act of aggression, they blew up bridges, trains, and infrastructure and bombed Belgrade, killing civilians in the way.
Clinton invoked the «Responsibility to Protect» (R2P), and claimed NATO represented the «international» community. These were audacious, bogus claims to justify military intervention. The underlying message to any apostate of US domination was submit or be destroyed.

Let's talk about what's going on in Malheur Oregon, What does the Constitution say about this?

Important update. 
Let's talk about what's going on in Malheur Oregon and take back the narrative

What does the Constitution say about this? 
What are the precedents? 
Listen watch, subscribe, like, comment and share now. Make this go viral. 

Subscribe to the KrisAnne Hall YouTube Channel
http://youtube.com/subscription_cente...

Visit the Liberty First Gift Shop: http://krisannehall.com/shop/

About Krisanne Hall
KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor, fired after teaching the Constitution to TEA Party groups – she would not sacrifice liberty for a paycheck. She is a disabled veteran of the US Army, a Russian linguist, a mother, a pastor’s wife and a patriot. She now travels the country and teaches the Constitution and the history that gave us our founding documents. KrisAnne Hall does not just teach the Constitution, she lays the foundations that show how reliable and relevant our founding documents are today. She presents the “genealogy” of the Constitution – the 700 year history and five foundational documents that are the very roots of American Liberty. - See more at: 

http://krisannehall.com/

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked suggested Dawabsha family immolation murder suspects not be tried

Jewish Terrorists Indicted for Palestinian Arson Murders

In-depth Report: 
Dawabsha
Last July’s immolation murders made world headlines. Three Palestinian Dawabsha family members succumbed to devastating third-degree burns too severe to save them, including 18-month-old infant Ali.
Four-year-old Ahmed alone survived, still hospitalized in intensive care. His painful struggle to recover continues.
Israel stonewalled for months, knowing the guilty parties, refusing to bring charges on the phony pretext of “protect(ing) the identity” of alleged intelligence sources, effectively sanctioning cold-blooded murder.
Had one or more Palestinians committed a similar act against Jews, they’d likely have been hunted down and extrajudicially executed – denied due process and judicial fairness.
Perhaps the lingering effects of brutal murders capturing world attention finally got Israel to act. On Sunday, two Jewish terrorists were indicted for murder.
Amiram Ben Uliel, aged 21, faces three murder charges, an unnamed minor indicted as an accomplice. Two others (possibly three) face terrorism related charges along with the two murder suspects.
A gag order remains in place so further details aren’t known, including whether suspects were released pending trial. Much about the investigation and ongoing process remains confidential. The Palestinian public’s right to know is ignored.
Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked suggested the suspects may not be tried fairly, barely stopping short of supporting their immolation murders.
Will prosecutions result in slap-on-the-wrist sentences, perhaps commuted after short-term imprisonment if any hard time is imposed?
Why did Israel wait five months to act when the killers were known last summer, should have been arrested and prosecuted straightaway, leaving doubt now whether justice will be served?
A court is set to hear arguments to lift some gag order restrictions. Attorney Itamar Ben Gvir, representing several of the suspects, said their confessions were obtained through torture.
“The indictment is not the end of the story, but the opening of a Pandora’s box for the Shin Bet,” he said. “My clients are innocent. (They) only confessed because (of) severe(ly) abus(ive) interrogation.”
Shin Bet claims they only faced “moderate physical pressure,” legal in terror investigations, not subjected to torture or other forms of abuse.
What happens at trial and its aftermath remains to be seen. Israel crimes against Palestinians almost never are punished. Extremist settlers freely commit violence and vandalism unaccountably.
Israeli soldiers and militarized police extrajudicially execute defenseless Palestinians with impunity. They’ve been denied justice for nearly seven decades. Nothing in prospect suggests change.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached atlendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

The Hell in a Hand-Basket Files RT News Jan 6, 2016

The Hell in a Hand-Basket Files

RT News

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un © Kyodo
North Korea claims fully successful ‘miniaturized hydrogen bomb’ test
North Korea has announced it has successfully tested a miniaturized hydrogen bomb following an “artificial seismic event” that has likely become the country’s fourth known nuclear test.
  • The comments were made in the Vatican newspaper. © Max Rossi
    God a terrorist? Vatican newspaper slams Charlie Hebdo cover
    A Vatican newspaper has criticised the latest cover of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo which depicts God as a terrorist carrying a gun, accusing it of hurting believers and “manipulating” faith.
  • Al-Ha'ir Prison. © Saudi TV / DSK
    ISIS vows to destroy Saudi prisons holding terrorists
    Islamic State has threatened to destroy Saudi Arabian prisons holding extremists, following Riyadh’s decision to execute 47 people last week, among them a Shiite cleric – a situation that escalated into a heated diplomatic standoff with Iran.
  • Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. © Amir Cohen
    Netanyahu urges govt to avert Palestinian Authority collapse – media
    The Israeli Prime Minister has reportedly told high-level government officials Tel Aviv must take steps to prevent the collapse of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, or prepare for a worst-case scenario, local press reports.
  • The change was all but confirmed in a tweet from CEO Jack Dorsey. © Dado Ruvic
    Twitter planning 10,000-character limit for tweets
    Twitter has hinted at plans to expand its character limit from 140 to 10,000. CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted that while the notorious 140-character limit was a “beautiful constraint”, change was being explored to respond to its users’ needs.
  • © Tyrone Siu
    Bird flu death puts Hong Kong border checkpoints on disease lookout
    A 26-year-old woman has died in China after being infected with a highly contagious bird flu virus, leading to a heightened alert at border checkpoints with Hong Kong. Another patient in the same province was earlier reported to be in critical condition.
  • © Jack Guez
    UN probes alleged CAR child abuse by peacekeepers
    New instances of sexual abuse of minors by UN peacekeepers in the Central African Republic were reported by the UN in the latest series of child rape cases to hit the mission in the country.

Unhappy Ukrainians disappointed & "suffering" in the literal sense of the word,"Gallup" quotes

Will anything change in Ukraine in the coming years? No. So, the researchers from Gallup can be prepared for new records of depression and pessimism among Ukrainians.
A member of the Ukrainian armed forces assists local residents onto a bus to flee the military conflict, in Debaltseve
Brazen tone of the official Ukrainian propaganda is surprisingly optimistic: the country closer and closer to Europe, the reforms follow reforms that the separatists are dying by the thousands to avoid, the money magically arises from the magic of the IMF, and all of Ukraine rejoice. All, except the Ukrainians.
"What a shock from the classic!" — pathetically exclaimed Bender, and now have every reason to exclaim in the administration of the President of Ukraine. How is it – our relatives, our indispensable, our paternal United States of America took and planted most prosperous Ukrainians, and sad (which is especially outraged lovers of fat) – totally inedible pig in the form of polling company Gallup, the oldest and most prestigious American sociological Agency. And in this survey, a priori, interested in "blacking" the Americans have demonstrated that the people of Ukraine now feel the most miserable in the entire history of independence. And in this story, by the way, was already very little light years. But now the indicators of social pessimism and depression has set a new record. "Depression permeates in almost every segment of Ukrainian society. The current ratings of the standard of living improved among representatives of all age groups, regardless of sex and education" — to quote from the study "Gallup" add up to nothing.
Moreover, are curious concrete figures – they shock themselves. So, 79% of Ukrainian citizens consider themselves poor. But the Ukrainians, like all post-Soviet residents, reluctant to so unflattering to himself the language – but there's probably more euphonious synonyms disappeared, and the word "poverty" shines from all the holes. The whole huge mass of state employees, small businesses, workers and peasants, etc., etc., directly and clearly said we do not have enough to live off, and we barely scrape by. While 36% acknowledged himself suffering – "suffering" in the literal sense of the word. That is, so poor that even cry, though a cry scream. And this is the worst performance in the post-Soviet space. Mysterious neither in Kyrgyzstan, nor in impoverished Tajikistan there are so many screaming-poor people.
It is interesting, and who has disappointed and hurt the most? No, it's not the residents of Western Ukraine, which went to Europe on a "pick-up work" and go. These are the inhabitants of the center and South of the country. The ever-fluctuating regions without persistent electoral preferences. So they voted a year and a half ago for Poroshenko, now and ofigevayu from happening. How cynical: the citizens elected the President – but life has only worsened. And the Odessans unhappier steel imported from his Governor. And inhabitants of Nikolaev and Kherson, lost trade relations with the Crimea.
Another caveat: the survey was conducted in late summer, when another did not receive the bills for utility services during the heating season. Take him now – could safely expect even more disappointing results.
You know what's amazing? Here these words are "current ratings of the standard of living improved among representatives of all age groups, regardless of sex and education". Usually after a while the changes in her life: part of the population unhappy, but a part, big or smaller is encouraged. So was, say, in the early 90s, when the bulk of the discontented was diluted by those who sought to snatch market opportunities. That is a no, but the social drive was, albeit controversial. In Ukraine, now totally muffled as in the tank.
Dissatisfied with all categories of citizens of the sharp increase in prices for communal services, for many it was devastating.
Disgruntled pensioners the lack of indexation of pensions according to growth in prices for all categories of goods.
Unhappy business people rampant new gangster lawlessness and racketeering involving "veterans".
Disgruntled policemen, who were replaced by strange freaks of facebookyou.
Disgruntled residents of Donbass for... well, that's clear.
Unhappy with all men of military age for the infinite mobilization, the terror of the Commissars and the catching of conscripts.
Unhappy with business representatives because of sanctions against Russian goods, which cut short the possibility of Ukrainian exports to Russia.
Disgruntled community members, who suddenly realized that the new regime at times autoritarna and meaner all the previous ones and when it "swing right" has become much more difficult.
Dissatisfied optimists, which are still fed with promises, and not European open arms.
Dissatisfied with the army thrown in senseless attacks and provocations.
And absolutely all adds to the discontent fed smug face on the TV, which even stopped pretending that they're being modest.
Will anything in Ukraine change in the coming years? No. So, the researchers from Gallup can be prepared for new records of depression and pessimism among Ukrainians.


Hi Ukrainians, Hello horses!
You rode? For the devastation of the country?
For the war in the Donbass, for killing people?
For Dorval to power, the Frank pigs?

Why Ukrainians, them power you gave?
So they Ukraine before the end destroyed?
I had accumulated credits, and you all sold?
To the laws, morality, and conscience trampled?

So the bandit Bandera, glorified cities?
You tell me honestly – do you riding?
Brothers to, each other shot,
That you missed? You dreamed about it?

Of Europe wanted, to cognitively impaired,
On the Maidan stood to spasms of the stomach.
You instilled the idea that Europe is waiting for you,
But in fact, you lied, and now...

You rates have raised, up to European heights,
And the salary was forgotten, then the hunger waiting for you.
You the hryvnia dropped, and inflation pressure,
And did not understand that the vassal you ruled.

The people from Donbass, have you sharpened the knives,
Only because they rebelled, they are against the lies.
You bomb them with "grad", and shot in the back,
For his idea of the "Dino the country".

You blind idea, clouded mind,
And now like a zombie, you walk at once.
You can not be saved, there is no such medication,
You can do anything any guile.

Crimea turned away from you, and no wonder he left
He the way home, through the mists found.
And Donbas does not want Ukraine to serve
Enough he had suffered, willingly wants to live!

Well, you, Ukrainians, for that you were?
You for this country, in the clumps broke up?
You're in Odessa, people burned?
And in Donetsk, Lugansk, children were killed?

Hey, loud-mouthed maggots of the "Maidan",
You are burned on the Maidan, its the same Ivan.
YOU, his own country, divided it up,
How do you live now, under the current government?