Back to the
The Ukraine crisis: what does it look like, versus, what is it, most presumably?
What does it look like? I've segmented it in six parts:
It's end 2013. The Ukrainian people are sick and tired of President Yanukovich's corrupt regime.
When he unexpectedly abstains from signing an association treaty with the EU, and signs a deal with Russia instead, the angry people take to the streets, notably to the Maidan square of the capital city of Kiev. The authorities react mercilessly, but the violent confrontation, claiming over 100 lifes, leads to the ousting of Yanukovich and the entry of a government that is sympathizing with the West.
Russian President Putin, already estranging himself from the West by his anti-gay laws and his repressive actions against foreign NGOs, looks disgruntedly at the developments in Ukraine, as they are an obstacle in his dreams to restore the power and prestige of the former Soviet Empire. He decides to annex the Crimea and to destabilize Ukraine by supplying weapons to the pro-Russian separatists in the east of that country. Since most media in Russia are state-controlled, the Russians are brainwashed 24/7 that Putin is a great leader doing the right thing. The effects of that omnipresent one-sided media influence are clearly shown in the political polls of the country: an overwhelming majority of the Russians agrees with Putin's line.
The West is shocked to see that yet again a nation with imperialist ambitions is shamelessly using military force to annex a part of another sovereign nation. It reminds one of the fateful 19th-century power politics, if not of Hitler's annexation of the Czecho-Slovakian Sudetenland in 1938. US Vice President Joe Biden immediately travels to the Baltic countries to ensure them of the American solidarity, as these countries fear that Russia might invade them as well, under the pretext of protecting the Russian minorities. Leading talkshows and opinion magazines in the West start wondering who will check Russia. In Germany for instance, guests of the Anne Will talkshow discuss the topic: 'War danger in Europe - who will stop Putin?', and a cover article of the Spiegel magazine calls Putin 'an isolated arsonist'.
On top of that, a Boeing of Malaysian Airlines crashes in East Ukraine on July the 17th, a disaster that claims 298 lifes, the majority of them Dutch nationals. The likelihood is that ill-trained pro-Russian rebels mistook the airliner for a Ukrainian army freight plane, and that they fired a ground-to-air missile of Russian make at it. The Russian state media however put the blame on a Ukrainian jet fighter. Their propaganda really becomes ridiculous when it also suggests that Ukrainian forces perhaps thought to down President Putin's plane, its paint scheme allegedly quite similar to that of Malaysian Airlines.
The West stands long divided over the question how to deal with the threat that Russia poses. After all, Europe made itself dependent on the Russian gas supply, and the other important economic ties with Russia are rendering an income of many billions of euros. Finally however, the Western leaders agree that a hard line is the only language that Putin and his cronies will understand. Sanctions are imposed or expanded, answered by Russian sanctions in return. Western leaders are now concerned that Russian troops might invade East Ukraine under the disguise of humanitarian support. President Obama, Chancellor Angela Merkel and the EU Commission's President Barroso have already warned Moscow not to do that.
In a speech on the Crimea, President Putin said that Russia is not seeking conflict, and that the bloodshed in Ukraine should be ended as soon as possible, but a Russian military presence in Ukraine has been witnessed, according to various sources.
So, that's what it looks like, this Ukraine crisis.
Now I invite you to reflect on what this crisis most probably is, in reality.
As an introduction, just one of those facts that CNN or the BBC or the NOS or RTL or the VRT or the ZDF never tell us anything about: for 3,500 years now, Torahism is the self-reproducing product of sectarian indoctrination of Jews as from the age of five.
Now, expanding my theory I unfolded in the main text: whether there is a Democrat or a Republican in the White House, Torahism is the true ruler of America. In Europe too, Torahist Jews have far more power, in the economy, in the media, in the bureaucracy, in a host of organizations, in parliaments and in cabinets, than is good for the European peoples among who they live, to understate it. International Torahism is aiming to slowly, step by step, dissolve the original European nations into the socalled European Union, a superstate which, somewhere further down the 21st century, will become a second America under lasting Torahist rule, with Brussels as a second Washington DC.
In its obsession to enlarge its power, the fall of Communism in 1989-1991 means that Torahism can target the East European countries to get them in its sphere of influence. Initial agreements over a political border with the last Soviet leader, Mr Gorbachev, are quickly forgotten. The Western military alliance is bent on expanding eastbound and countries like Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria, that were once Warsaw Pact members, are now becoming NATO members. Then, Ukraine becomes the next country on the long-term agenda of Torahism.
In Vladimir Putin, the president of neighbouring Russia, Torahism sees a head of state who isn't planning to bow for it any time soon. His determination to keep Russia master over its own destiny, becomes evident in several ways. One example: the annual military parades on Moscow's Red Square are signalling that Russia, if need be, is prepared to fight to hold its own. Another example: recently, Russia, Brazil, India, China and South Africa have founded a bank that must serve as an alternative for the money kings of the IMF and the World Bank, with their haughty demands. It is Putin's sense of independence that triggers Torahism to the point of rage; he must bow. He has to accept that Ukraine becomes a NATO member once, he has to accept that neighbouring Georgia, an Asian country (!), becomes an EU member once, and then Torahism will further mount its pressure on Russia in order to interfere with the country's domestic affairs. The Western peoples are unaware of all of this, because the media never talk about Torahism, let alone about its rages.
It's end 2013. The Ukrainian people are sick and tired of President Yanukovich's corrupt government, and that makes it easier for Torahism to carry out its plans.
Firstly, Torahism tries to lure President Yanukovich into its sphere of influence by the time-tested method of bribing the elite of a country. To the outside world, this becomes visible in the EU handing out enormous amounts of money to new member states to spend on their infrastructure. President Putin however is adamant to rule out the chance of neighbouring Ukraine ever becoming an EU and - worse - a NATO member. He offers President Yanukovich a better deal, which the latter accepts.
Torahism now resorts to one of its other specialties: organizing unrest and mayhem in the targeted country, creating a chaotic situation that will make the country slide into the direction that Torahism wants. The instrument of choice is the CIA, the reputed powerhouse of remarkable abilities: how to befriend a country's influentials, how to isolate a country's independent minds, how to raise and lead a mob, how to topple a government, how to market a revolution. The main décor is quickly chosen: the Maidan square in Kiev. That's the place Torahism's TV cameras will focus on, just like in 2004 during the socalled Orange Revolution. A platform will be built on the square and the ones who are mysteriously privileged to speak there, will instantaneously and worldwide be seen as 'the voices of the Ukrainian people', due to the magic that is television: one camera filming one speaker makes hundreds of millions of people see that speaker and listen to him. When one studio presenter then says: 'So there we've heard the new voice of the Ukrainian people', hundreds of millions of TV watchers will take that for granted.
The aim is to make the Western TV audiences believe that the crowd on the Maidan actually represents the whole of the Ukrainian people. German TV for instance, even starts to talk about the 'Euro-Maidan', as to sow the idea in the German mind that the square is actually the birthground of a new benign EU member state.
The well-led crowd occupy the square, they build the platform for TV, they lay siege on government buildings and public utilities and they bring the country to a standstill, breaking Heaven knows how many laws in the process. The riot police are sent in, petrol bombs are thrown and rifles are fired, the lethal violence claims over 100 victims, an agreement under Western auspices doesn't last two days and President Yanukovich, who was democraticly elected, feels forced to leave. In his stead a regime is installed that will connect Ukraine to the EU and the NATO.
Coached by the CIA, it soon emerges that Ukraine's new leadership counts a number of politically very dubious persons in its ranks, persons who the Western media would immediately expose as dangerous neo-Nazis if they popped up in a Western cabinet. In this case however, Torahism can't be bothered; the people in question hate the Russians even more than the Jews, so it's not that bad. In fact, the presence of the politically foul makes it easier for the US coaches to continuously play people off against one another, to make sure that the new government remains on the Torahism-friendly course.
President Putin knows he already has an image problem in the West. For instance, the Russian law that prohibits the confrontation of minors with homosexual propaganda is systematicly misrepresented as an 'anti-gay law' in the Western media. His ban on foreign centres of subversion, that act under the disguise of noble-sounding causes, wasn't celebrated by the Western media either.
More serious than this image problem, is his observation that America refuses to share Russia's view on world affairs. Russia realisticly sees the world as multi-polar. There are more than one great powers. Together, these world powers carry a special responsibility for maintaining world peace. Every great power on its own should entertain good relations with the less powerful nations around them. So time and again - as recently as on the 4th of July of this year - President Putin offers Russia's partnership to America, albeit on the basis of equality. Earlier too, I've seen him seize the moment, after he reached a deal with the West on other issues, by saying he sees no obstacle for further improving the Russian-Western relationship.
America's rulers on the other hand, take a totally different view on world affairs. They are the masters over the most impressive military arsenal in mankind's history, over the Western finances, and over the most impressive image-making arsenal in mankind's history: TV, film and other media. They view America as the one and only super power. America is entitled to impose its do's and don'ts on the rest of the world, including Russia and China. (Recently, President Obama told the Americans they are 'an exceptional people'. When a leader is telling his people thát, you can bet he is preparing them for 'exceptional' events.)
President Putin realizes that not even the 27 million Soviet soldiers and civilians who died in World War Two, fill America's rulers with respect towards Russia. He sees that this world, in spite of all the sheen of civilization, is still a dog-eats-dog-world, in which a coup d'état isn't internationally condemned, much less followed by sanctions. Russia herself must look after her strategic interests, her Navy interests, because no-one else will do it for her. And so, he carries out a plan to reclaim the Crimea, given away to Ukraine by Khrushchev in 1954, and the Kremlin leader gets overwhelming consent for it from the grateful Crimeans themselves and the Russians. That the Western media have now more ammo to down-image him, is something he has to take into the bargain.
In East Ukraine, most people feel culturally affiliated with Russia, but they are now suddenly confronted with a government in Kiev that was elected by nobody and that is striking a very hostile tone against Russia. They rise in protest, but Kiev goes as far as sending in the military against its own, Ukrainian, citizens (!). The brutality of this doesn't really get through to the Western peoples though, for the Western media are calling these Ukrainians consistently 'pro-Russian separatists' or 'pro-Russian rebels'. The negative image that Russia has been given, will because of that wording also reflect on these Ukrainians, so that they won't become sympathetic in the eyes of the Western peoples.
Moscow sees that the deployment of a country's army against its own citizens isn't internationally condemned either. It puts the Kremlin before a dilemma. On the one hand, it sees the necessity of sending military support. That would prevent the parachuted Kiev government from stabilizing the country and subsequently joining the NATO, and it would give a deterring signal to the West in general that the closer it wants to move its tanks and troops to Russia's borders, the more bellicose Russia will react. On the other hand, the Kremlin doesn't want Ukraine to sink into a fullfledged civil war either. A decision is made. For the time being, Moscow will officially deny that it is sending military aid to the resistance in East Ukraine, but in fact will do so clandestinely, to give them a fighting chance against the troops of Western-backed Kiev.
You are not an apologetic admirer of Mr Putin when you look back at the last 200 years and realize the following. In 1812, the Westerner Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia. In 1914, the Westerner Kaiser Wilhelm II invaded Russia. In 1941, the Westerner Adolf Hitler invaded Russia. In 1949, the Western countries created the NATO, that only six years later was followed by the creation of its Communist pendant, the Warsaw Pact. I can easily imagine that whoever is residing in the Kremlin this century, just about has had it with Western expansionism in Moscow's direction, and in our times, that expansionism comes in the shape of Torahist imperialism, camouflaged as EU and NATO enlargement. (And no, I haven't forgotten about East Berlin '53, Hungary '56, Berlin '61, Prague '68 and Afghanistan '79.)
The Western media's standard allegation that the Russian media are state-controlled bears testimony to their mindboggling hypocrisy, as they themselves are the servants of dangerous masters, even if their accusation were true.
The Western powers, used to militarily intervene or sending 'advisers' and arms to whatever place on Earth they like - Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya to name a few - are acting as if they are shocked and indignant over Russia's reclamation of the Crimea. Some don't shy away from comparing Putin to Hitler. By doing so, they are saying something that is as nonsensical as offensive to the entire Russian people. After all, only Hitler was Hitler, to begin with, and as mentioned before, the Russians and the other Soviet peoples suffered horrendously at Hitler's hands, but won the war unleashed by him anyhow.
And then, oh dear, the concerns of those Baltic politicians, wringing their hands with fear of the proverbial Russian bear, evidently going berserk, and then, the galant Joe Biden flying in from the USA to tranquilize their pounding hearts.... it's all a show. It's all a show! Mr Biden and his Baltic colleagues know that Russia will not attack NATO countries, but they stage the show anyhow to make Russia look bad, in the eyes of the world. And their show will undoubtedly have gone down well with their own peoples, given their bitter recollections of the Soviet occupation in decades gone-by. Putin's Russia however is not the same country as Stalin's USSR.
The hyped media campaign against Putin is upsetting people in the West. The alarming newspaper headlines, magazine articles and talkshow topics create a disquieted atmosphere in which polls display that a large part of the population, in Germany and The Netherlands for instance, is fearing that war might be looming. Noteworthy, a poll in April 2014 shows that the majority of the Germans is against an increased NATO presence* in Eastern Europe (source: ARD-DeutschlandTrend).
The MH-17 plane disaster makes something clear that's very important in politics. The politician or country that has a good image, is more likely to be trusted by the general public than a politician or a country with a bad image. So this calamity occurs and the UN declare it man-made, but no-one has yet produced irrefutable evidence of the cause. All the same, many people in the West are likely to believe their politicians and TV presenters who are suggesting Russia or Russia-related people are the perpetrators. It's the automatism in which your memory plays its part: we already heard so many bad things about Putin and Russia, the likelihood is they are responsible for this as well. The mirrored situation is taking place in Russia.
The actual cause of the catastrophe is now the subject of an investigation by the UN's civil aviation organization, if I'm not mistaken. Hopefully, the experts will have the stamina to resist the political pressure that inevitably comes into play after a tension-laden event like this. I won't speculate about the cause, but let me highlight two media reports.
1) On the Russian website english.pravda.ru, I read the article 'Boeing-777 was downed by Ukrainian MiG-29, Romanian expert says'. The article makes a serious impression, but I have no means to establish the (un)truths in it.
2) On the disastrous day itself, the NOS and other broadcasters reported that a rebel leader had triumphantly written on the internet they had downed a Ukrainian Antonov, just around the same minute that flight MH-17 disappeared from the radar. Soon afterwards, the message was deleted. The media report about this sounded plausible. Again, I have no means to establish the (un)truths in it.
Yet the point of focus remains this: nearly 300 innocent people got killed. The first ordeal their loved ones went through was hearing the devastating news and seeing themselves suddenly confronted with the black reality of the loss. The second ordeal they had to endure were the tormenting images and reports of the appalling aftermath. So the circumstances have to be cleared up and the guilty ones must be tried and sentenced, because the next of kin should absolutely be spared a third ordeal of not seeing justice done.
The West is hesitating to hit Russia economicly by means of sanctions, because countersanctions can be expected and the decrease of imports and exports will obviously entail a considerable loss of revenue. Moreover, the economic elites of Europe would hate to endanger the lucrative Russian gas supply. Finally however, it is decided that this use of money as a political weapon is well affordable, and that these are times to deploy it. Besides, America is producing shale gas in abundance, so that should become Europe's logical alternative to the Russian gas anyway.
To the general public, the sanctions are portrayed as the only language that 'President Putin and his cronies' understand. The economic adversity that will come from the trade war, are to be sold to the nations by means of televised lines like 'we all will face some difficulties now, but sometimes you have to stand for your principles, leniency now would only encourage Moscow to continue its risky course'.
No sanctions against Israel, on a rampage against the Gaza Palestinians at the same time. No warning phonecalls to Netanyahu from Obama, Cameron, Barroso. Worried statements, oh yes. Serious faces, sure. Yet nothing substantial.
Every Russian move is now to be misconstrued. The general public have to perceive it with distrust. So the Western leaders now pretend they are concerned that Russian troops might invade East Ukraine under the disguise of humanitarian support. President Obama, Chancellor Angela Merkel and the EU Commission's President Barroso have already warned Moscow not to do that.
A Russian military presence in Ukraine has been witnessed, according to various sources, but in a speech on the Crimea, President Putin said that Russia is not seeking conflict, and that the bloodshed in Ukraine should be ended as soon as possible.
Because of its control of the Western media, Torahism is able to describe the events B1 through B6 in the tone of voice and with the choice of words that I demonstrated in the texts A1 through A6.
The coverage of this crisis by 'our' media fits in their overall editorial policy of fooling the American people, the European peoples, into believing that ours is the right kind of society, and that ours are the right kind of politicians, even when the real rulers, propelled by their Chosen People mania, are pushing the world into the danger zone right in front of war, as the NATO is stepping up its activities everywhere and Russia, in response, likewise.
*On 18th August 2014, during a visit to Latvia, Mrs Merkel said the NATO would have "a very much stronger presence" in its eastern territories than previously.
(Source: Deutsche Welle, see
Richard Schoot, 18th August 2014 (with some corrections on 1st September)
Britain, The Netherlands, Europe are in very big trouble, in my view. Our countries
urgently need new political parties, Christian Patriotic parties, and it is very important to know what Torahism is. Please read
my main text at www.ibcpp.org.uk
If you come to agree with my views, please always remember that
the only way out is a peaceful and patient way. Not a single foreigner or Jew
can be held responsible for the country's present situation. Avoid
confrontations that can easily turn overheated. Don't react to provocations. Please
don't view the avoiding as cowardice. It isn't. Be strong, be calm and calm down others
if their anger may cause them to do foolish things.
Long live the Jews, down with Torahism.
PRINTING THIS TEXT TAKES 7 SHEETS
Back to the