Posted on December 18, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

smoky mt-1Alphabet In the interest of including all perspectives on events of high importance, we share the following short documentary “Inside the People’s Republic of Donetsk”. Ukraine and the people who live there, in both west and east, have become used as pawns in a dangerous geopolitical struggle between billionaires in the United States, European Union and Russia. With Ukraine, the extreme contrast between media and government of the “sides” in their versions of events, causes, and solutions has perhaps been so great that every day sees the previous day’s “world record narrative contrast” surpassed once again.

The question which becomes begged is “who is pulling the levers behind the scenes?” – what is causing the conflict in Ukraine? The most likely answer to that question lies in the recent significant global changes associated with the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) alliance, in particular the group’s paradigm-altering announcement of establishing a development bank which challenges International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and other formerly “competition-less”, powerful international financial institutions.

The people of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine were strongly opposed to the violent coup which ousted Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, then voted to become an independent government entity, and have since experienced civil war intermittently between a number of ceasefire agreements. Unfortunately for the people living in all regions of Ukraine, the war and killing – over 4,000 have perished, more than 10,000 injured, and hundreds of thousands displaced – of the past months has made it much more difficult to use dialogue successfully to unite the Ukrainian people.

As with nearly all wars throughout history, the causes are directly related to small groups of very wealthy, powerful, politically influential people, whose seemingly insatiable lust for even more power results in unnecessary, heartbreaking harm to that majority of people living in areas of conflict who simply want to live peaceful lives.

Most are aware of the saying that “the love of money is the root of all evil”, and the BRICS nations have become viewed as potentially coming between the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Bank for International Settlements, Federal Reserve, etc. and their previously unchallenged monopoly status with regard to $multi-billion deals with customers/nations in need of financial resources for developing their economies and improving the living conditions of their citizens.

Let us pray this “lovers quarrel” does not get out of hand, beyond the control of the world’s wise leaders. Wisdom has become urgently needed now.

All the wisdom in the world.


(Thank you to PressTV Documentaries)


Prof. Stephen Cohen On Ukraine: “America Has Blood On Its Hands.”


Posted on September 7, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

Book4United States Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies Stephen Cohen appeared recently on “Democracy Now” and spoke about the situation in Ukraine. Among some of his statements in this very informative interview, he said:

“In my own judgment, we (United States) have contributed mightily to this tragedy. I would say that historians one day will look back and say that America has blood on its hands. Three thousand people have died, most of them civilians who couldn’t move quickly – that’s women with small children, older women. A million refugees. Nobody else should die for absolutely no reason”.

U.S. President Barack Obama spoke in Britain during the recent NATO meeting and said:

“It was not the government of Kiev that destabilized the Eastern Ukraine. It’s been the pro-Russian separatists who are encouraged by Russia, financed by Russia, trained by Russia, supplied by Russia, and armed by Russia. And the Russian forces that have now moved into Ukraine are not on a humanitarian mission or peacekeeping mission. They are Russian combat forces, with Russian weapons, in Russian tanks. (emphasis added)”

Professor Cohen said America has blood on its hands; Barack Obama hasn’t admitted that. So, what is the real deal; what is the truth? After Democracy Now ran the clip of President Obama and his speech, Stephen Cohen responded:

“What Obama just said implies, if not asserts, is that if it wasn’t for Russia, Ukraine would be stable. That Russia’s destabilized Ukraine. No serious person would believe that to be the case. Ukraine is in the throes of a civil war which was precipitated by the political crisis which occurred last November and this February, when the elected President of Ukraine was overthrown by a street mob, and that set off a civil war – primarily between the West (including Kiev) and the East”.

Professor Cohen goes on to explain that the civil war became a proxy war between the United States and Russia, and that if both left the scene, the civil war would still remain. Both the United States and Russia have contributed to Ukraine’s destabilization, and, according to Cohen, “when Obama says Russia has destabilized Ukraine, it’s a half-truth”.

Democracy Now co-host Amy Goodman asks Cohen about the criticism he’s faced for speaking out in contradiction to Obama administration narratives on Ukraine, and he replied that he’d probably been slandered and libeled in published articles and on radio and television, but that nobody has corrected any of his facts. He went on: “These assertions by the United States that we’re a “democracy builder”, we’re virtuous, and it’s all Putin’s fault – this is worse than a half-truth, it’s actually a falsehood”.

Ms. Goodman started asking him about Ukraine possibly joining NATO, and, before she finished her question, Cohen said, “It’s war”.

Moving on to the NATO proposal for a rapid response force – a “spearhead” – Cohen stated:

“Fifteen thousand or less rebels in Ukraine are crushing a 50,000-member Ukrainian army. Four thousand against a million-man Russian army is nonsense. The real reason for creating this so-called rapid deployment force is they save the infrastructure, and the infrastructure – that is, in plain language, military bases – need to be on Russia’s borders, and they’ve said where they’re going to put them. The Baltic Republics, Poland, and Romania. The last Cold War the military confrontation was in Berlin – far from Russia. Now it will be – if they go ahead with this NATO decision – right plunk on Russia’s borders”.

If this occurs, according to Professor Cohen, Russia will leave the first agreement ever abolishing a category of nuclear missiles – short-range nuclear missiles – after a historic agreement signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987. At this point in the interview, Mr. Cohen asks where the anti-nuclear groups of the world are, and why they aren’t becoming very outspoken and extremely active now.

The interview then focuses on the unthinkable scenario of a nuclear exchange, the possible events which could start one, and MH17… “about which everyone has forgotten. Still, nobody knows who did it. There seems to have been an agreement among the major powers not to tell us who did it, which suggests it wasn’t the rebels – it wasn’t Russia after all. But it would take something like that (shoot-down of MH17), which can happen in these circumstances, to launch something”.

Amy Goodman asks about the nations conducting the investigation into MH17:

“The major countries that are doing it are Britain that has the black boxes and others. There was a report the other day that those parties, those states, agreed that they would not divulge individually what they have discovered. Now, they’ve had plenty of time to interpret the black boxes. There are reports from Germany that the White House version of what happened is not true, therefore you have to look elsewhere for the culprit who did the shooting down. They’re sitting on satellite intercepts. They have the images. They won’t release the air controllers conversations in Kiev with the doomed aircraft. Why not? Did the pilot say, let me speculate, “Oh, my God! We’re being fired on by a jet fighter next to us! What’s going on?” Because we know there were two Ukrainian jet fighters. We don’t know. But somebody knows”.

“That’s a digression. I apologize”. End of interview.

If one looks up “digress” in their dictionary, it says “v. wander from main purpose, theme, etc”. It may have been the case that Ms. Goodman and Professor Cohen had agreed before the interview on the topics of discussion, and that MH17 was not one of them. Given the profound world-changing nature of discovering that Ukraine was behind the shooting down of MH17 and the deaths of 298 passengers and crew – and not the rebels or Russia – Professor Cohen’s talking about MH17 is about a major issue of the Ukraine civil war.

In other words, he had no reason for making an apology whatsoever.

Take some moments and ponder on exactly how stupendous an announcement to the world would be disclosure that Ukraine shot down MH17, after the virtual non-stop government and media accusations that Eastern Ukraine rebels and/or Russia were responsible. The August 2013 chemical attacks which the United States falsely blamed on Syria were since revealed carried out by mercenaries as a pretext for a bombing campaign by the US/UK and others. That bombing campaign became prevented in part because a lot of men and women around the Earth learned of that “false flag” event. Russia’s Vladimir Putin played a part in preventing escalation of war on Syria when helping to negotiate for eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons stocks. Another important event was the British Parliament’s “no” vote on war against Syria; an unprecedented action for that nation.

The “false flag” aspect of the Syria chemical attacks, because the world breathed a lot easier when war became averted, became largely forgotten and never reported in the western press/media.

There would be a colossal difference between the affect on international public opinion after the Syria “false flag” chemical attacks of August 2013 and – if it turns out to indeed have been the case – a “false flag” carried out by the Ukrainian government in the shooting down of Malaysian airliner MH17 in July 2014. The percentage of human beings in the world who today are aware that the August 2013 Syria chemical attacks were a “false flag” operation could be in the range of 10-20%.

So, Professor Cohen, you had no reason to apologize. You were absolutely justified to ask “why not?” after pointing out the silence and stonewalling surrounding the investigation into MH17, and saying that “somebody knows”.

If the Ukrainian government attempted a “false flag” operation in shooting down MH17 – and if the evidence proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt – then 100% of the human race will know.


(Thank you to democracynow at YouTube)

Vladimir Putin: Transcript From Minsk Petro Poroshenko Meeting.

Posted on August 28, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

Russia’s Vladimir Putin during talks with Ukraine’s Petro Poroshenko and others
First, I would like to thank Minsk and Belarus for the opportunity to meet here.
The format we are using here – the Customs Union-Ukraine-EU – gives us a good opportunity to discuss issues pertaining to the impact of signing by Ukraine of the EU Association Agreement within the context of its cooperation with the Customs Union states.
Russia has always respected the sovereign choice of any nation to organize its political life and make all sorts of unions, both military and economic, and we will continue to do so. However, we hope that this will not be detrimental to other participants in international communication, and not at our cost.
As you may know, Ukraine is deeply integrated into the CIS economic space. Alongside Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, it is actually an inseparable part of the largest economic complex in the world, which took ages, rather than years or decades, to create – and this is no exaggeration.
Our countries’ companies have developed close ties in all the basic industries: in the fuel and energy sector, which includes nuclear power, in chemical production, in aviation and machine building, space, metallurgy and metals processing, in construction and agriculture.
We have developed unique production chains and created technological alliances. Russian capital represents about 32 percent of the Ukrainian banking system. The Customs Union states are Ukraine’s key foreign trade partners. In 2013, mutual trade turnover came up to $50 billion. This is comparable to what is going on the western track.
In the first six months of 2014, our trade turnover reached $22.7 billion. The Customs Union accounts for 30 percent of Ukraine’s exports. We have to openly state that the Russian market takes up most of this volume. We have developed a good legal basis for our cooperation.
In 2011, a free trade zone agreement was signed within the CIS framework. I would like to stress here that Ukraine took a very active stance in this respect. It actually insisted on signing this agreement. We are still drafting agreements on free trade in services, on state purchases and on pipeline transit. We believe that it would be expedient not only to maintain, but also to significantly step up our cooperation.
However, the question arises of whether this would be possible if the Ukraine’s association agreement with the EU really starts to work. Russia has stated on numerous occasions that full acceptance by our Ukrainian friends of all the tariff liberalization requirements and the adoption of the European Union technical, sanitary and veterinary norms will have a negative impact on the scope and dynamics of trade and investment cooperation in Eurasia.
Not to mention the fact that all these norms – the EU sanitary norms and regulations that we do not apply or apply only partially, and the technical regulations will actually close the Ukrainian market for our goods, for goods from the Customs Union and Russia. The rejection of common CIS technical norms and adaptation to EU standards will cost Ukraine billions of euros.
It will lose its partnerships with the Customs Union states in industry, finance, agriculture and transportation. As soon as Ukraine introduces zero import duty on goods from the EU, a step envisaged right after the ratification of the agreement that would apply to 98 percent of all the goods, there will obviously be a sharp increase in the supply of European goods to the Ukrainian market.
We understand our European partners; they have already developed the Ukrainian market rather well, and would like to get hold of whatever is left and squeeze out everyone else. Besides, less competitive Ukrainian produce will also be squeezed out from its own market. Where to? Primarily to Russia and the other Customs Union states, but primarily to us.
We should not rule out the risk of illegal re-export to the Customs Union market of goods from the EU under the guise of Ukrainian produce, either. Technical regulations and ways of establishing the country of origin are very important here. Nobody ever discussed this with us. Nobody, actually, ever discussed with us any of the issues I have just mentioned. I believe we will take this up in detail later, without press coverage. At some stage, we were simply told that this was none of our business, that they do not, for instance, discuss our relations with China or Canada. However, let us bear in mind that China and Canada are far away, while economic relations between Russia and Ukraine are a completely different story. Besides, Russia is not the least of our EU friends’ partners.
I believe it would be appropriate to have an open discussion of this matter. There has been nothing of the kind, unfortunately. However, we pin great hopes on this meeting, in the sense that it would be frank and substantive. By very conservative estimates, the total loss for the economy of Russia alone may amount to 100 billion rubles on the first stage, that is $3 billion. This will affect entire sectors of our economy and agriculture, with all the consequences for economic growth and employment rates.
Belarus and Kazakhstan will also incur losses, of course. And of course, Russia cannot lie by in this situation. I would like to stress that we would be forced to reciprocate, to protect our market. In full compliance with the provisions of the CIS agreement on the free trade zone and with WTO norms, I would like to stress this, we would be forced to cancel preferences for imports from Ukraine.
I would like to note here that we do not intend to discriminate against anyone, and we will not do it. I simply wanted to make this perfectly clear. We will simply be forced to introduce a regular trade regime for Ukraine. The same one that applies to trade between Russia and the European Union. It is called the most-favored nation treatment.
Sounds good and is exactly to the point However, no preferences that are now envisaged by the CIS free trade zone regulations. We will of course take a very careful look at the application by our Ukrainian friends of the phyto-sanitary norms envisaged by the EU Association Agreement and we will mirror them Our regulations in this area are very flexible now.
We will introduce the exact same norms for Ukraine; and as regards the industry, one of the major components here, as I have said, is establishing the origin of the goods. We have a strong suspicion, as I have already said, and there is a great threat that European goods will be brought in through Ukraine. Mr. Poroshenko will say what he thinks about this when he makes his address, I can see him disagreeing.
Even within the Customs Union, we are already receiving goods from the EU that are banned for import in Russia. In this case, unfortunately, they are coming through Belarus. The label reads: the country of origin – Belarus. You remove it: Poland. With Ukraine this would increase manifold. We will be flooded, you see? I know that both the President and the Government of Belarus are trying to prevent this negative illegal practice. We at least have an agreement, which we do not have with Ukraine.
We expect today to have a constructive discussion, during which our partners will hear our arguments. Overall, we are in favour of establishing closer cooperation between the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union, of searching for ways to combine the two integration processes. I hope that all the participants in today’s meeting support the strategic goal of creating a common economic space from Lisbon to Vladivostok.
I would like to stress that we are ready to consider any cooperation scenarios that are based on the consideration of mutual interests. We are ready to have an exchange on the critical situation that has developed in Ukraine, which, I am certain, cannot be resolved through further escalation of force without due consideration of the vital interests of the country’s southeast regions and without a peaceful dialogue with these regions’ representatives.
Thank you for your attention.

Ukraine Political Leader: “Poroshenko Is Covered In Blood.”

Posted on August 21, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

“War is the naked, criminal, business of murder.”


superior222.jpg(UKRAINE) – Victoria Shilova is an elected political office holder of Ukraine representing the District of Dnepropetrovsk. She delivers a powerful message to her fellow Ukrainians around the Earth – calling for an end to the bloody civil war in that country.

There have been a number of articles recently where writers have asked readers why Malaysian Flight MH17 – crashed in Eastern Ukraine killing 298 passengers – has been virtually forgotten for weeks by the western mainstream/corporate media. Western nations and media were quick to blame pro-federalist Eastern Ukraine dissidents and/or Russia for shooting down MH17, but since then investigative journalists and analysts have published a great number of articles which point to Ukraine’s government in Kiev as the most likely guilty party.

The black boxes from MH17 were apparently handed over to British, then NATO authorities some weeks ago, however neither the British or NATO has informed the world public about any findings, which has some observers wondering why. Various articles are appearing on websites claiming a cover up over the MH17 shoot down is occurring, so the drama builds over this very consequential, criminal, and unfortunate event. At this point, worldwide public opinion has resulted in increased calls for a more rapid resolution of the MH17 tragedy, especially with regard to discovery of the responsible criminal parties.

If it becomes determined, as the many recent articles are suggesting, that persons in the Kiev government were guilty of shooting down Flight MH17, such a revelation would cause shock waves in the halls of every government on Earth. The downing of MH17 remains an extremely important world event and one which millions of men and women are watching and anticipating further developments.

While western mainstream media have left MH17 developments in the recent weeks unreported, the civil war in Eastern Ukraine has also been unreported in the western press. If what Ukraine political leader Victoria Shilova says in the following video becomes disseminated widely to her fellow Ukrainians and the people in all nations on Earth, just as MH17 becomes unavoidable by the media, so too will what is occurring in Eastern Ukraine.

Ms. Shilova speaks forcefully and with strong emotion while delivering her message, and holds no punches in her very powerful criticism of Ukraine’s President Poroshenko. She directly contradicts Poroshenko on his use of the term “anti-terror operation” in describing military actions carried out against the people of Eastern Ukraine; instead she calls it a civil war. She openly describes the Poroshenko administration “murderers in our government”, and straightforwardly tells Ukraine’s president that “the Hague Tribunal is waiting for you”.

Ms. Shilova points out that 75% of Ukrainians are against the ongoing war in Ukraine, but that people are afraid to express their true feelings in public for fear of being “detained, interrogated, kidnapped, or even killed”. She notes that “anything can happen in Ukraine today, because we have thieves replaced by killers”. She is particularly fearless in her criticism of Ukraine oligarchs, speaking about their being “like vampires, they suck our blood, the blood of our mothers and sisters, our son, husbands and wives”.

According to Victoria Shilova, 170-200 Ukrainians are dying every day in the civil war, the total now some 6,000 civilians and 11,000 soldiers. She points out that the numbers do not include those wounded and left behind on the battlefield or those who’ve told the truth and been sent to mental hospitals. She believes when the real numbers of dead, wounded, and censored become known, what has occurred over the last four months will be no longer possible to hide or deny – the truth is coming out.

She, along with others in Ukraine trying to stop the civil war, have taken actions including preparation of documents by the best independent attorneys in Ukraine to stop Poroshenko’s “unconstitutional anti-terrorist operation in Donbass”. She notes that the documents will become delivered to the highest courts in Ukraine, because according to Ukraine’s constitution an army cannot violate its own citizens on its soil. She speaks directly to those who fight on the side of Poroshenko and asks them, “why are you fighting with Poroshenko against the children of the Donbass?”

Finally, she reaches out to the people of Ukraine: “Please let us unite. Let us protest against this war. Let us be heard, just like during the Vietnam War. We have been bombarded for months. Please stop this. I cannot believe that they have no goodness in themselves. Are they not human beings?”

Some may hold a different perception after hearing Victoria Shilova’s moving video address, but her words may well become recorded forever in Ukraine’s history books. Because one woman member of Ukraine’s political leadership came to the point where she felt it urgent to take action to save the lives of her fellow citizens, the land of Ukraine – and the world – is on the verge of profound historic change.  


(Thank you to Anti-Maidan at YouTube)