Inside the mind of an important figure…

0 41

By Tatzhit. December 3rd, 2015

Here
is a very important blog post from Ukraine. Not because of what is said, but
because of who said it.

Let me first examine the contents – it’s a fairly
standard mix of paranoia, ignorance, and dyslexia, characteristic of the less
educated nationalists:
 

The author opens up by talking about the Paris massacre, which apparently was
“a well-planned action as
part of [Putin’s] hybrid war waged against Europe”.

Then he tries to sound smart by stealing definitions from third-rate experts:

“A hybrid war is … usage of regular armed forces … terrorists,
saboteurs, guerrillas, provocateurs … as well as the other forms and methods
of inflicting substantial damage on the enemy – economic, energy, and
environmental” (environmental? Muskovites are to blame for winters being
cold, I guess) …

Furthermore, “The hybrid war has the only purpose … to force the
adversary to take decisions necessary to the aggressor” (so, you know,
it’s exactly the same as a regular war. In fact, the meaningless buzzword
“hybrid war” is debunked point-by-point in THIS
hilarious article).
 

Then, of course, our blogger makes a litany of
complaints about Ukraine’s predicament:

– Russia/Putin have been “waging a
large-scale hybrid war”, Crimea was “occupied by the Armed Forces of
the Russian Federation” (nevermind the fact that 80% of Ukrainian soldiers
on the peninsula defected to the side of the people, and the overwhelming self-determination vote)

– all the Donbass militia are “regular
units of the Russian Armed Forces under the guise of criminal-surrogate
forces” (nevermind that only 2% of captured militiamen – about a dozen out of ~600 – were “Russian mercenaries“).

– there are “sabotage and terrorist
attacks in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa and other regions” (apparently when
neonazis throw a grenade at Nationalist Guard soldiers in Kiev – it’s Putin’s
fault; and he probably sic’d the RightSectorites on local protesters
during the Odessa massacre, too)

– a multitude of other complaints about ”
powerful information attacks” (a lost cause when it comes to the author, I
think), “attempts to destabilize the country” (I guess overthrowing
the elected government, then violently suppressing half the country that voted
it into power, was Putin’s doing), “economic and energy pressure”
(yes, because continuing to sell power and natural gas at discount prices – to
a regime that insists it’s waging a war against you – equals “pressure”
in opposite land), “provoking and supporting separatist and extremist
actions of radical forces” (I guess that’s how they view
negotiating Minsk-1, then Minsk-2 peace treaties at the times when UAF were smashed and Donbass
militias started advancing).
 

After this, the real fun starts: the author
goes off the deep end and starts ranting that self-determination of Crimea
and Donbass “was only the beginning for Putin”, that this local civil
war “broke down the system of collective security, breached European
borders and changed the parity of forces in the region”, that “[Russian] hybrid war
… begins to spread over Europe”.
 

Our blogger goes on to quote a fellow paranoid
Rosen Plevneliev (President of Bulgaria, who so far saw two cabinets resign
within three years amid massive popular protests). Rosen also thinks Russia is
out to get him, apparently because some unknown script kiddies recently
attempted to DDOS the Bulgarian Parliament website. It seems to me that, even if the attempt was successful, Bulgarian Parliament webpage going down for a couple days could hardly initiate “[Putin] destabilizing the
whole of Europe”, like Plevniev claims.
 

- Advertisement -

However, I can’t help but hope that the author is right
about one thing: that “[mass media] stories with
dirty lies about Ukraine and statements of how important it is to be friends
with the good Russians” are indeed paid for by Putin.
Because so far neither me, nor anyone I know have seen a single paycheck
from the Kremlin, and I’d sure like to have spare money for humanitarian aid
donations (to be fair, I think the critical stuff I occasionally publish would disqualify me).

Then we move to Putin’s nefarious deeds in the Middle East: the author blames
“bombardments of Syria by Russia” for the EU refugee crisis –
nevermind the fact that refugee surge was caused by NATO meddling in Iraq,
Libya and Syria, and began a long time before the first Russian airstrike.
Apparently, trying to defeat islamists and preserve the secular, multicultural
society, so that refugees have somewhere to come back to, is in fact a plot to
destroy Europe and “divert attention from the Ukrainian issue”. 
 Putin also created “unique conditions
… for thousands of trained and armed terrorists and radical Islam supporters
to infiltrate Europe” – here we must conclude that Merkel works for Putin,
since it is fact the relaxing of Germany’s refugee policy that caused most recent
spike in refugees, many months before Russia got involved.

Russia is also at fault for tightening regulations on Ukrainian labor migrants
– clearly a nefarious plot to destroy Ukraine and EU by having millions of
Ukrainians come home rather than stay in the “aggressor state”.
It’s also an information warfare ploy – because those traitors would report the
lies their eyes saw, and not the truth shown on Kiev-controlled mass media.

And so on, and so forth:

– Russia is much too upset over Turks shooting
down one tiny jet
 

– Russia is buying ISIS oil (Russia is having
trouble selling its own vast oil reserves for a decent price, why in the world
would it buy any more?!)
 

– Russia is a “center … which finances
and forms a global terrorist threat” (maybe it was Russia that supported
Al-Qaeda in Afganistan, islamists in Kosovo, Lybia, Syria? Maybe it hides
Chechen terrorists, or maybe 80% of Syrians believe that Russia created ISIS?).

Oh wait – actually the author does say the Taliban and Al-Qaeda are Western
creations, but then argues that cooperating with Russia would create a far
bigger problem because it “captures not airplanes or concert halls but
…  takes as hostages millions of people
[in Crimea and Donbass]”. Obviously, if Crimeans are “hostages of
Russia” (despite being ethnically Russian and yearning to rejoin Russia
ever since their 300-year union was broken in 1991), then Texans are hostages
of USA, Turkish Cypriots are hostages of Turkey, East Germans are hostages of
Germany, etc. etc.
 

The same logic applies to panicked claims that
“Putin tests the accuracy of … marine-, air- and underwater-launched
cruise missiles … that can carry nuclear warheads. … Russia uses the war in
the Middle East … as a free proving ground for demonstrative exercises in
combat employment of powerful weapons. Russia trains, increases its combat
potential and, obviously, is preparing to anything but peacekeeping
operations”. If deploying 30 planes to a combat zone is so ominous, what
do we say of USA? NATO? The Ukraine itself? All of them have far greater number
of forces used in combat for far longer.

In the end, the author degrades into vague
ramblings, blaming Putin for creating 
conflicts “to test new weapons and to work off new warfare
tactics” (implying the disastrous NATO-backed regime change efforts in Libya,
Syria and Ukraine were orchestrated by Putin for training purposes), warning
that “attempts to interact with [Russia]… condemn and provoke a
transformation of local military conflict into a global one. This means to
legalize the crash of the world order and to contribute the oncoming of the
moment when cruise missiles will fly in the other direction”, and
predicting that “attempts to negotiate with Russia and Putin trigger the
mechanism, which went off on the September 11, but its scale will be more
terrible and atrocious”. The post finally concludes with rather dyslexic
statement that “effective and informatory response should be given to the
Kremlin instead of offering cooperation”.

Now, it’s finally time for the big reveal.

Who is our paranoid blogger, the man who
sees Putin in every shadow, and Russian aggression in every Middle Eastern or
European problem?

None other than Oleksandr Turchinov AKA “Bloody
Pastor”*, the head honcho in Kiev in the first months after the coup!



Igor Strelkov is often quoted as “the man who started the Ukrainian civil
war”, because he said “I was the first to start fighting”, but
in fact, he was merely the first to start fighting back – against nationalist
forces coming into East Ukraine to suppress the locals.

Turchinov was the one who sent the army against the people and started the Anti-Terrorist Operation (commonly
known as Ukrainian Civil War), days before Strelkov even set foot in Donbass.

Even so, the rebels are often blamed for “taking up arms, instead of going the democratic route”.
First off, only a portion of the rebels took up arms, so we can clearly see what happened to those that took the path of non-violence. In Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, and elsewhere around the country the demands of unarmed protesters were ignored, they were beset by armed extremists and State Security alike, killed, thrown in prisons, or intimidated into silence. “Democratic route” was never an option, despite overwhelming popular support in the eastern regions.
 
https://welections.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/ukraine-2012.png
Second, you’ve just been inside
the mind of the man in charge of the coup-installed government back then.

How do you imagine the potential negotiations would go?

Donetsk – “Hi, we’d like free and fair elections, protection from nationalist gangs, guarantee that our close economic ties to Russia would not suffer, and language rights for 86% population that speaks Russian as their primary language.”

Kiev – “You are a Putin’s agent waging hybrid war through informational attacks and environmental aggression and responsible for Lybian refugees. Any attempts to negotiate will trigger the
mechanism, which went off on the September 11, but its scale will be more
terrible and atrocious!”

Actually, from what I understand, that’s pretty much how the negotiations went back then**.
 

Notes:
* On the “Bloody Pastor” nickname – to round off our charming image of Turchinov, we also have to mention that he is a priest in the Kiev offshoot of the “Word of Faith” neo-baptist sect. No kidding, sermons and all. Speaking in tongues and miracle healing are their two main attractions, apparently.

** Also, in case you are wondering, Turchinov is still very much in power – currently he’s head of the Security and Defense Council, which more or less makes him the second most powerful man within the Kiev regime.

Subscribe to our newsletter
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.

Comments