Ukrajina Part II

Pac-Man je 6. sep 2018 ob 16:42 izjavil:

2 možnosti:

1) Ukrajina je v 90ih čutila potrebo po protitankovskih minah in jo zapolnila z uvozom iz Rusije. Nato so le-te padle v roke podjetnim rudarjem in traktoristom.
2) Rusija upornikom dobavlja protitankovske mine.

https://medium.com/dfrlab/minskmonitor-...

On July 4, 2018, VKontakte (VK) user Vlad Shamray uploaded a set of photos of himself sitting by a pile of anti-tank mines. Twitter user @666_mancer was the first to notice these photos, and tweeted about them, pointing out the manufacture date and factory of origin as further indicators of Russian interference in the conflict.

The mines bore a set of markings:

ТМ-62П3
121–4–94

TM-62П3 meant that the mines were TM-62 mines of the P3 type, and the series of numbers below denoted the factory, lot number, and year of production. 121 indicated that the mines originated from the “Bryansk Chemical Plant named after the 50th anniversary of the USSR” in Bryansk, Russia. 94 denoted that the mines were produced in 1994, three years after the independence of Ukraine from the Soviet Union.

Upornikom v siriji pa tud rusi....so what....

Pac-Man je 6. sep 2018 ob 22:47 izjavil:

Mr.B je 6. sep 2018 ob 16:47 izjavil:

so what....

Seznam dokazov o ruski vpletenosti v konflikt pa je vedno daljši in daljši.

Krim je ruski ! To je jasno vsem, razen nekim izjemam.

"Krim ni ruski ! To je jasno vsem, razen nekim izjemam. "

Tukaj se motiš! Ker velja tole:
1. zmagovalec ima prav!
2. če slučajno nima prav velja pravilo 1

Pac-Man je 7. sep 2018 ob 13:56 izjavil:

Krim ni ruski ! To je jasno vsem, razen nekim izjemam.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262 @ Wikipedia

The non-binding resolution, which was supported by 100 United Nations member states, affirmed the General Assembly's commitment to the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders and underscored the invalidity of the 2014 Crimean referendum.

Voting summary

100 voted for
11 voted against
58 abstained
24 absent

Evo prvi zadetek , samo zate : Election Day in Pro-Russia Crimea
A misliš da če se redna Ruska vojska sprehaja po ozemlju, ki se je odločil da bo pod rusijo, da boš kaj novega ugotovil. Krim je in ostaja Ruski. Enako kot bi rekel Izrael je Izraelski in pripada Izraelcem, tisti palestinci tam nimajo za burek. Razen če misliš da ima Ukrajina zmožnost da se oloči zavzesti ozemlje nazaj in se zoperstaviti Ruski vojski. No veliko sreče, ker pred letom ali dvemi je biila študija, da bi prišla ruska vojska do varšave če bi hoteli zavzeti EU, preden bi EU z natom bila sposobna karkoli narediti...

Ukrajinsko sodišče je tožilstvu dovolilo dostop do leta in pol prometnih podatkov z mobilnega telefona raziskovalne novinarke. ESČP je dalo blokado do 18. oktobra, da lahko novinarka pripravi odgovor.

https://www.rferl.org/a/sedletska-europ...

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ordered the Ukrainian government not to access any data from the cell phone of RFE/RL investigative reporter Natalya Sedletska.

The September 18 order is in effect until October 18 to give Sedletska time to prepare a full complaint to the court.

...

On August 27, the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv approved a request from the Prosecutor-General's Office to allow investigators to review all data from Sedletska's cell phone from July 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017.

The ruling stems from a criminal investigation into the alleged disclosure of state secrets to journalists in 2017 by Artem Sytnyk, director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.

...

Sedletska is the host of Schemes, an award-winning anticorruption television program by RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service and Ukrainian Public Television.

The Schemes program reported on several investigations involving senior Ukrainian officials, including Prosecutor-General Yuriy Lutsenko, during the period in question.

Naj rusi vrnejo Donetsk in Lugansk Ukrajini, ukrajinci pa bodo priznali, da nimajo več Krima. A ni to morda ustrezna rešitev?

SimplyMiha je 23. sep 2018 ob 20:06 izjavil:

Zadeva je malo bolj komplicirana, mednarodno priznane meje republike Ukrajine pa so še vedno dobro znane.

Zanimiva zgodba.

Janukoviča naj bi evakuirali v Rusijo iz tam na Krim in nazaj v Rusijo.

https://en.hromadske.ua/posts/skripal-p...

Hromadske’s sources in the Prosecutor’s Office say that the investigation did not record any Russians being present at Mezhyhirya at the time. However, on February 22, 2014, when Yanukovych was in Kharkiv, the former president’s security guards were in contact with Russians.

“We have billing information from Russian phones. Six numbers. But it’s unknown whether they were definitely in contact by telephone or physically in contact. This was February 22. By the night of February 23, they were already physically next to Yanukovych in Urzuf, Donetsk region. From there they sent him to Yeisk, in the Krasnodar region of Russia, and from there they escorted him by plane to Anapa, and from Anapa by military transport plane to Hvardiiske in Crimea,” an interlocutor told Hromadske.



Je bil v igri tajvanski scenarij? "Legitimni predsednik je pred nacisti pobegnil na Krim, kjer nadaljuje svoj mandat. Nova prestolnica Ukrajine je Sevastopol, hočemo stol v ZN itd. itn." ampak je bil tip preveč neprebavljiv za polotočane? Zakaj sicer delati ovinek čez Krim?

A vidim problem :

Režiral je njen mož.

Ps, a ni neko skladišče orožja šlo v luft...

Pac-Man je 23. sep 2018 ob 22:14 izjavil:

SimplyMiha je 23. sep 2018 ob 20:06 izjavil:

Zadeva je malo bolj komplicirana, mednarodno priznane meje republike Ukrajine pa so še vedno dobro znane.

A tko kot meje R. Srbije? Saj veš, Kosovo pa to...

Verjetno so krivi zmerni ruski uporniki proti obstoječemu tiranskemu režimu :

Crimea bloodbath: Attack on college involved masked gunmen shooting at people, witnesses tell RT

Šola na Krimu, v kateri se je zgodila razpaljotka, je imela na vhodu detektor kovin.

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2018/10/18...

Ukrajinski neonacisti? Ne. Novokuznetsk, Rusija, s caristično zastavo. https://twitter.com/loogunda/status/105...

Če je slučajno kdo pozabil... https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europ...

Kontekst

https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/gashc4...

In another contentious vote, the Committee approved a draft on combating the glorification of Nazism by a recorded vote of 130 in favour to 2 against (Ukraine, United States), with 51 abstentions. Introducing the text, the representative of the Russian Federation noted current attempts to rewrite history in the name of narrow‑minded geopolitical interests. Xenophobic rhetoric — justified as “free speech” — has become part of electoral campaigns, he asserted.

By its terms, the Assembly would express alarm over the spread of extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo‑Nazis and skinhead groups, as well as racist extremist movements and ideologies. It also would call for the universal implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Its passage followed the failure — by a recorded vote of 75 against to 2 in favour (Ukraine, United States), with 88 abstentions — of an amendment introduced by the United States delegate, which sought to address the text’s “politicized roots”. She said the draft attempts to criminalize free speech and expression. The solution to hate is not censorship; it will only be found in the free marketplace of ideas.


povzetek debate


Moving on, the Committee then took up a draft resolution titled “Combating glorification of Nazism, neo‑Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance” (document A/C.3/73/L.53/Rev.1).

The representative of the Russian Federation, introducing the draft, recalled that 70 years ago, the anti‑Hitler coalition gave rise to the United Nations, a triumph over nationalism and hate that reinforced the Nuremberg tribunal. There must be pride in the creation of a global system of international security, as well as human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and conventions on discrimination. He noted current attempts to rewrite history in the name of narrow‑minded geopolitical interests, evidenced in new memorials and the renaming of streets that honoured collaborators of Nazism. Such actions are incompatible with the obligations of Member States. Xenophobic rhetoric has become part of electoral campaigns, marked by statements justified as “free speech”. Such behaviour is cynical, given countries’ human rights obligations under international law.

The representative of Kyrgyzstan, also on behalf of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan, said the lack of a collective response to Nazism facilitated the rise of the Third Reich and the Second World War, which was unprecedented in its violation of human rights. It was unacceptable to make national heroes of those who had committed grave crimes during that time. Having learned about the dangers of hatred and violence, and witnessing increased hotbeds around the world, he decisively condemned monuments to Nazism.

The representative of Belarus called for combating the glorification of Nazism in any form, neo‑Nazism and the Nazi past. Such glorification cannot be justified through freedom of speech or expression or equated with exercising human rights. Racism and xenophobia had a destructive impact on youth. Efforts to end the resurgence of such movements and ideologies should be a focus at the United Nations, without politicization, she said, voicing support for the resolution.

The representative of the United States expressed concern over the politicized roots of the draft resolution. It required changes, a point expressed during informal meetings. The United States aimed to work with like‑minded countries to improve the text. Her country does not need to defend its position on Nazism, she said, recalling that the greatest fear the Nazis had was of the United States, as it stood for liberty and humanism. A draft resolution should honour that truth.

However, the current draft was borne of a political controversy, she said. It is an annual power play by one country attempting to exert influence over a region without genuine efforts to actually combat Nazism, and instead, seeking to criminalize free speech and expression. The United States is disgusted by anti‑Semitism and fought a war against it. However, the solution to hate “is not censorship and will only be found in the free marketplace of ideas. The best antidote to free speech is free speech,” she said, proposing an amendment to remedy areas where the draft falls short and as a start to addressing the cynicism.

The representative of the Russian Federation opposed the amendment as the draft resolution is the result of intensive negotiations that involved six rounds of open informal consultations. The goal of the amendment is to whitewash Nazism and rewrite the Nuremberg tribunal judgements, which would only lead to more migrant phobia and aggressive nationalism. He called it unethical and sacrilegious to vote for the amendment, considering all who had died, urging delegates to vote against it.

The delegate of South Africa said that as host of the 2001 World Conference against Racism, her country rejected the amendments and the fact that they were presented so late, notably as they seek to remove article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. She will vote no on the amendments.

The representative of Cuba, in a general statement, said the United States delegation did not circulate the amendment prior to tabling it. Such behaviour undermines, and shows disdain for, multilateralism. Cuba will vote against the amendment, he said, urging others to do the same.

The Committee then rejected the amendment by a recorded vote of 75 against to 2 in favour (Ukraine, United States), with 88 abstentions.

The representative of Uruguay, speaking in explanation of vote, said her delegation abstained because it did not have enough time to consider the amendment.

The Chair replied to a question by the Russian Federation’s delegate that the representative of the United States requested the recorded vote.

The representative of the United States, making a general statement, encouraged delegations that abstained to work with her delegation next year to find common ground. While delegations might not have had enough time to consider the amendment, they had sufficient time to examine the draft resolution’s flaws. Hateful ideologies are defeated by taking action; neutrality only serves the oppressor, not the oppressed. Assuring that the United States continues to condemn all forms of intolerance and hatred at home and abroad, she said the draft resolution criminalizes free speech and serves as a nation’s political weapon against its neighbours. Its vague terminology can be used to target political opponents and undermine the ability of civil society to spotlight violations. As it has done for decades, the United States will vote against the draft resolution, she stated, urging others to do the same.

The representative of Ukraine, speaking in explanation of vote, said millions of Ukrainians made an enormous contribution to the victory over Nazism. While reiterating his country’s condemnation of Nazism, racism, xenophobia and intolerance, he said this draft resolution has nothing to do with Nazism and other forms of intolerance. He condemned the Russian Federation’s cynical attempt to present itself as a champion of the fight against Nazism and neo‑Nazism while perpetrating crimes against other nations. Pointing out the propaganda motives of the resolution, he urged all delegations to vote against it.

The Committee then approved the draft resolution by a recorded vote of 130 in favour to 2 against (Ukraine, United States), with 51 abstentions.

By its terms, the Assembly would express alarm over the spread in many parts of the world of various extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo‑Nazis and skinhead groups, as well as racist extremist movements and ideologies — and further — over the fact that this trend has resulted in the implementation of discriminatory measures, policies and bills at the local or national levels. It would call for the universal ratification and implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and urge those States parties that have not yet done so to consider making the declaration under its article 14.

The representative of Austria, speaking in explanation of vote on behalf of the European Union, said initiatives related to the common goal of ending racism should unite Member States, not divide them. They should address racism in a balanced and comprehensive manner. While acknowledging some changes requested by the European Union were made, he said they were not sufficient to correct the draft resolution’s selectivity, bias and negativity.

The representative of Australia shared serious reservations about this resolution, including those expressed by the European Union, and those of the United States regarding freedom of expression. Australia looks forward to addressing these concerns next year.

The representative of Canada, while acknowledging the draft resolution contributes to the fight against racism, xenophobia and intolerance, voiced regret that the changes proposed to broaden its scope were not accepted. Canada shares the concerns voiced by the United States pertaining to freedom of expression. And yet, the amendment would have only addressed some of the draft resolution’s flaws. Canada had abstained for procedural reasons.

The representative of Nigeria said his country supports any initiative that addresses racism, xenophobia and all forms of intolerance. He voted in favour of the resolution to encourage global efforts to address racial discrimination. Tackling this scourge is a priority for Nigeria.


in sam dokument


http://undocs.org/A/C.3/73/L.53/REV.1

TL;DR

Concern trolling.

7tom1ja je 20. nov 2018 ob 14:52 izjavil:

There are no nazis in Ukraine :-)

So. Ravno čez vikend so pretepli shod za trans pravice.

https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/statu...
https://twitter.com/ColborneMichael/sta...

Tole vzemite kot miselni problem, ker v praksi nastopa cel kup zadev, ki mi gredo močno na živce - od interesnih sfer naprej.

Kosovo je razglasilo samostojnost z odločitvijo parlamenta l. 2008.
2008 Kosovo declaration of independence @ Wikipedia

Krim je razglasil neodvisnost z odločitvijo vrhovnega sveta 11. marca 2014
Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Crimea @ Wikipedia

Krim je nato naredil nadaljni korak ter 16. marca 2014 izvedel referendum o priključitvi Ruski federaciji, ki ga od 18. marca smatra za svoj teritorij in se trudi pridobiti mednarodno priznanje.
Crimean status referendum, 2014 @ Wikipedia
Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation @ Wikipedia

Kdo meni, da Rusija ne bi vrgla Srbije pod bus, če bi ji bila ponujena možnost mednarodnega priznanja krimske aneksije v zameno za podoben referendum na Kosovu? Posledično seveda Kosovo postane del Albanije in nata.
Kaj pa če bi za priznanje Krima Ukrajino spustili v EU in NATO?

Ste vidl 24 kur poročanje?
čist pro-ukrainsko.

no sedaj vemo zakaj so britanci poslali ladje... https://sputniknews.com/europe/20181125...

volitve v ukrajini so čez par mesecev, porošenko ima pa podporo pod 10%

korenje3 je 26. nov 2018 ob 01:00 izjavil:

BBC v akciji. Verjetno se je sprehajala 50km stran s specifičnim namenom.

Poslušaj @1:00, dumbfuck št.2.

Tako je to, ko se hočejo pobalini igrati v peskovniku na račun drugih, jih zapostavljat, ustrahovati in ko to ne gre več pa uporabit silo.

Pobalini so za svojo rit že davno poskrbeli, raja pa naj trpi!

gendale2018 je 26. nov 2018 ob 01:11 izjavil:

https://112.ua/statji/esli-segodnya-voy...

rip volitve

saj to je point tega dogodka, da se volitve prestavijo, ker bi trenutni predsednik izgubil na njih a on noče

gendale2018 je 26. nov 2018 ob 01:11 izjavil:

https://112.ua/statji/esli-segodnya-voy...

rip volitve

Predsedniške volitve so 31.3.2019 .

Popušenko uvedel martial law do 25.1 2019 .