Connect with us

RussiaFeed

News

From Russian Prison to Ukrainian Jail – ‘Hero of Ukraine’ Nadia Savchenko arrested

Ukraine just arrested their ‘Joan of Arc’

Published

on

47 Views

It’s out of the fire and into the frying pan for so-called Ukrainian ‘Joan of Arc’ Nadia Savchenko, who has just now been arrested by Ukraine, for allegedly planning a terrorist attack inside the parliament of which she is a member.

Ukrainian military pilot Nadia Savchenko was previously sentenced to 23 years in jail in Russia, for complicity in the murder of two Russian journalists, and later released as part of a prisoner exchange. Since then, she was hailed as a great idol of the Maidan – a symbol of the new anti-Russian, pro-Ukrainian future, that Ukrainians are supposedly all supposed to fight for. Western media and those in Ukraine alike lionized her, and she was awarded by President Poroshenko the highest honor Ukraine can bestow, the title: Hero of Ukraine.

This is important to note: Savchenko has literally been declared a Hero of Ukraine, thereby intended to represent everything Ukraine stands for.

A few short years after her release from Russian Prison, the same Ukrainian President which decorated her, and hailed her as Ukraine’s Hero, their Joan of Arc, on her return from Russian Prison, now President Poroshenko supports her arrest. Savchenko has simply went from Russian prison to Ukrainian jail.

The authorities have been desperately wanting to arrest and silence Savchenko, after a great scandal, but until now, her immunity as a member of parliament protected her from arrest, even as they accused her of attempting to blow up that same parliament. Finally, she has been strippped of that immunity and detained, according to TASS news:

The decision to strip Savchenko of immunity was carried by a 291 majority vote. Her detention was supported by 277 legislators, with 11 opposing it; 268 voted for her arrest, and six, against.

Lutsenko said before the voting that “on the list of top priority investigative measures to be taken today an order to take Savchenko for psychiatric examination is number eight.”

“This will answer all questions,” he said. In her final statement Savchenko said that Ukraine should reform its political system and give voters a chance to revoke legislators and hold referendums.

“Ukraine does have a way out without terrorist attacks and other problems that may ruin it. There is a simple and legal way – a reform of the political system,” she said.

At least a hundred picketers supporting Savchenko, including her sister Vera and mother, gathered near the Ukrainian parliament. They were chanting “Nadya is a hero” and “Freedom for Nadya.” Some were seen crying.

Savchenko was not handcuffed, but was lead out of the Rada into the crowd of her supporters.

So the big question remains, why has Nadia Savchenko been arrested? Well, if you follow RussiaFeed, you may recall that we covered her recent claims which shocked Ukraine and the world over. If you haven’t read the article, it’s highly recommended, as it explains in detail what has really been happening behind the scenes.

SHOCKING: ‘Hero of Ukraine’ Nadia Savchenko now accuses Kiev for Maidan Snipers

In short, Nadia Savchenko has made some shocking claims, she said the following, regarding the events of the 2014 Maidan Coup, which was hailed in the west as a revolution of dignity:

I saw the current speaker of parliment bring snipers to the hotel, those people are in parliment now. The prosecuter general needed to become prosecuter so that his crimes against the Ukrainian people wouldn’t be investigated.

She directly accused members of the current regime in power in Ukraine, including the Prosecutor General, of hiring the mysterious snipers which fired on police and protesters alike from the roofs of Kiev buildings, namely the Hotel Ukraina overlooking the Maidan.

These snipers were acknowledged in western Media, but naturally, they were blamed on Russia or President Yanokovich. The official claim was that the Snipers were targetting Ukrainians fighting for freedom. It has been stated by Russia and independent journalists for some time, however, that the snipers were, in fact, targetting both protesters and police, thereby acting as provocateurs, pushing Ukraine over the brink of war. Recently, damning evidence has been produced confirming what was already known and stated in Russian media about these snipers.

That, however, at this point, is not even the issue here, this is not to argue that Russia has claimed the snipers were put there by the current Ukrainian government, but rather to show that Savchenko is arguing that. Now the Russian claims are confirmed by one of the most violently anti-Russian people in Ukraine.

What makes Savchenko’s claims so shocking is not the claims themselves – we already knew about them, it is the fact that they are coming out of the mouth of one of the most violently Russophobic people in the country. Slowly but surely the truth in Ukraine is coming out, and Savchenko’s words proved to be the most unexpected clue, affirming the Russian account of the Ukraine crisis.

It can not be overstressed the poetic justice that “Hero of Ukraine” Nadia Savchenko is somehow directly affirming the Russian story, and thereby disproving the lies the west spread about Ukraine, both inside the country and abroad. No one can accuse her of being a Russian agent – she has Russian blood on her hands, which makes her the most unbiased source in this situation.

Why the Change of Heart?

To be clear, Savchenko is not exactly morally pure – let’s not forget that she does indeed have blood on her hands. She is a kindred spirit to many of the Ukrainian neo-Nazis running around the country, but this is, in fact, the reason why she is opposing the current Ukrainian regime.

She has not had a change of heart per-say, she is a Ukrainian nationalist through and through, but it seems she has grown a brain, if not a conscious, and realized that she may be a so-called “Hero of Ukraine” willing to fight and die for the cause, but the Ukrainian authorities certainly are not.

She realized while she was in jail for her crimes, the powers that be in Kiev were not worshiping at the altar of Bandera, sacrificing a goat or two for the glory of Ukraine, but instead robbing the country blind, while she and her comrades served as useful idiots dying on Ukrainian battlefields.

She realized they were not fighting Russians, who could easily capture Kiev if they really wanted to, but rather, Ukrainian citizens, and that she and her comrades were bamboozled by the west, and the Oligarchs in power, to divide Ukraine with war, setting it up for western socio-economic conquest.

She realized that the revolution of dignity she fought for in Kiev, was actually a lie, the current Ukrainian authorities are legitimized criminals, who rose to power on bloodshed, and they, in fact, sent the snipers which fired on Maidan protesters, and security forces alike. She realized after being promised so much, the revolution of dignity was a complete and utter farce and sham.

Ukraine has Gone Insane

Ukraine has gone completely insane – not just because of this, but because of everything that’s happened after 2014. Lets recap, shall we? Before 2014, when Ukraine was allegedly controlled by Russia, the country was peaceful, there was no war, and at worst, some people in one side of the country didn’t get along with some others at the opposite end. Everyone basically went about their normal affairs. After the so-called Revolution of Dignity:

  • The Ukrainian government collapsed, and a democratically elected President was ousted in a violent coup.
  • A fratricidal war began in Donbass, which killed around 10,000 people including children.
    • The war crimes were committed by Ukrainian government forces – however, a large amount of the army deserted – Ukraine can’t even keep their army in line – so a majority of the worst atrocities were committed by Neo-Nazi battalions.
  • Fascism effectively returned to Europe for the first time since 1945 – in the heart of a country which fought fascism. Former Nazi Ukrainian elements from western Ukraine were rehabilitated like Bandera.
  • The rise of fascism effectively revitalized the certain radical bands of Uniates, which since the 16th century Union of Brest, killed Orthodox Christians.
  • Crimeans voted to join Russia, motivated especially by fear of Ukrainian fascism.
  • Ukrainian fascism has scared away even Russophobes in Poland.
  • Ukraine lost wonderful opportunities with Russia, and was forced into a Master-Slave trade relationship with the EU.
  • EU leaders STILL say Ukraine is decades away from joining EU
  • In recent days
    • Former Georgian President Saakashvili (stripped of citizenship in his own country and wanted for corruption) was appointed Governor of Odessa in Ukraine. He then attempted to overthrow the corrupt Ukrainian government – and was deported after a back and forth fight with the current President.
    • Now Savchenko – a former ‘Hero of Ukraine’, hailed as the Ukrainian Joan of Arc and jailed in Russia for murder, has been arrested on accusations of terrorism against Ukraine.

The Kiev regime now maintains that this is all a plot of Russian secret services, yet it’s not Russia which has descended into a dystopian quagmire.

Ukrainian democracy in action

Now, Ukraine is arresting and jailing not only one of their soldiers, but one who earned the highest medal and title in the land: Hero of Ukraine. Ukraine is jailing their own Heroes, corrupt exiled former presidents of foreign countries are appointed Ukrainian governors, only for them to call the government corrupt and state coups, and a civil war is raging killing thousands. Ukraine still maintains that it is all Russia’s fault, even as they jail their own Heroes who kill Russians. It seems the Hetman (title for Cossack ruler) must soon come to terms with the fact that he is wearing no clothes.

I’d tell him to buy some – but the oligarchs have already stolen all the clothes.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Is the Violent Dismemberment of Russia Official US Policy?

Neocons make the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Erik D’Amato via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity:


If there’s one thing everyone in today’s Washington can agree on, it’s that whenever an official or someone being paid by the government says something truly outrageous or dangerous, there should be consequences, if only a fleeting moment of media fury.

With one notable exception: Arguing that the US should be quietly working to promote the violent disintegration and carving up of the largest country on Earth.

Because so much of the discussion around US-Russian affairs is marked by hysteria and hyperbole, you are forgiven for assuming this is an exaggeration. Unfortunately it isn’t. Published in the Hill under the dispassionate title “Managing Russia’s dissolution,” author Janusz Bugajski makes the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

Engagement, criticism and limited sanctions have simply reinforced Kremlin perceptions that the West is weak and predictable. To curtail Moscow’s neo-imperialism a new strategy is needed, one that nourishes Russia’s decline and manages the international consequences of its dissolution.

Like many contemporary cold warriors, Bugajski toggles back and forth between overhyping Russia’s might and its weaknesses, notably a lack of economic dynamism and a rise in ethnic and regional fragmentation.But his primary argument is unambiguous: That the West should actively stoke longstanding regional and ethnic tensions with the ultimate aim of a dissolution of the Russian Federation, which Bugajski dismisses as an “imperial construct.”

The rationale for dissolution should be logically framed: In order to survive, Russia needs a federal democracy and a robust economy; with no democratization on the horizon and economic conditions deteriorating, the federal structure will become increasingly ungovernable…

To manage the process of dissolution and lessen the likelihood of conflict that spills over state borders, the West needs to establish links with Russia’s diverse regions and promote their peaceful transition toward statehood.

Even more alarming is Bugajski’s argument that the goal should not be self-determination for breakaway Russian territories, but the annexing of these lands to other countries. “Some regions could join countries such as Finland, Ukraine, China and Japan, from whom Moscow has forcefully appropriated territories in the past.”

It is, needless to say, impossible to imagine anything like this happening without sparking a series of conflicts that could mirror the Yugoslav Wars. Except in this version the US would directly culpable in the ignition of the hostilities, and in range of 6,800 Serbian nuclear warheads.

So who is Janusz Bugajski, and who is he speaking for?

The author bio on the Hill’s piece identifies him as a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington, D.C. think-tank. But CEPA is no ordinary talk shop: Instead of the usual foundations and well-heeled individuals, its financial backers seem to be mostly arms of the US government, including the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the US Mission to NATO, the US-government-sponsored National Endowment for Democracy, as well as as veritable who’s who of defense contractors, including Raytheon, Bell Helicopter, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Textron. Meanwhile, Bugajski chairs the South-Central Europe area studies program at the Foreign Service Institute of the US Department of State.

To put it in perspective, it is akin to a Russian with deep ties to the Kremlin and arms-makers arguing that the Kremlin needed to find ways to break up the United States and, if possible, have these breakaway regions absorbed by Mexico and Canada. (A scenario which alas is not as far-fetched as it might have been a few years ago; many thousands in California now openly talk of a “Calexit,” and many more in Mexico of a reconquista.)

Meanwhile, it’s hard to imagine a quasi-official voice like Bugajski’s coming out in favor of a similar policy vis-a-vis China, which has its own restive regions, and which in geopolitical terms is no more or less of a threat to the US than Russia. One reason may be that China would consider an American call for secession by the Tibetans or Uyghurs to be a serious intrusion into their internal affairs, unlike Russia, which doesn’t appear to have noticed or been ruffled by Bugajski’s immodest proposal.

Indeed, just as the real scandal in Washington is what’s legal rather than illegal, the real outrage in this case is that few or none in DC finds Bugajski’s virtual declaration of war notable.

But it is. It is the sort of provocation that international incidents are made of, and if you are a US taxpayer, it is being made in your name, and it should be among your outrages of the month.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

At Age 70, Time To Rethink NATO

The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:


“Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.”

So said President Charles De Gaulle, who in 1966 ordered NATO to vacate its Paris headquarters and get out of France.

NATO this year celebrates a major birthday. The young girl of 1966 is no longer young. The alliance is 70 years old.

And under this aging NATO today, the U.S. is committed to treat an attack on any one of 28 nations from Estonia to Montenegro to Romania to Albania as an attack on the United States.

The time is ripe for a strategic review of these war guarantees to fight a nuclear-armed Russia in defense of countries across the length of Europe that few could find on a map.

Apparently, President Donald Trump, on trips to Europe, raised questions as to whether these war guarantees comport with vital U.S. interests and whether they could pass a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

The shock of our establishment that Trump even raised this issue in front of Europeans suggests that the establishment, frozen in the realities of yesterday, ought to be made to justify these sweeping war guarantees.

Celebrated as “the most successful alliance in history,” NATO has had two histories. Some of us can yet recall its beginnings.

In 1948, Soviet troops, occupying eastern Germany all the way to the Elbe and surrounding Berlin, imposed a blockade on the city.

The regime in Prague was overthrown in a Communist coup. Foreign minister Jan Masaryk fell, or was thrown, from a third-story window to his death. In 1949, Stalin exploded an atomic bomb.

As the U.S. Army had gone home after V-E Day, the U.S. formed a new alliance to protect the crucial European powers — West Germany, France, Britain, Italy. Twelve nations agreed that an attack on one would be treated as an attack on them all.

Cross the Elbe and you are at war with us, including the U.S. with its nuclear arsenal, Stalin was, in effect, told. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops returned to Europe to send the message that America was serious.

Crucial to the alliance was the Yalta line dividing Europe agreed to by Stalin, FDR and Churchill at the 1945 Crimean summit on the Black Sea.

U.S. presidents, even when monstrous outrages were committed in Soviet-occupied Europe, did not cross this line into the Soviet sphere.

Truman did not send armored units up the highway to Berlin. He launched an airlift to break the Berlin blockade. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian rebels in 1956. JFK confined his rage at the building of the Berlin Wall to the rhetorical: “Ich bin ein Berliner.”

LBJ did nothing to help the Czechs when, before the Democratic convention in 1968, Leonid Brezhnev sent Warsaw Pact tank armies to crush the Prague Spring.

When the Solidarity movement of Lech Walesa was crushed in Gdansk, Reagan sent copy and printing machines. At the Berlin Wall in 1988, he called on Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.”

Reagan never threatened to tear it down himself.

But beginning in 1989, the Wall was torn down, Germany was united, the Red Army went home, the Warsaw Pact dissolved, the USSR broke apart into 15 nations, and Leninism expired in its birthplace.

As the threat that had led to NATO disappeared, many argued that the alliance created to deal with that threat should be allowed to fade away, and a free and prosperous Europe should now provide for its own defense.

It was not to be. The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

This, said Kennan, would “inflame the nationalistic and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion” and “restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations.” Kennan was proven right.

America is now burdened with the duty to defend Europe from the Atlantic to the Baltic, even as we face a far greater threat in China, with an economy and population 10 times that of Russia.

And we must do this with a defense budget that is not half the share of the federal budget or the GDP that Eisenhower and Kennedy had.

Trump is president today because the American people concluded that our foreign policy elite, with their endless interventions where no vital U.S. interest was imperiled, had bled and virtually bankrupted us, while kicking away all of the fruits of our Cold War victory.

Halfway into Trump’s term, the question is whether he is going to just talk about halting Cold War II with Russia, about demanding that Europe pay for its own defense, and about bringing the troops home — or whether he is going to act upon his convictions.

Our foreign policy establishment is determined to prevent Trump from carrying out his mandate. And if he means to carry out his agenda, he had best get on with it.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Photos of new Iskander base near Ukrainian border creates media hype

But research into the photos and cross-checking of news reports reveals only the standard anti-Russian narrative that has gone on for years.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Fox News obtained satellite photos that claim that Russia has recently installed new Iskander missile batteries, one of them “near” to the Ukrainian border. However, what the Fox article does not say is left for the reader to discover: that in regards to Ukraine, these missiles are probably not that significant, unless the missiles are much longer range than reported:

The intelligence report provided to Fox by Imagesat International showed the new deployment in Krasnodar, 270 miles from the Ukrainian border. In the images is visible what appears to be an Iskander compound, with a few bunkers and another compound of hangars. There is a second new installation that was discovered by satellite photos, but this one is much farther to the east, in the region relatively near to Ulan-Ude, a city relatively close to the Mongolian border.

Both Ukraine and Mongolia are nations that have good relations with the West, but Mongolia has good relations with both its immediate neighbors, Russia and China, and in fact participated with both countries in the massive Vostok-2018 military war-games earlier this year.

Fox News provided these photos of the Iskander emplacement near Krasnodar:

Imagesat International

Fox annotated this photo in this way:

Near the launcher, there is a transloader vehicle which enables quick reloading of the missiles into the launcher. One of the bunker’s door is open, and another reloading vehicle is seen exiting from it.

[Fox:] The Iskander ballistic missile has a range up to 310 miles, and can carry both unconventional as well as nuclear warheads, putting most of America’s NATO allies at risk. The second deployment is near the border with Mongolia, in Ulan-Ude in Sothern Russia, where there are four launchers and another reloading vehicle.

[Fox:] Earlier this week, Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, said authorities of the former Soviet republic are being “controlled” by the West, warning it stands to lose its independence and identity as a consequence. “The continuation of such policy by the Kiev authorities can contribute to the loss of Ukraine’s statehood,” Mr Patrushev told Rossiyskaya Gazeta, according to Russian news agency TASS.

This situation was placed by Fox in context with the Kerch Strait incident, in which three Ukrainian vessels and twenty-four crew and soldiers were fired upon by Russian coast guard ships as they manuevered in the Kerch Strait without permission from Russian authorities based in Crimea. There are many indications that this incident was a deliberate attempt on the part of Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko, to create a sensational incident, possibly to bolster his flagging re-election campaign. After the incident, the President blustered and set ten provinces in Ukraine under martial law for 30 days, insisting to the world, and especially to the United States, that Russia was “preparing to invade” his country.

Russia expressed no such sentiment in any way, but they are holding the soldiers until the end of January. However, on January 17th, a Moscow court extended the detention of eight of these captured Ukrainian sailors despite protests from Kyiv and Washington.

In addition to the tensions in Ukraine, the other significant point of disagreement between the Russian Federation and the US is the US’ plan to withdraw from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Russia sees this treaty as extremely important, but the US point of view expressed by John Bolton, National Security Adviser, is that the treaty is useless because it does not include any other parties that have intermediate range nukes or the capability for them, such as Iran, North Korea, and China. This is an unsolved problem, and it is possible that the moves of the Iskander batteries is a subtle warning from the Russians that they really would rather the US stay in the treaty.

Discussions on this matter at public levels between the Russian government and the US have been very difficult because of the fierce anti-Russia and anti-Trump campaigns in the media and political establishments of the United States. President Putin and President Trump have both expressed the desire to meet, but complications like the Kerch Strait Incident conveniently arise, and have repeatedly disrupted the attempts for these two leaders to meet.

Where Fox News appears to get it wrong shows in a few places:

First, the known range for Iskander missiles maxes at about 310 miles. The placement of the battery near Krasnodar is 270 miles from the eastern Ukrainian border, but the eastern part of Ukraine is Russian-friendly and two provinces, Donetsk and Lugansk, are breakaway provinces acting as independent republics. The battery appears to be no threat to Kyiv or to that part of Ukraine which is aligned with the West. Although the missiles could reach into US ally Georgia, Krasnodar is 376 miles from Tbilisi, and so again it seems that there is no significant target for these missiles. (This is assuming the location given is accurate.)

Second, the location shown in the photo is (44,47,29.440N at 39,13,04.754E). The date on the “Krasnodar” photo is January 17, 2019. However, a photo of the region taken July 24, 2018 reveals a different layout. It takes a moment or two to study this, but there is not much of an exact match here:

Third, Fox News reported of “further Russian troops deployment and S-400 Surface to air missile days after the escalation started, hinting Russia might have orchestrated the naval incident.”

It may be true that Russia deployed weapons to this base area in Crimea, but this is now Russian territory. S-400s can be used offensively, but their primary purpose is defensive. Troops on the Crimean Peninsula, especially at this location far to the north of the area, are not in a position strategically to invade Kherson Oblast (a pushback would probably corner such forces on the Crimean peninsula with nowhere to go except the Black Sea). However, this does look like a possible defense installation should Ukraine’s forces try to invade or bomb Crimea.

Fox has this wrong, but it is no great surprise, because the American stance about Ukraine and Russia is similar – Russia can do no right, and Ukraine can do no wrong. Fox News is not monolithic on this point of view, of course, with anchors and journalists such as Tucker Carlson, who seem willing to acknowledge the US propaganda about the region. However, there are a lot of hawks as well. While photos in the articles about the S-400s and the Russian troops are accurately located, it does appear that the one about Iskanders is not, and that the folks behind this original article are guessing that the photos will not be questioned. After all, no one in the US knows where anything is in Russia and Ukraine, anyway, right?

That there is an issue here is likely. But is it appears that there is strong evidence that it is opposite what Fox reported here, it leaves much to be questioned.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending