Connect with us

Latest

Video

News

Hillary Clinton now blames “Macedonia” for election loss, in bizarre onstage interview

“I Was The Victim”: Hillary Clinton.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

34,049 Views

Let’s begin with the irony of it all.

Hillary Clinton explaining away her pathetic election campaign at a tech conference.

Hillary Clinton, the most inept politician when it comes to tech, speaking at a tech conference.

The candidate who had insecure email servers sitting in her basement, speaking at a tech conference. The candidate whose campaign manager fell for ridiculous phishing scams and used the word “password” as his actual gmail password, speaking at a tech conference.

And of course HRC told the tech audience that her election loss had nothing to do with her stupidity, laziness and complete ignorance of all things tech, but everything to do with Russia, Comey, sexism, and now Macedonia.

We begin with Zerohedge’s coverage of Hillary’s delusion…

Earlier today Hillary Clinton offered up what some have described as one of the most delusional interviews of all time at Recode’s CodeCon conference, in which she blamed everything and everyone, including but certainly not limited to: FBI Director Comey, “1,000s of Russian agents”, right-wing media outlets, Russia, sexism, WikiLeaks, Russia, a funding deficit at the DNC, the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, the New York Times (yes, the NYT) …oh, and Russia, for her 2016 election loss. And while she certainly “takes responsibility” for every decision she made, Hillary desperately wants you to understand that’s not why she lost…because, you know, Russia.

“I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that’s not why I lost.”

Of course, in all of her rambling, Hillary never offered up a viable conclusion on why “Russian hackers” were only able to sway voters in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania but not in places like Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, states where anti-Russian tinfoil must be impervious.

The following tweet pretty much sums up Hillary’s bizarre interview.

Here are some more details of Hillary’s ontage breakdown (courtesy Zerohedge)…


1. Hillary first blames Russia and Macedonia for her election loss.

Hillary would like for you to know that Putin’s primary goal is to topple the U.S.

Moreover, it’s almost certain that he colluded directly with Trump in this effort, because how else could Russian agents possibly know that American’s might like to better understand Hillary’s efforts to collude with the DNC to undermine the campaign of her competitor or how she used TV personalities to steal debate questions in advance… please, that kind of insight could only come from Trump himself.

Here is what HRC said regarding Russia’s master plan…

“It’s important that Americans…understand that Putin wants to bring us down. He was an old KGB agent.”

“We saw evidence of [Russian involvement] and we could track it. But they were shooed away.”

“The Russians are increasingly..launching cyber attacks. A lot of the information they’ve stolen they use for internal purposes. So this was different because they went public.”

“That was the conclusion. I think it’s fair to ask how did that actually influence the campaign and how did they know what messages to deliver. Who told them? Who were they coordinating with or colluding with? I’m leaning Trump.”

“Within one hour of the Access Hollywood tapes being leaked, the Russians or say Wikileaks — same thing — dumped the John Podesta emails.”

“The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

Hillary continued on with her delusion referencing FYROM (Macedonia) in the plot…

“And I think it’s fair to ask, how did that actually influence the campaign, and how did they know what messages to deliver? Who told them? Who were they coordinating with, or colluding with?”

“Because the Russians historically in the last couple of decades, and then increasingly, you know, are launching cyber-attacks and they are stealing vast amounts of information and a lot of the information they’ve stolen, they’ve used for internal purposes to affect markets, to affect the intelligence services, et cetera.”

“So this was different because they went public, and they were conveying this weaponized information and the content of it, and they were running, y’know there’s all these stories, about y’know, guys over in Macedonia who are running these fake news sites, and you know I’ve seen them now, and you sit there and it looks like you know sort of low level CNN operation, or a fake newspaper.”

“So the Russians, in my opinion and based on the intel and counter-intel people I talk to, could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided.”

Guided by Americans…meaning guided by Trump, is the conclusion in HRC’s twisted head.

And after this elaborate Kremlin plot was explained by Hillary, the failed candidate noted that the content of her emails “was the biggest nothing burger ever.”

“My email account was turned into the biggest scandal since Lord knows when. And, you know, in the book I’m just using everything that anybody else said about it besides me to basically say this was the biggest nothing-burger ever. It was a mistake. I’ve said it was a mistake, and obviously if I could turn the clock back I wouldn’t have done it in the first place. But the way that it was used was very damaging.”

Just so everyone understands...the Russians formulated the perfect plan to destroy Hillary and American Democracy on top of “nothing burger” email content.

Zerohedge adds that even though most of the stories that we and other media outlets covered came directly from the DNC’s and John Podesta’s own emails, Hillary would like for you to know that it was all “fake news”… just like it was “fake news” when Donna Brazile told everyone that she didn’t share debate questions with Hillary.

“They were run of the mill emails. Stuff that were so common. Within one hour they dumped them and then began to weaponize them. They had their allies like Infowars say the most outlandish, absurd lies you could imagine. They had to be ready for that.”

“That really influenced the information people were relying on. If you look at Facebook the vast majority of the news items posted were fake. They were connected to, as we now know, the 1000 Russian agents… They were connected to the bots. It was such a new experience. I understand why people on Facebook would think ‘oh Hillary Clinton did that. I did not know that.'”

“Fake news…lies that’s a good word too. The other side was using content that was just flat out false and delivering it in a very personalized way. Above the radar screen and below.”


2. Hillary then moved on to blaming former FBI Director James Comey…

Moreover, despite what you may remember from that original Comey press conference last summer, Hillary wants you to know that she was “very responsible and not at all careless” when it came to the handling of her State Department emails…

“Well if you went all the way back, doing things that others have done before was no longer acceptable. I didn’t break any rule nobody said don’t do this. I was very responsible and not at all careless. You end up with a situation that was exploited.”


3. Hillary then proceeded to blame the media, that overwhelmingly supported her throughout the entire campaign.

Meanwhile, despite pretty much every major media outlet, with the exception of Fox News, dedicating their networks to cheerleading for the Hillary Clinton campaign, Hillary was also convinced that she lost because CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, Washington Post, etc, etc, etc are not as “effective” as the “media forces on the Republican side”… or Russian propaganda for that matter: apparently RT’s YouTube channel has greater reach and more influence than virtually every paper of record in the US.

“Here’s a really telling statistic that has been validated. I had this old fashioned idea that it would matter what I would do as president. We had a great tech program and a really good set of policies. In 2008 which as the last time you had a contested election, the policies put forth by President Obama, Senator McCain got 222 minutes of airtime. In 2016 despite my best efforts, we got 32 minutes, total, over 18 months.”

“Media forces on the Republican side are entrenched and very effective. They’re beginning to call the shots on those local stations. Local TV is still incredibly powerful.”


4. Sexism…Hillary finally blamed good old fashion misogyny for her election loss, forgetting that it was the boys of Goldman who paid her millions of dollars to speak.

“I have been on many speaking platforms with many men who are in office or running for office. And the crowd gets you going and I watch my male counterparts and they beat the podium and they yell and the crowd loves it. I have tried that and it’s been less than successful.”

“Men got paid for the speeches they made…I got paid for the speeches I made.”

“I have to say, Walt I never thought someone would throw out my entire career…because I made a couple of speeches.”

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
seby
Guest
seby

Sounds like some Albanian gangsters just made a big contribution to clinton’s bank accounts.

Дарко Ѓорѓиев
Guest
Дарко Ѓорѓиев

It’s “blames” Macedonia, mate. correct it.

swamp chicken
Guest
swamp chicken

I know a woman who talks like Hillary, but she is in a safe institutional setting where she can be medicated.

SumGuy
Guest
SumGuy

I wonder if the elections were actually a topic to be covered in the speech or if Clinton went into a tirade of her own. Looks like every time she appears in public she can’t help but rave and complain about how Russia, Trump, Facebook, the aliens from Zeta Reticuli, Cartman from South Park and Wile E. Coyote stole her election. Sounds like she’s getting more and more senile by the day.

Peter Bozich
Guest
Peter Bozich

Clinton should be thrown into jail and fed only bread and water, she is a nutjob.

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Oh, be nice. A padded room with bars and locks will do.

GaryAus
Guest
GaryAus

My God she’s funny. Where does she perform next ?

ScienceABC123
Guest
ScienceABC123

Keep burning those bridges Hillary, keep burning them.

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Preferably while she’s on one.

colum
Guest
colum

Bitch has lost the plot. I know that line is long passed cliche but Lord Pepe help this woman and retire her from world view. To all the hateful bastards who put her on show (I’m talking to you the regressive left) we’ve had our fill and will take no more. Let her rest or let us put her down, your choice.

Shadilay.

Mel10
Guest
Mel10

I hope she runs again, It’ll be hysterical to observe her complete and total humiliation.

Zeke Clinton
Guest
Zeke Clinton

Can you imagine that this woman might have been elected President? America dodged a bullet.

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Dodged a bullet with Insane McCain too. Living in America is too close to playing Russian Roulette to my liking.

Jerry Tribble
Guest
Jerry Tribble

Brain damage from her fall. The world is against her she thinks. No one loves me. Except her drinking buddies and lesbians down at little billie’s Bar and Grill.

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Even Huma went scurrying back to the perv. Guess she figured he was the saner of the two.

David Schultz
Guest
David Schultz

What the heck is she talking about? First Russia now Macedonia? Perhaps she could supply a link or something?

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Isn’t it obvious? Any nation not eagerly courting NATO was hosting a nationwide den of hackers out to get her.

[twilight zone theme music]

David Schultz
Guest
David Schultz

LOL! They are living in another dimension.

FlorianGeyer
Guest
FlorianGeyer

Has any empire in history been as collectively insane as the US Empire ?

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Well, Caligula and Nero ran close seconds.

Goran Batovanja
Guest
Goran Batovanja

so Russians do not have right to free speach? Or is it just :”sorry teacher, but dog eat my homework”?

Michael DeStefano
Guest
Michael DeStefano

Finally time to book a padded room at the Hebejebes Hilton for Ms. Meltdown.

mick
Guest
mick

Clearly a psychopathy right there!
Just a bad loser.

Acki
Guest
Acki

The great nation of 2 million people that live in Republic of Macedonia choose the President of US ??? Hillary look in the mirror and there you can find the reason and your worst enemy why did you lose.

Bruce Burstein
Guest
Bruce Burstein

“So this was different because they went public, and they were conveying this weaponized information and the content of it, and they were running, y’know there’s all these stories, about y’know, guys over in Macedonia who are running these fake news sites, and you know I’ve seen them now, and you sit there and it looks like you know sort of low level CNN operation, or a fake newspaper.” Holy……. Batman! This has to be a joke. Macedonia has a population less than New Mexico and a total GDP just a bit more than Hillary’s presidential campaign spending. English is… Read more »

Latest

Ukraine Wants Nuclear Weapons: Will the West Bow to the Regime in Kiev?

Efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation are one of the few issues on which the great powers agree, intending to continue to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and to prevent new entrants into the exclusive nuclear club.

Published

on

Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


The former Ukrainian envoy to NATO, Major General Petro Garashchuk, recently stated in an interview with Obozrevatel TV:

“I’ll say it once more. We have the ability to develop and produce our own nuclear weapons, currently available in the world, such as the one that was built in the former USSR and which is now in independent Ukraine, located in the city of Dnipro (former Dnipropetrovsk) that can produce these kinds of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Neither the United States, nor Russia, nor China have produced a missile named Satan … At the same time, Ukraine does not have to worry about international sanctions when creating these nuclear weapons.”

The issue of nuclear weapons has always united the great powers, especially following the signing of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The decision to reduce the number of nuclear weapons towards the end of the Cold War went hand in hand with the need to prevent the spread of such weapons of mass destruction to other countries in the best interests of humanity. During the final stages of the Cold War, the scientific community expended great effort on impressing upon the American and Soviet leadership how a limited nuclear exchange would wipe out humanity. Moscow and Washington thus began START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) negotiations to reduce the risk of a nuclear winter. Following the dissolution of the USSR, the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances persuaded Ukraine to relinquish its nuclear weapons and accede to the NPT in exchange for security assurances from its signatories.

Ukraine has in recent years begun entertaining the possibility of returning to the nuclear fold, especially in light of North Korea’s recent actions. Kim Jong-un’s lesson seems to be that a nuclear deterrent remains the only way of guaranteeing complete protection against a regional hegemon. The situation in Ukraine, however, differs from that of North Korea, including in terms of alliances and power relations. Kiev’s government came into power as a result of a coup d’etat carried out by extremist nationalist elements who seek their inspiration from Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera. The long arm of NATO has always been deeply involved in the dark machinations that led to Poroshenko’s ascendency to the Ukrainian presidency. From a geopolitical point of view, NATO’s operation in Ukraine (instigating a civil war in the wake of a coup) follows in the footsteps of what happened in Georgia. NATO tends to organize countries with existing anti-Russia sentiments to channel their Russophobia into concrete actions that aim to undermine Moscow. The war in the Donbass is a prime example.

However, Ukraine has been unable to subdue the rebels in the Donbass region, the conflict freezing into a stalemate and the popularity of the Kiev government falling as the population’s quality of life experiences a precipitous decline. The United States and the European Union have not kept their promises, leaving Poroshenko desperate and tempted to resort to provocations like the recent Kerch strait incident or such as those that are apparently already in the works, as recently reported by the DPR authorities.

The idea of Ukraine resuming its production of nuclear weapons is currently being floated by minor figures, but it could take hold in the coming months, especially if the conflict continues in its frozen state and Kiev becomes frustrated and desperate. The neoconservative wing of the American ruling elite, absolutely committed to the destruction of the Russian Federation, could encourage Kiev along this path, in spite of the incalculable risks involved. The EU, on the other hand, would likely be terrified at the prospect, which would also place it between a rock and a hard place. Kiev, on one side, would be able to extract from the EU much needed economic assistance in exchange for not going nuclear, while on the other side the neocons would be irresponsibly egging the Ukrainians on.

Moscow, if faced with such a possibility, would not just stand there. In spite of Russia having good relations with North Korea, it did not seem too excited at the prospect of having a nuclear-armed neighbor. With Ukraine, the response would be much more severe. A nuclear-armed Ukraine would be a red line for Moscow, just as Crimea and Sevastopol were. It is worth remembering the Russian president’s words when referring to the possibility of a NATO invasion of Crimea during the 2014 coup:

“We were ready to do it [putting Russia’s nuclear arsenal on alert]. Russian people live there, they are in danger, we cannot leave them. It was not us who committed to coup, it was the nationalists and people with extreme beliefs. I do not think this is actually anyone’s wish – to turn it into a global conflict.”

As Kiev stands on the precipice, it will be good for the neocons, the neoliberals and their European lackeys to consider the consequences of advising Kiev to jump or not. Giving the nuclear go-ahead to a Ukrainian leadership so unstable and detached from reality may just be the spark that sets off Armageddon.

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

Latest

Mike Pompeo lays out his vision for American exceptionalism (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 158.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and International Affairs and Security Analyst via Moscow, Mark Sleboda take a look at Mike Pompeo’s shocking Brussels speech, where the U.S. Secretary of State took aim at the European Union and United Nations, citing such institutions as outdated and poorly managed, in need of a new dogma that places America at its epicenter.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Speaking in Brussels, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo unwittingly underscored why nobody takes the United States seriously on the international stage. Via The Council on Foreign Relations


In a disingenuous speech at the German Marshall Fund, Pompeo depicted the transactional and hypernationalist Trump administration as “rallying the noble nations of the world to build a new liberal order.” He did so while launching gratuitous attacks on the European Union, United Nations, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund (IMF)—pillars of the existing postwar order the United States did so much to create. He remained silent, naturally, on the body blows that the current administration has delivered to its erstwhile allies and partners, and to the institutions that once upon a time permitted the United States to legitimate rather than squander its international leadership.

In Pompeo’s telling, Donald J. Trump is simply seeking a return to the world that former Secretary of State George Marshall helped to create. In the decades after 1945, the United States “underwrote new institutions” and “entered into treaties to codify Western values of freedom and human rights.” So doing, the United States “won the Cold War” and—thanks to the late President George H. W. Bush, “we won the peace” that followed. “This is the type of leadership that President Trump is boldly reasserting.”

That leadership is needed because the United States “allowed this liberal order to begin to corrode” once the bipolar conflict ended. “Multilateralism has too often become viewed as an end unto itself,” Pompeo explained. “The more treaties we sign, the safer we supposedly are. The more bureaucrats we have, the better the job gets done.” What is needed is a multilateralism that once again places the nation-state front and center.

Leave aside for the moment that nobody actually believes what Pompeo alleges: that multilateralism should be an end in itself; that paper commitments are credible absent implementation, verification, and enforcement; or that the yardstick of success is how many bureaucrats get hired. What sensible people do believe is that multilateral cooperation is often (though not always) the best way for nations to advance their interests in an interconnected world of complicated problems. Working with others is typically superior to unilateralism, since going it alone leaves the United States with the choice of trying to do everything itself (with uncertain results) or doing nothing. Multilateralism also provides far more bang for the buck than President Trump’s favored approach to diplomacy, bilateralism.

Much of Pompeo’s address was a selective and tendentious critique of international institutions that depicts them as invariably antithetical to national sovereignty. Sure, he conceded, the European Union has “delivered a great deal of prosperity to the continent.” But it has since gone badly off track, as the “political wake-up call” of Brexit showed. All this raised a question in his mind: “Is the EU ensuring that the interests of countries and their citizens are placed before those of bureaucrats and Brussels?”

The answer, as one listener shouted out, is “Yes!” The secretary, like many U.S. conservative critics of European integration, is unaware that EU member states continue to hold the lion’s share of power in the bloc, which remains more intergovernmental than supranational. Pompeo seems equally unaware of how disastrously Brexit is playing out. With each passing day, the costs of this catastrophic, self-inflicted wound are clearer. In its quest for complete policy autonomy—on ostensible “sovereignty” grounds—the United Kingdom will likely have to accept, as the price for EU market access, an entire body of law and regulations that it will have no say in shaping. So much for advancing British sovereignty.

Pompeo similarly mischaracterizes the World Bank and IMF as having gone badly off track. “Today, these institutions often counsel countries who have mismanaged their economic affairs to impose austerity measures that inhibit growth and crowd out private sector actors.” This is an odd, hybrid critique. It combines a shopworn, leftist criticism from the 1990s—that the international financial institutions (IFIs) punish poor countries with structural adjustment programs—with the conservative accusation that the IFIs are socialist, big-government behemoths. Both are ridiculous caricatures. They ignore how much soul-searching the IFIs have done since the 1990s, as well as how focused they are on nurturing an enabling institutional environment for the private sector in partner countries.

Pompeo also aims his blunderbuss at the United Nations. He complains that the United Nations’ “peacekeeping missions drag on for decades, no closer to peace,” ignoring the indispensable role that blue helmets play in preventing atrocities, as well as a recent Government Accountability Office report documenting how cost-effective such operations are compared to U.S. troops. Similarly, Pompeo claims, “The UN’s climate-related treaties are viewed by some nations simply as a vehicle to redistribute wealth”—an accusation that is both unsubstantiated and ignores the urgent need to mobilize global climate financing to save the planet.

Bizarrely, Pompeo also turns his sights on the Organization of American States (OAS) and the African Union (AU), for alleged shortcomings. Has the OAS, he asks, done enough “to promote its four pillars of democracy, human rights, security, and economic development?” Um, no. Could that have something to do with the lack of U.S. leadership in the Americas on democracy and human rights? Yes. Might it have helped if the Trump administration had filled the position of assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs before October 15 of this year? Probably.

Equally puzzling is Pompeo’s single line riff on the AU. “In Africa, does the African Union advance the mutual interest of its nation-state members?” Presumably the answer is yes, or its members would be headed for the door. The AU continues to struggle in financing its budget, but it has made great strides since its founding in 2002 to better advance security, stability, and good governance on the continent.

“International bodies must help facilitate cooperation that bolsters the security and values of the free world, or they must be reformed or eliminated,” Pompeo declared. Sounds reasonable. But where is this “free world” of which the secretary speaks, and what standing does the United States today have to defend, much less reform it? In the two years since he took office, Donald Trump has never expressed any interest in defending the international order, much less “returning [the United States] to its traditional, central leadership role in the world,” as Pompeo claims. Indeed, the phrase “U.S. leadership” has rarely escaped Trump’s lips, and he has gone out of his way to alienate longstanding Western allies and partners in venues from NATO to the G7.

When he looks at the world, the president cares only about what’s in it for the United States (and, naturally, for him). That cynicism explains the president’s deafening silence on human rights violations and indeed his readiness to cozy up to strongmen and killers from Vladimir Putin to Rodrigo Duterte to Mohammed bin Salman to too many more to list. Given Trump’s authoritarian sympathies and instincts, Pompeo’s warnings about “Orwellian human rights violations” in China and “suppressed opposition voices” in Russia ring hollow.

“The central question that we face,” Pompeo asked in Brussels, “is the question of whether the system as currently configured, as it exists today—does it work? Does it work for all the people of the world?” The answer, of course, is not as well as it should, and not for nearly enough of them. But if the secretary is seeking to identify impediments to a better functioning multilateral system, he can look to his left in his next Cabinet meeting.

“Principled realism” is the label Pompeo has given Trump’s foreign policy. Alas, it betrays few principles and its connection to reality is tenuous. The president has abandoned any pursuit of universal values, and his single-minded obsession to “reassert our sovereignty” (as Pompeo characterizes it) is actually depriving the United States of joining with others to build the prosperous, secure, and sustainable world that Americans want.

“Bad actors have exploited our lack of leadership for their own gain,” the secretary of state declared in Belgium. “This is the poisoned fruit of American retreat.” How true. Pompeo’s next sentence—“President Trump is determined to reverse that”—was less persuasive.

 

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

Latest

Russia calls on US to put a leash on Petro Poroshenko

The West’s pass for Mr. Poroshenko may blow up in NATO’s and the US’s face if the Ukrainian President tries to start a war with Russia.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Russia called on Washington not to ignore the Poroshenko directives creating an active military buildup along the Ukrainian-Donbass frontier, this buildup consisting of Ukrainian forces and right-wing ultranationalists, lest it “trigger the implementation of a bloody scenario”, according to a Dec 11 report from TASS.

The [Russian] Embassy [to the US] urges the US State Department to recognize the presence of US instructors in the zone of combat actions, who are involved in a command and staff and field training of Ukraine’s assault airborne brigades. “We expect that the US will bring to reason its proteges. Their aggressive plans are not only doomed to failure but also run counter to the statements of the administration on its commitment to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine by political and diplomatic means,” the statement said.

This warning came after Eduard Basurin, the deputy defense minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic noted that the Ukrainian army was massing troops and materiel for a possible large-scale offensive at the Mariupol section of the contact line in Donbass. According to Basurin, this action is expected to take place on 14 December. TASS offered more details:

According to the DPR’s reconnaissance data, Ukrainian troops plan to seize the DPR’s Novoazovsky and Temanovsky districts and take control over the border section with Russia. The main attack force of over 12,000 servicemen has been deployed along the contact line near the settlements of Novotroitskoye, Shirokino, and Rovnopol. Moreover, more than 50 tanks, 40 multiple missile launcher systems, 180 artillery systems and mortars have been reportedly pulled to the area, Basurin added. Besides, 12 BM-30 Smerch heavy multiple rocket launchers have been sent near Volodarsky.

The DPR has warned about possible provocations plotted by Ukrainian troops several times. Thus, in early December, the DPR’s defense ministry cited reconnaissance data indicating that the Ukrainian military was planning to stage an offensive and deliver an airstrike. At a Contact Group meeting on December 5, DPR’s Foreign Minister Natalia Nikonorova raised the issue of Kiev’s possible use of chemical weapons in the conflict area.

This is a continuation of the reported buildup The Duran reported in this article linked here, and it is a continuation of the full-scale drama that started with the Kerch Strait incident, which itself appears to have been staged by Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko. Following that incident, the president was able to get about half of Ukraine placed under a 30-day period of martial law, citing “imminent Russian aggression.”

President Poroshenko is arguably a dangerous man. He appears to be desperate to maintain a hold on power, though his approval numbers and support is abysmally low in Ukraine. While he presents himself as a hero, agitating for armed conflict with Russia and simultaneously interfering in the affairs of the Holy Eastern Orthodox Church, he is actually one of the most dangerous leaders the world has to contend with, precisely because he is unfit to lead.

Such men and women are dangerous because their desperation makes them short-sighted, only concerned about their power and standing.

An irony about this matter is that President Poroshenko appears to be exactly what the EuroMaidan was “supposed” to free Ukraine of; that is, a stooge puppet leader that marches to orders from a foreign power and does nothing for the improvement of the nation and its citizens.

The ouster of Viktor Yanukovich was seen as the sure ticket to “freedom from Russia” for Ukraine, and it may well have been that Mr. Yanukovich was an incompetent leader. However, his removal resulted in a tryannical regíme coming into power, that resulting in the secession of two Ukrainian regions into independent republics and a third secession of strategically super-important Crimea, who voted in a referendum to rejoin Russia.

While this activity was used by the West to try to bolster its own narrative that Russia remains the evil henchman in Europe, the reality of life in Ukraine doesn’t match this allegation at all. A nation that demonstrates such behavior shows that there are many problems, and the nature of these secessions points at a great deal of fear from Russian-speaking Ukrainian people about the government that is supposed to be their own.

President Poroshenko presents a face to the world that the West is apparently willing to support, but the in-country approval of this man as leader speaks volumes. The West’s blind support of him “against Russia” may be one of the most tragic errors yet in Western foreign policy.

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