It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
demus
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
so they could choose to stay part of the Ukraine with broad autonomy.
but that is not what propaganda told you, I know - it's hard.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
edit on 3-4-2014 by demus because: misusing breakaway bloodcells
DJW001
demus
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
so they could choose to stay part of the Ukraine with broad autonomy.
but that is not what propaganda told you, I know - it's hard.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
edit on 3-4-2014 by demus because: misusing breakaway bloodcells
Please post a scan of one of these actual ballots, so we can see for ourselves that the western media are lying.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?"
demus
DJW001
demus
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
so they could choose to stay part of the Ukraine with broad autonomy.
but that is not what propaganda told you, I know - it's hard.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
edit on 3-4-2014 by demus because: misusing breakaway bloodcells
Please post a scan of one of these actual ballots, so we can see for ourselves that the western media are lying.
oh, they are not lying, of course not, that would be too obvious: they are just distorting the truth; it worked on you didn't it?
you trust telegraph?
The title is little bit different than the story inside, they do it all the time:
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?"
But the status quo – remaining a fully fledged province of Ukraine, and rejecting the decisions of a separatist regional government that came to power little more than two weeks ago, was not on the ballot paper. Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
DJW001
demus
DJW001
demus
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
so they could choose to stay part of the Ukraine with broad autonomy.
but that is not what propaganda told you, I know - it's hard.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
edit on 3-4-2014 by demus because: misusing breakaway bloodcells
Please post a scan of one of these actual ballots, so we can see for ourselves that the western media are lying.
oh, they are not lying, of course not, that would be too obvious: they are just distorting the truth; it worked on you didn't it?
you trust telegraph?
The title is little bit different than the story inside, they do it all the time:
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?"
Do you trust The Telegraph?
But the status quo – remaining a fully fledged province of Ukraine, and rejecting the decisions of a separatist regional government that came to power little more than two weeks ago, was not on the ballot paper. Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
Your own source.
Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
demus
DJW001
demus
DJW001
demus
DJW001
reply to post by demus
everything correct, only you forgot to mention the referendum.
citizens of the region that already had some autonomy decided to join Russia.
How many marked the NO box? Oh, wait, there was no 'no' option. Do you consider that to be a fair vote? No-one but Russia does.
so they could choose to stay part of the Ukraine with broad autonomy.
but that is not what propaganda told you, I know - it's hard.
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?" The first option would restore Crimea back to being part of Russia again, as it was before Nikita Kruschev, who was half-Ukrainian himself, gave it as a gift to Ukraine in 1954. The second option of the 1992 constitution would grant the peninsula almost total autonomy while remaining – on paper at least – part of Ukraine.
edit on 3-4-2014 by demus because: misusing breakaway bloodcells
Please post a scan of one of these actual ballots, so we can see for ourselves that the western media are lying.
oh, they are not lying, of course not, that would be too obvious: they are just distorting the truth; it worked on you didn't it?
you trust telegraph?
The title is little bit different than the story inside, they do it all the time:
Each ballot paper offered voters two options. One was: "Do you support Crimea's unification with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" The other was: "Do you support the reinstatement of the 1992 constitution of the autonomous republic of Crimea and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?"
Do you trust The Telegraph?
But the status quo – remaining a fully fledged province of Ukraine, and rejecting the decisions of a separatist regional government that came to power little more than two weeks ago, was not on the ballot paper. Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
Your own source.
I proved my point.
you said there was only option to join Russia.
that is not the truth.
there was option to join Russia or to stay a part of Ukraine with autonomy.
telegraph admits:
Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
DJW001
Do you trust The Telegraph?
But the status quo – remaining a fully fledged province of Ukraine, and rejecting the decisions of a separatist regional government that came to power little more than two weeks ago, was not on the ballot paper. Not that it would have stood much chance if it had been.
I proved my point.
you said there was only option to join Russia.
that is not the truth.
there was option to join Russia or to stay a part of Ukraine with autonomy.
GargIndia
reply to post by DJW001
Your point does not help. There is a political authority in Crimea which acted in a certain way due to wishes of the majority of Crimean people.
How do you claim to know the wishes of the Crimean people?
There was a referendum because these people wanted to leave Ukraine. Why they wanted to leave Ukraine? Because the economy of Crimea is heavily dependent on Russia and people are mostly ethnic Russians. Ukraine is financially ruined and socially in chaos.
dragonridr
GargIndia
reply to post by DJW001
Your point does not help. There is a political authority in Crimea which acted in a certain way due to wishes of the majority of Crimean people.
How do you claim to know the wishes of the Crimean people?
There was a referendum because these people wanted to leave Ukraine. Why they wanted to leave Ukraine? Because the economy of Crimea is heavily dependent on Russia and people are mostly ethnic Russians. Ukraine is financially ruined and socially in chaos.
Well the vote was a joke because no one made sure the voting was fair. The UN observers were not allowed to enter. You had people who refused to vote because they didnt think it was legitimate. And if that wasnt enough CNN has video of a man stuffing a ballot box he thought he was so important he voted multiple times.So the out come was decided by a few for the many. If they wanted it to seem legal they did a poor job.
cosmonova
dragonridr
GargIndia
reply to post by DJW001
Your point does not help. There is a political authority in Crimea which acted in a certain way due to wishes of the majority of Crimean people.
How do you claim to know the wishes of the Crimean people?
There was a referendum because these people wanted to leave Ukraine. Why they wanted to leave Ukraine? Because the economy of Crimea is heavily dependent on Russia and people are mostly ethnic Russians. Ukraine is financially ruined and socially in chaos.
Well the vote was a joke because no one made sure the voting was fair. The UN observers were not allowed to enter. You had people who refused to vote because they didnt think it was legitimate. And if that wasnt enough CNN has video of a man stuffing a ballot box he thought he was so important he voted multiple times.So the out come was decided by a few for the many. If they wanted it to seem legal they did a poor job.
They invited OSCE but they declined
'On March 10, 2014 the de facto Prime Minister of Crimea, Sergei Aksionov, made an unofficial verbal invitation to OSCE to monitor the plebiscite as well.[117][118][119] However, later in the day, an OSCE spokeswoman said that Crimea did not have the authority to invite the organization into the region as it is not a fully-fledged state and, therefore, incapable of requesting services provided exclusively to OSCE members.[118] On March 11, the OSCE chair, Switzerland's Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter, declared the referendum as unconstitutional and therefore the OSCE would not send observers.[120]'
en.wikipedia.org...edit on 4-4-2014 by cosmonova because: (no reason given)
WARSAW -- A mission of observers from the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has been stopped from entering Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula by unidentified men in military fatigues, Poland's defense minister said.
"The mission has been detained, they cannot go further. They landed in Odessa and they were traveling by car from Odessa towards the Crimean Peninsula, but they were detained by unidentified men in fatigues," the defense minister, Tomasz Siemoniak, told reporters.
The OSCE military observer mission of 37 people from 18 countries, including the United States, was stopped at the Crimean border, organization spokesperson Tatyana Baeva said in Vienna. She said it wasn't clear who had stopped the mission, which had been formed at Ukraine's request to help monitor the tense situation in Crimea.
www.cbsnews.com...
DJW001
reply to post by demus
I proved my point.
you said there was only option to join Russia.
that is not the truth.
there was option to join Russia or to stay a part of Ukraine with autonomy.
There was no option to remain independent of both Ukraine and Russia. Why not, do you suppose? And where is an actual scan of a ballot so we can see what it really says? Is that top secret for some reason?
GargIndia
reply to post by DJW001
Your point does not help. There is a political authority in Crimea which acted in a certain way due to wishes of the majority of Crimean people.
How do you claim to know the wishes of the Crimean people?
There was a referendum because these people wanted to leave Ukraine. Why they wanted to leave Ukraine? Because the economy of Crimea is heavily dependent on Russia and people are mostly ethnic Russians. Ukraine is financially ruined and socially in chaos.
demus
reply to post by VirusGuard
I agree and have already mentioned it.
the title is definitely wrong but it's OK to stay - as only to show how reality get distorted so easily sometimes.
show me the proof of intimidation.
do you really think they had to intimidate Crimeans to get majority vote for joining Russia?
they were welcomed out of their bases.