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.

 

Russia declares war on Ukraine. Live updates from inside Ukraine

page: 417
367
<< 414  415  416    418  419  420 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmonova

I just wonder why USS Donald Cook went straight to Romanian port after this event? Maybe they were a bit short on toilet paper supply?


I have seen boats return to port for less.




posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme
a reply to: cosmonova

Your 'Junta' is made up of the same legislature that was in place before 21 February.

The only difference is that the ultra corrupt president whose 'family' miraculously profited by billions after his taking office has absconded to Russia...

www.spiegel.de...
en.novayagazeta.ru...

( as he was ordered to by the Russian FSB after agreeing to unfavorable terms to opposition during 21 February negotiations - online.wsj.com... )



'Ukraine's new government are a varied lot. Made up of 21 cabinet members, many are from Arseniy Yatsenyuk's Fatherland party. A handful are drawn from the far-right nationalist Svoboda party. There is also a smattering of new faces, mainly activists who were prominent in the "Euromaidan" protests in Kiev and journalists.'

www.theguardian.com...

I would call them 'Made in Maidan' Government or Junta (considering it was a military type coup in place)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: zilebeliveunknown

I did give you an answer... The same answer was just given here -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Maybe you should read it as it will resolve the confusion you seem to be having on the difference between impeachment, which is valid, and your non existent coup, which for some reason you think is somewhere in the constitution. If you took the time to read the agreement and the 2004 constitution, in addition to the streamlined law that was used under that constitution, in addition to the Russian article discussing this very possibility of Yanukovych being impeached just after the 2004 constitution and streamlined impeachment laws were passed, you would not be stuck on this notion of an armed coup and somehow trying to figure out where a coup is authorized under the Ukraine Constitution.

You are confused in that respect because you refuse to face the fact he was lawfully impeached by a lawful government. Since you are incapable of accepting that because of your "handlers" not allowing you to think for yourself, you keep this idiotic notion that somehow the Ukraine constitution somehow allows for a coup to keep going.

Even though there were no armed men in parliament the day of the vote.
Even though no armed individuals forced any members of parliament to vote one way or the other.
Even though no armed men took any members of parliament into custody.
Even though the former President Yanukovych stated time and again to media he never fled.

You are still stuck on the baseless accusation of an armed coup in Kiev when in fact one never occurred. That means your question about the constitution and a coup is irrelevant, as I stated the first few times you tried, unsuccessfully, to argue the point.

Now, can we move on from this or are you gonna go down swinging at air?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmonova

and all of them put into place by Parliament, which was elected by the Ukrainian people in 20102, which the Russian government officially commented on, noting the election was valid and fair, another point you guys ignore.. All of them put into place per the Ukrainian constitution, hence the reason they have acting in their titles.

Its also the reason, the Ukrainian constitution, the presidential elections were moved.

If any of you bothered to read it you would see once the President is removed, a vote has to be held within 90 days.


edit on 23-4-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme

originally posted by: cosmonova

I just wonder why USS Donald Cook went straight to Romanian port after this event? Maybe they were a bit short on toilet paper supply?


I have seen boats return to port for less.


Or they were heading back to port when it occurred, and that port is the one they are stationed out of.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


and your non existent coup, which for some reason you think is somewhere in the constitution.


There you go, I knew you'd slip again.
It was you saying it's a coup, but when I asked you to show me how coup is legal and allowed by Ukrainian constitution, you changed your story.
Thanks for that.
We can move now...



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: Xcathdra


and your non existent coup, which for some reason you think is somewhere in the constitution.


There you go, I knew you'd slip again.
It was you saying it's a coup, but when I asked you to show me how coup is legal and allowed by Ukrainian constitution, you changed your story.
Thanks for that.
We can move now...


no.. read your rants on the topic..
you kept calling it a coup.. I kept calling it lawful.

Every time I posted the information about the change in constitution, you kept demanding to know where in the constitution it allowed a coup.

nice try though... and based on my posting on this topic a pathetic attempt to change your position. Even more so since I have been telling you it has not been a coup from the start while you and others keep referring to it as a coup.
edit on 23-4-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: cosmonova

and all of them put into place by Parliament, which was elected by the Ukrainian people in 20102, which the Russian government officially commented on, noting the election was valid and fair, another point you guys ignore.. All of them put into place per the Ukrainian constitution, hence the reason they have acting in their titles.

Its also the reason, the Ukrainian constitution, the presidential elections were moved.

If any of you bothered to read it you would see once the President is removed, a vote has to be held within 90 days.




no one is talking about members of parliament, those guys were in opposition. We are talking about government, which came in power through violent coup. If more people voted for those in opposition everything would be fair and legal, they would form a legal government. But somehow they did not win majority of people's votes and they became opposition.
In order to grab a power against people's will they have decided to do it violently and they have impeached the president against constitution which says that president can be impeached only if treason or crime has been committed. I have not seen any treason or crime, have you?
So we have illegal government in power and legal president who had to escape to Russia in order to save his own life,
regardless that all sides have signed agreement to stop the violence prior that. And we all know that Junta has broken that agreement the very next day enticing even more violence.

And lets not pretend here, it was all endorsed by cookie lady Nuland, warmonger McCain who were regular visitors at Maidan at the time. All with one goal in mind. Working for implementation of US strategic interest No1-Weakening Russia's economic growth and eliminating dependence on Russia's oil in gas. Period.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown

There you go, I knew you'd slip again.
It was you saying it's a coup, but when I asked you to show me how coup is legal and allowed by Ukrainian constitution, you changed your story.
Thanks for that.
We can move now...


Sorry Zile my dear, but that does not make much sense even if you are arguing semantics.


Xcathdra's point is that the president was removed by a legislative procedure of impeachment as defined by the constitution and therefore could not be considered a 'coup' — i.e. a violent seizure of government.

There simply was no armed insurrection against the executive branch. Yanukovych and his security simply disappeared.

But of course Russia knew nothing of his whereabouts. After all, it is very easy for a head of state to cross your border unnoticed.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: Xcathdra


and your non existent coup, which for some reason you think is somewhere in the constitution.


There you go, I knew you'd slip again.
It was you saying it's a coup, but when I asked you to show me how coup is legal and allowed by Ukrainian constitution, you changed your story.
Thanks for that.
We can move now...


He said "A NON EXISTENT COUP" which means IT WAS NEVER A COUP. reading comprehension goes a long way to making your thoughts come across clear. The 2004 constitution allows the streamline impeachment that was handed to the former president he said. And quoting a entire constitution is very hard to do on ATS with the character limit isnt it?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmonova

No...

the Parliament that was elected in December of 2012 is the body that removed Yanukovych.

once that was done they are then required to appoint members as an interim government as placeholders until presidential elections can be held, within 90 days.

There was no armed violent overthrow of any government in Kiev.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I keep saying that if they are going to kidnap Journalists and American Citizens it is time to tell Russia to piss off. Preferably using a really big bullet.

Russia is testing the USA's resolve, I say lets show them what we think of what is going on. Send in the Seals to get our Americans back!



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

xcathdra I love the west and appreciate your stance. but your gonna get flamed by these Russian sympathizers and Id really like to take you off the cross maybe just to save face, but in all honesty I don't think you should defend your stance. I think these sympathizers will answer when this kicks off. anyway good luck to you hats off to roy ect ect



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

I appreciate the feedback.. Several others have made the same comment in PM's.

My thing is I made the statements and because of that I feel the need to defend my position. Being chased away by people who refuse to see the entire picture does not help those people who browse these forums for info but do not participate.

If I were to just stop it could come across as surrendering my position, and I refuse to do that.

I am not above being told I am wrong provided information comes along with the statement that I can read and see where my error is. To date I don't believe I have been wrong on my position with regards to Ukraine. Because of that I don't think I should have to stop defending a position others attack without providing anything to support them.

To me, giving into that method, is giving into the Russian mentality of forcing an issue by tiring out those who know the truth.

I refuse to allow that to happen.

The truth is important... no matter how much smoke others try to put up to prevent it from being heard/seen/read.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

the truth is a matter of philosophy. let me says this if it so compels you to never retreat let it be understood your not one of them, these people are scared followers I wonder to my self how much of agreement is out of socially conditioned fear rather than free discerning thought. Regardless good luck to you my friend and keep reporting as it should be reported



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmonova
no one is talking about members of parliament, those guys were in opposition. We are talking about government, which came in power through violent coup. If more people voted for those in opposition everything would be fair and legal, they would form a legal government. But somehow they did not win majority of people's votes and they became opposition.


Your use of the word 'government' is a bit vague. The parliament is the legislature of Ukraine's government. If you are talking about the head of state, Yanukovych was impeached in absentia under the procedures dictated by the constitution.



In order to grab a power against people's will they have decided to do it violently and they have impeached the president against constitution which says that president can be impeached only if treason or crime has been committed. I have not seen any treason or crime, have you?


No crimes???

How about dispersing peaceful student protestors in November 2013 with brutal force (the Maidan grew and grew over the course of months and eventually took up arms because of such brutality), defrauding the country of billions through mining and other government contracts awarded to his own family, imprisoning his biggest political rival Yulia Tymshenko without proper criminal prosecution, conspiring with Russian GRU to use military snipers in 'self defense' against Maidian protestors.



So we have illegal government in power and legal president who had to escape to Russia in order to save his own life,
regardless that all sides have signed agreement to stop the violence prior that. And we all know that Junta has broken that agreement the very next day enticing even more violence.


Empty claims, notably the same one as Russia's state-controlled media.

I watched the 'violent' throngs of ordinary citizens who toured the President's opulent villa in the days after he left…

Look at the old aunts and children with balloons. What a dangerous fascist coup!






And lets not pretend here, it was all endorsed by cookie lady Nuland, warmonger McCain who were regular visitors at Maidan at the time. All with one goal in mind. Working for implementation of US strategic interest No1-Weakening Russia's economic growth and eliminating dependence on Russia's oil in gas. Period.


Not everything has to be about the States and their interests. Am I misinformed or did John McCain win your country's election?
edit on 23-4-2014 by ALoveSupreme because: The President in Ukraine is technically the 'head of state', the Prime Minister is the 'executive'



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Xcathdra

the truth is a matter of philosophy. let me says this if it so compels you to never retreat let it be understood your not one of them, these people are scared followers I wonder to my self how much of agreement is out of socially conditioned fear rather than free discerning thought. Regardless good luck to you my friend and keep reporting as it should be reported


Sure I can agree with that but at the same time there is some absolute truth present.

The agreement Yanukovych signed.
The return to the 2004 Constitution.
The fact Parliament was elected by the people and still present when they impeached Yanukovych.
The reason why Presidential elections had to be moved.
The fact there was no armed violent coup / over throw of the government.
The fact that the Prime minister under Yanukovych resigned his government prior to Yanukovych being impeached.
The fact Yanukovych's election in 2004 had to be thrown out by their courts because of election fraud.
The fact Yanukovych has been under investigation for various crimes since 2004 up to the time of his impeachment.



edit on 23-4-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: cosmonova

No...

the Parliament that was elected in December of 2012 is the body that removed Yanukovych.

once that was done they are then required to appoint members as an interim government as placeholders until presidential elections can be held, within 90 days.

There was no armed violent overthrow of any government in Kiev.




and I will tell you again, according to Ukrainian constitution, president can be impeached only if treason or crime has been committed. And I am asking you again, has Yanukovych committed a treason or crime of any sort?
And 'voting' went 380-0 in favour of removing the president (lol who is crazy to vote against when armed thugs are monitoring voting and waiting outside of the building).

I agree, apart from 100 dead people, there was nothing violent in 'regime change' events.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mamatus
I keep saying that if they are going to kidnap Journalists and American Citizens it is time to tell Russia to piss off. Preferably using a really big bullet.

Russia is testing the USA's resolve, I say lets show them what we think of what is going on. Send in the Seals to get our Americans back!



you just sent dolphins, and now you want to send seals. What is next, seagulls?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmonova
And again when the 2004 constitution was reinstated it came along with the streamlined impeachment process...

Maybe you should actually read the impeachment requirements since they have been told to you time and again and you seem to ignore them.

2004 Constitution
Streamlined Impeachment Process

His removal was valid and lawful. Simply ignoring the facts because they don't support your position doesn't make them invalid, just your position.

Interesting that you ignored the other post on the exact same topic and concentrated on just me. Any reason why?


edit on 23-4-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
367
<< 414  415  416    418  419  420 >>

log in

join