State Dept release: President Putin's Fiction: 10 False Claims about Ukraine

Ouch - so much for diplomatic language!!

1. Mr. Putin says: Russian forces in Crimea are only acting to protect Russian military assets. It is “citizens’ defense groups,” not Russian forces, who have seized infrastructure and military facilities in Crimea.

The Facts: Strong evidence suggests that members of Russian security services are at the heart of the highly organized anti-Ukraine forces in Crimea. While these units wear uniforms without insignia, they drive vehicles with Russian military license plates and freely identify themselves as Russian security forces when asked by the international media and the Ukrainian military. Moreover, these individuals are armed with weapons not generally available to civilians.

2. Mr. Putin says: Russia’s actions fall within the scope of the 1997 Friendship Treaty between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.

The Facts: The 1997 agreement requires Russia to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Russia’s military actions in Ukraine, which have given them operational control of Crimea, are in clear violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

etc......

Well that lays it all on the line - no doubt the usual suspects on here will tell us all that these are all inventions of the Obama tyranny or some equally fatuous drivel........but let's face reality for a change - Putin's actions are what a tyranny does - and it's not neatrly as nice as insisting that all your citizens should have health insurance!!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I could care less what the State Department says...why are they trying to convince us...they do what they want anyway when it comes to foreign and domestic issues...

But thanks for the link friend

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Is this the same state dept that said Benghazi was due to a YouTube video?

reply to post by JacKatMtn


Bazinga!

I guess the normal MSM outlets used for getting their word out is not being watched and so they instead of using a inside source will just post it on their own site now . I wonder if maybe they think that they have slightly more credibility then MSM .That must really hurt for them eh.

Too bad they wouldn't open up comments on their site lol

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Ok, I'll raise the State Dept this:

Questions on Ukraine the West chooses not to answer

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Well I think the State Department is obviously diverting attention away from their own failings.

By pointing the finger they might actually be accusing somebody else of what they themselves are/have been guilty of.

It certainly *could* be an Obama Red Herring.

reply to post by xuenchen


Yeah - Obama & Putin got together over Christmas..

Hey, Barackski, my freend.....how can the great peace loving Soviet....er....Russian peoples help you this year.....

Hey Vlad, buddy...well I'm suffering a bit in the polls, so if you could just invade Ukraine immediately after the Olympics that'd be great......






God you people need to get a life!!

JacKatMtn
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Is this the same state dept that said Benghazi was due to a YouTube video?

Ohhhhhhhh....well played

JWash
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Ok, I'll raise the State Dept this:

Questions on Ukraine the West chooses not to answer

Nah - #1 is answered.....Yanku fled rather than fulfill his part of het deal of Feb 21.

#2 - because it is the right of the elected parliament to do so if they so choose - they chose to do so for Yanku....why should they not be allowed to do so when he's not there? Assuming it is actually true in the first place.....

#3 - because as a sovereign parliament that is its right to do so

#4 - answers itself - "Several Constitutional court judges were accused of violating their oath ...." - what a stupid "question"!!

#5 - Why would the west support the "coup"?? Really - the west hasn't answered that?? I'm pretty sure the answers are all over het MSM.......something to do with democracy, supporting a mass public movement to get rid of a corrupt president - something a lot of people on here think the US should do, but you can't see how much worse this guy was than anything you have in het USA??

no you haven't "raised the State Dept" - you've just shown up your inability to comprehend the situation.

JacKatMtn
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Is this the same state dept that said Benghazi was due to a YouTube video?

Dunno - is it?

Is anything in the list actually wrong?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Just an easy way for me to say that just because the US State Dept releases a FACT sheet on the current situation, having been burned before by the same entity in the not so distant past, why in the world would I give this much weight?

Don't get me wrong, I don't buy what Putin's folks are saying either...

I don't buy what the MSM or big media outlets are saying, actually.. I have been more interested in what folks opinions are here, and the material they bring from unofficial or alternative sources, and so far those seem to be closer to the truth, without either side's intended blame game emotional deal..

Honestly, I don't know the truth, but I am not waiting on my govt or their govt to provide anything that resembles it..

Putin, while generally smoother than Obama, is certainly cut from the same cloth no doubt: Sociopathic Elitism.

Having said that, Headline! Dancing Chicken Tows Party Line Yet Again!
Dance, Chicken, Dance!

When the US butts in with imperialist guns--or some other country does the exact same thing--the subject gets changed to the insurance executive's wet dream: Obamacare. Does that shizzle fly with anyone but puppets and stooges? Talk about get a life...

reply to post by The GUT


So nothing factual to add, just a whiney Ad-hom, and somehow it is all the fault of Obamacare....

Gotcha...thanks for the predictability!!

JacKatMtn
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Just an easy way for me to say that just because the US State Dept releases a FACT sheet on the current situation, having been burned before by the same entity in the not so distant past, why in the world would I give this much weight?

well you could check it against other information you have available, and decide how much you like it, or not, based on that.

at least you are open enough to consider the possibility - unlike various people on here!!

Aloysius the Gaul
So nothing factual to add, just a whiney Ad-hom, and somehow it is all the fault of Obamacare....

Gotcha...thanks for the predictability!!

I consider pointing out the hypocrisy of warmongers a factual addition. You are impervious to "facts" it seems. Imo, the most predictable member here on these boards is you. It's like you have Anderson Cooper's hand up your butt.

Is this the same state that has been spying on every one all around the world? (Allies included?) The same state that uses drones to kill people all over the world? (Americans included) The same one that kidnaps people and holds them in Gitmo?
Who really gives a toss what these morons have to say about Russia and Putin. As a Brit I am 100% behind those evil commies. I hope Putin turns the gas supply off to Europe. That will soon shut up our own traitors in Govt, creeps like hague and camoron. I also hope that Putin dumps the dollar as an international currency.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


They just can't get anything right.

The Facts: Strong evidence suggests

Is it a fact or a strong suggestion?

The propaganda tool of labeling your paragraphs as FACTS died out in the eighties, or should have. These clowns are still trying it on. Hey, guys, does not work anymore, even less do when you follow the word FACTS with the word SUGGESTS.

And the US Government employs these people? Jeez!

P

Aloysius the Gaul

JacKatMtn
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Just an easy way for me to say that just because the US State Dept releases a FACT sheet on the current situation, having been burned before by the same entity in the not so distant past, why in the world would I give this much weight?

well you could check it against other information you have available, and decide how much you like it, or not, based on that.

at least you are open enough to consider the possibility - unlike various people on here!!

When they fire Assistant Secretary of European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland I may consider vetting their fact sheet press releases...

"* the EU?" during a call when the discussion was the Ukraine, and she still holds the post? and is traveling with Kerry ?!?

I can't tell you how proud I am of the folks representing my country these days

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

#1 is answered.....Yanku fled rather than fulfill his part of het deal of Feb 21.

#1. . . Lmao, its a SIGNED agreement. As long as the U.S. says that it no longer matters then thats that. . . If only it was that simple.

The agreement was signed through the mediation of (3) European countries: Poland, Germany & France. In addition, Yanukovych agreed to the opposition's demands -
1) Agreed to early parliamentary elections
2) Agreed to early presidential elections
3) Agreed to return to the 2004 Constitution
Also under Ukranian law there are (3) ways a president can be removed, and fleeing isn't one of them.

So explain, what was the purpose of the coup takeover, when Yanukovych agreed to give up power? That is the question being asked.

#2 - because it is the right of the elected parliament to do so if they so choose - they chose to do so for Yanku....why should they not be allowed to do so when he's not there? Assuming it is actually true in the first place.....

#2. . . Bwahaha @ 'the elected parliament'. Pretty sure they were SELF APPOINTED! aka anti-constitutional takeover. . . So the newly self-appointed govt decided to appoint an Ukranian Jewish billionaire (Igor Kolomoisky) who has a history of scamming as the new oligarch. Guess removing a corrupt govt & replacing it w/ an EVEN greater corrupt govt is good, right?

No wonder the people of Ukraine don't accept this new illegitimate govt.

#3 - because as a sovereign parliament that is its right to do so

#3. . . Sure they do have the right however Ukraine's regional majority speaks russian. This move sowed discontent & destabilized Ukraine even further, for what reason? Kinda like shooting yourself in the foot to prove a point.

#4 - answers itself - "Several Constitutional court judges were accused of violating their oath ...." - what a stupid "question"!!

#4. . . Or that it was purposely disbanded in order to prevent a procedural impeachment which could be challenged?

#5 - Why would the west support the "coup"?? Really - the west hasn't answered that??

I'm pretty sure the answers are all over het MSM.......something to do with democracy, supporting a mass public movement to get rid of a corrupt president - something a lot of people on here think the US should do, but you can't see how much worse this guy was than anything you have in het USA??

#5. . . Thanks for the same lame brain answer thats been spewed out by the western WAR media.

Democracy, really? Um, self appointed ring any bells in that chicken brain?
Removing corruption? By installing an even greater corrupt non-elected govt?

I'm not sold on your claim that "a lot of people" back the US on this issue. Plenty of comments stating otherwise. . .

no you haven't "raised the State Dept" - you've just shown up your inability to comprehend the situation.

I comprehend the situation perhaps it's your inability to provide non copy & paste answers borrowed from the comments section of the link I provided (unless thats you Mike Campbell?). . . tsk tsk plagiarism