Authorities Threaten to 'Liquidate' Crimean Tatar Council

To the Pro Russians -

Explain please -

The Moscow Times ‏@MoscowTimes · 51m
Authorities Threaten to 'Liquidate' Crimean Tatar Council tmt-go.ru... #news

Authorities Threaten to 'Liquidate' Crimean Tatar Council

Crimea's prosecutor has threatened to outlaw Crimean Tatars' main self-governing body for "extremist" activities, reading out a warning to their leader in Russian despite his repeated appeals for a translation into the official language of their autonomy.

The Sunday admonition by prosecutor Natalya Poklonskaya to Mejlis leader Refat Chubarov was seen by some as an ominous sign for the Crimean Tatars, whose former head Mustafa Dzhemilev was banned from entering the Black Sea peninsula the previous day.

In a video posted on YouTube, prosecutor Natalya Poklonskaya described the massive rallies by Crimean Tatars against the ban on Dzhemilev's entry as "illegal" gatherings marked by "violence and threats of violence,"

"I am warning Refar Abdurakhmanovich Chubarov, the chairman of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis, about the unacceptability of carrying out extremist activities, I demand an immediate secession of extremist activity," Poklonskaya said.

Chubarov attempted to cut in: "I am having much trouble catching on the meaning," he said. "Please, in Crimean Tatar, in an official language, or at least in Ukrainian."

Poklonskaya plowed on, raising her voice to drown out the protests.

If the "violations noted above are not eliminated," the "Crimean Tatar Mejlis will be liquidated" and "its activity on the territory of the Russian Federation will be banned," she said.

"You have violated my rights," Chubarov said told Crimea's prosecutor by reading out her warning "not in my native language, not in the official language."

A reader on the Ekho Moskvy website said Sunday that the "repressions" constituted "nothing new" for Russia, but that repressing the "Crimean Tatars, who have already survived the horror of the purges, may backfire for the regime — and it will."

Crimean Tatars, whose members were persecuted and exiled from their homeland under Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, have opposed Russia's annexation of Crimea, though Moscow has sought to appease any protests by promising to grant Crimean Tatars the same kind of self-governing and linguistic autonomy they enjoyed in Ukraine.

In a televised appearance last month, Putin said he had signed a decree to "rehabilitate" the Crimean Tatars and other ethnic minorities on the peninsula — "all those who suffered during Stalin's repressions."

The decree, published on the Kremlin website, also said it aimed to "restore historical justice and remove the consequences of the illegal deportation" and to "foster the creation and development of national-cultural autonomies."

Why no... they are just showers for disinfection.

What is it going to take for people to realize just how bad Putin is and what path he is leading people back down, not down but back down.

Or is it your contention that anyone not "Russian" is inferior and must go?

Please - explain the article and all the arguments people have made that Russia would not do exactly what is occurring now.
Please explain how Russia can bitch about actions against ethnic Russians, to the point of invading Ukraine, only to do the VERY action they accused Ukraine of?

Illegal gathering?

wtf



I think this info deserves a thread of its own.

Anyone care to defend the actions taken against the Tartars?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

What is it going to take for people to realize just how bad Putin is and what path he is leading people back down, not down but back down.

What an utter nonsense ... idiotic to the fact.

First, you should look at "who gains" from the act. Not the act itself, but what purpose it serves and whom it serves.

The purpose of this act, is to gain sympathy against russia and not for it. So, it does not serve russia but it's enemies and therefore, it is most likely started by it's enemies.

I'm not sure if you caught my posts in the other thread (they are 5 pages back I think) but due to my personal connections I am in touch with Tatars in Crimea. They are in contact with officials from Turkey's Ministry of Foreign Affairs due to the discrimination shown by the Russian Federation. Turkey will not stand idly by.

a reply to: bjarneorn

So you have nothing but dismissal for the story... check.


wait.... wait.....

yeah still not surprised.

originally posted by: ProfessorT
I'm not sure if you caught my posts in the other thread (they are 5 pages back I think) but due to my personal connections I am in touch with Tatars in Crimea. They are in contact with officials from Turkey's Ministry of Foreign Affairs due to the discrimination shown by the Russian Federation. Turkey will not stand idly by.

Of course its 5 pages back...

This is one of those stories that calls out the Pro Russians who have absolutely no chance of defending this action so their only hope is to either ignore, as is being done in this thread, or dismiss it without offering anything to the contrary, which again is whats going on in this thread.

It begs the question -
Why is Putin not a fascist for allowing this and does this now make Pro Russians supporters of the "Neo Nazi" " Fascists" as well?

The Pro Russian hypocrisy and deafening silence is telling.... yet not surprising.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: bjarneorn

So you have nothing but dismissal for the story... check.

There is no dismissal ... a crime is a crime. And you don't look for excuses, as you do ... because in a war, either side can do the crime. As both sides see, a crime, as means towards an end.

And the "filming" of the event, and putting it on the internet ... is a rally for support against Russians. And anyone, minority or not ... who is trying to yiell out the word of war or using the conflict as means for personal gain, is not a person of character.

In a war, everyone loses ... and many lose their lives. And nobody's life is more important than someone elses. And any and all parties, involved in war ... and supporting a war, are criminals, in my eyes. That applies to the Ukranians, as well as the Russians ... and the only ones who are worthy of notice, are the ones who talk about peace. And work towards that end ...

a reply to: bjarneorn

If that's so then why did you dismiss the article?

Secondly please point out where I have made excuses for what's occurring.

Third you dismissed the article in your 2nd response by stating its a rally against Russians. To me it sounds like you are more upset the Russians got caught pulling this trip down the memory lane of WWII and seem even more upset someone recorded it and put it on the internet for all to see.

As for everyone losing in a war - I agree 1 million percent with this mindset with a caveat. When hostilities break out, how far down the toilet do things need to be before its stopped? When something is downplayed / ignored with the result being it spirals out of control then what do we do?

Humor me for a minute -
When 9/11 occurred there were demonstrations in Detroit against going to war. A guy goes to the protest to see what it is about. While looking around he notices a protestor telling people to turn the other cheek and that war is not the answer. He lets the guy talk for about 5 minutes, walks up to him and as hard as he can, punches the protestor in the face.

The protestor recovers and is preparing to respond when the guy who hit him starts telling him to turn the other cheek, that a violent response is not the right choice etc. Once the protestor calms down, the guy again hits him in the face as hard as he can, and the protestor goes to the ground again. When he comes back up and starts towards the attacker, he is again told to turn the other cheek, violence is not the answer et.

The protestor agrees, and again he is popped in the face.

The point is there are situations where action must be required and no amount of talk will change that.

we aren't to that point yet be we are coming close.

how do we resolve it?

why does it have to be systematically about pro or against russia ?

if you criticize the acting nazi gvt you're pro russia, if you question msm reports you're pro-russian, if you question the imf deal you're pro-russian, if you show compassion and anger because Ukrainian people are being tortured and killed by the ukraine nazi junta you're pro russia.

in the same vain :

if you question israeli gvt you're antisemite
if you question 911 you're anti-american (and pro-islamist)

disinfo at his worst (or best depending where you're standing).

Arundhati Roy talks very well about this strategy (it's an old speech from 2003 about the war on terror but it applies here as well, since in "pro-russia", it is of course implied "anti-american", "antii-democracy" ) and the bias it's using to confuse and propagate disinformation.

When independent-thinking people (and here I do not include the corporate media) begin to rally under flags, when writers, painters, musicians, film makers suspend their judgment and blindly yoke their art to the service of the “Nation,” it’s time for all of us to sit up and worry.
...
Recently, those who have criticized the actions of the U.S. government (myself included) have been called “anti-
American.” Anti-Americanism is in the process of being consecrated into an ideology.
The term “anti-American” is usually used by the American establishment to discredit and, not falsely—but shall we
say inaccurately—define its critics. Once someone is branded anti-American, the chances are that he or she will be
judged before they are heard, and the argument will be lost in the welter of bruised national pride.

Once someone is branded pro-russian, the chances are that he or she will be judged before they are heard.

& so that "pro-russian" rhetoric is being used and abused ad-nausea to silence independent thinker

the whole speech is a gem of clarity & softness to denounce the globalist elite, ada.evergreen.edu...

it's not offtopic since the first sentence of this op contains the "pro-russian" bs

a reply to: Xcathdra

This conflict is getting uglier by the day.

Those who are called "protesters" or "freedomfighters" by one side, are "extremists" or even "terrorists" for the other side... and vice versa.
The media's terminology is propaganda... on both sides.
Two world power blocks are waging proxy-warfare, and the people are the ones who suffer... on all sides.
Like always.

If only there had been a peaceful solution to this crisis, BEFORE it turned into a violent conflict...

a reply to: anHairInTheSoup

Uuhm sure..

My question was how can those who don't care for government in Kiev, who many many on this site accuse of being Neo Nazi / fascist / Ultra nationalist, who disdain actions taken by the government against "ethnic Russians" and the " Ukrainian people", don't shout their same disdain for what occurred in Crimea.

This is not about sides - Its about their perceived moral authority. It comes across in their responses / arguments / positions that is wrong to target one group of people while its ok to do that when its in their own borders.

It just completely undermines Putin's position.

ETA -
Can anyone translate / know of an English translation. This is supposedly one of the people targeted by the prosecutor.

I havent been able to follow the story, but ive read alot about neo nazis in ukraines new government or gangs of thugs causing trouble, is it true or propaganda, this is a serious question. Hope im not off topic.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I havent been able to follow the story, but ive read alot about neo nazis in ukraines new government or gangs of thugs causing trouble, is it true or propaganda, this is a serious question. Hope im not off topic.

This thread is about Russia's history of ethnic cleansing in Crimea.

a reply to: DJW001

I get that but why does any pro russian use the wording neo nazy to defend russia

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: DJW001

I get that but why does any pro russian use the wording neo nazy to defend russia

Most people don't like Nazis, therefore it makes the interim government look bad. Childish, really.

a reply to: Xcathdra
As I remember when that Dzhamilev guy was leaving Crimea he threatened that it will be bloodshed in Crimea, so autrhorities saw that as call on terrorism.
It will be right decesion to 'liquidate' council, because they're terrorists.
Every normal country would do that.

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: Xcathdra
As I remember when that Dzhamilev guy was leaving Crimea he threatened that it will be bloodshed in Crimea, so autrhorities saw that as call on terrorism.
It will be right decesion to 'liquidate' council, because they're terrorists.
Every normal country would do that.

You have a perverse sense of "normal."

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: Xcathdra
As I remember when that Dzhamilev guy was leaving Crimea he threatened that it will be bloodshed in Crimea, so autrhorities saw that as call on terrorism.
It will be right decesion to 'liquidate' council, because they're terrorists.
Every normal country would do that.

You have a perverse sense of "normal."

So be it.
I would ask you what your opinion would be when similar happens in your country, having regional ethnic leader calling for terrorism?

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: Xcathdra
As I remember when that Dzhamilev guy was leaving Crimea he threatened that it will be bloodshed in Crimea, so autrhorities saw that as call on terrorism.
It will be right decesion to 'liquidate' council, because they're terrorists.
Every normal country would do that.

You have a perverse sense of "normal."

So be it.
I would ask you what your opinion would be when similar happens in your country, having regional ethnic leader calling for terrorism?

We arrest the leader but don't "liquidate" the group.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: DJW001

why does any pro russian use the wording neo nazy to defend russia

you're twisting things around,the question is :

why does any (benevolent or not) disinfo agent use the wording pro-russian to defend the neo-nazi imf backed usurping gvt of ukraine ?

the answer being to silence any critical thinking about the role of the imf banskters in the ukraine situation.