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.

 

Ukraine Admits Its Gold Is Gone

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo


There is absolutely no way they would ever transfer that gold to Poland, it would go to Germany and Switzerland.

Switzerland maybe because that is the second home for the Zionists but not Germany because they want their gold back from the USA who said NO and then blackmailed the leaders to then say it was OK, keep it.

Did you know that the british sent Hitler some gold half way into WWII, gee the banks just made a little mistake and it was gone before anyone could ask a word about it.

The time for removing bankers heads was with us 70 years ago
edit on 26-11-2014 by VirusGuard because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 11:49 PM
link   
People especially the Ukrainian people fail to recognize some basic things. Things such as it does not really matter who is in charge or who's flag is stamped in what, when your got barrel bombs dropping on your head by who know what or who's planes, and some supposed freedom fighters shooting down people in villages.

What they are doing is literally putting themselfs between a rock and a hardplace, when none of it is necessary at all. I mean what exactly would they get if they joined one or the others? Free TV's? An new X-Box or what. The sad truth is they would not even get that. What you have is two supper powers looking out for there interests, and with Ukraine in the middle. If western interests move closer to Russian borders, well what do you think will happen? They will just stay there and twiddle there thumbs, hellz no, and if it comes to it they will play just as dirty as the opposition.

Its not so much about who is right or who is wrong, because none of that really matters. It's more about not putting your country and people directly in the nutcracker all because you believe its the thing to do or because somebody promised something or whatever else or some political got greased or some pretty freedom speech or whatever other nonsense.

Most of this things and wars are all proxy wars, propaganda and just plain ol bull#, or political machinations and wealth distribution, all of that is still likely more preferable to all out war, and given time if both power push for expansion, well it will come to that anyways. So it could be that if you give it a few years of that ongoing supposed rebels and pro Russian or pro west supporters or whatnot. Well if that whole nonsense continues in a few years Ukraine may start looking like the middle east. And we will all sit here and watch it some years down the line on the TV and go, oh look at those crazy Ukrainians there so violent, why wont they just agree to freedom and peace.

So ya! Join the UN, join Russian federation or whatever, it does not matter, but what they chose purely based on the location there at will cause problems, and ultimately like I said before. When the elephants fight its the grass that suffers, an old African proverb which would have worked wonders even in Africa if they would have listened to there own proverbs.



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: Flatcoat

where did that 123% even come from? official polling agencies put the votes to join Russian federation at about 80%.


Just some anonymous blogger who fudged the numbers, but it was good enough for all the Russophobes to run with it like it was gospel...



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

i wouldn't doubt it. i don't care either way. if Russia hadn't stepped in Crimea would have been hit hard.



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Everything started when Ukraine accepted the 15 billion deal with Russia and told Eu no. First of all i think it Putin had to act on Crimea.. Its the only sea port Russia can use the other one in baltic sea is controlled by Nato. Its like a chess game. But ukraine has big problems.. Gold is gone.. Country completly divided east wants Russia west Eu. Problem is there is no money and all the oil is in Donesk and shell netherland has a 10-50 billion investment exactly where the plane mh17 went down. Bills are stacking up and they cant get controll over the doneskt area

The fact is the goverment are sendind troops to kill and scare away there own citizens. Its all about expanding Nato and private companies getting there hands all the oil and gas everything else is BS



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat




Just some anonymous blogger who fudged the numbers,


Care to show us where he went wrong since you say he fudged the numbers?



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: che33




First of all i think it Putin had to act on Crimea.. Its the only sea port Russia can use


Really because they had a lease until 2042 for that base...


Ukraine recently agreed to extend Russia's naval base lease for its Black Sea Fleet until 2042


www.csmonitor.com...

So that excuse doesn't really work.



The fact is the goverment are sendind troops to kill and scare away there own citizens.


And you think it's okay for armed separatists to take up against the gov't. and they do nothing about it, especially one backed by a foreign nation.

As for them being sent to kill and scare their own citizens...first they are fighting armed separatists that are using the civilian population as human shields, and exactly why would they be scaring the citizens away?

Or is Ukraine asking the civilians to leave so that they aren't caught in the middle of this conflict?



Its all about expanding Nato and private companies getting there hands all the oil and gas everything else is BS


Let me see if I get this correct...your saying that Ukraine and Russia set this up to scare the civilians that live in that area so that private companies can get the land?

As for NATO ...you love to speculate don't you?



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




i wouldn't doubt it. i don't care either way. if Russia hadn't stepped in Crimea would have been hit hard.


By what and, by who?

And Russia made an excuse to go into Crimea and annex it, as they weren't stepping in to protect anyone because there were no problems happening in Crimea until the infamous "Green Men" showed up.



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

there were no problems in crimea. and there arent any now. so it's a good thing russia stepped in.
edit on 27-11-2014 by AVoiceOfReason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: che33

ukraine doesn't really produce hardly any oil tho. i think it was just a move on russia for russia meddling with syria and pretty much cock blocking a US invasion. whoever gave the state dept the go ahead to start talking with yatsenyuk and oleh tyahnybok probably didn't think it through. it's totally back fired on them. i think they saw that after Georgia hit ossetia and russia reacted that russia would respond the same way in ukraine giving the EU and US ample reason to demonize Russia and impose sanctions. but russia didn't so their sanctions and demonizing are empty. and the EU is hurting. slowly but surely they seem to be turning against the US, at least on the subject of sanctions.
edit on 27-11-2014 by AVoiceOfReason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




there were no problems in crimea. and there arent any now. so it's a good thing russia stepped in.


Well then we can agree they lied and invaded Crimea to annex it. About time you came around.



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




there were no problems in crimea. and there arent any now. so it's a good thing russia stepped in.


Well then we can agree they lied and invaded Crimea to annex it. About time you came around.


no, they were already there and Crimea held a referendum. cant invade soil you already occupy.

edit on 27-11-2014 by AVoiceOfReason because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2014 by AVoiceOfReason because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




no, they were already there and Crimea held a referendum. cant invade soil you already occupy.

also you cant annex the willing.


Wrong, and wrong.

You see Putin already admitted to sending troops to Crimea, he didn't say deployed in Crimea...big difference.

And that referendum was a sham and it was even admitted by the Russian government. And they posted it to their website here...

www.president-sovet.ru...



cant invade soil you already occupy.


The only problem they occupied the naval base( which was leased to them by Ukraine) and nothing outside of that base because it was Ukranian territory not Russia's.



also you cant annex the willing.


Well according to the Russian gov't themselves, there wasn't very many that are willing to return to Russia.

And they also had two options and neither one of them asked if they wanted to stay as part of Ukraine, so how is that willing they had no choice but to become part of Russia?
edit on 27-11-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

yeah russia had rights to keep 25,000 troops there, whats your point?

either way, i dont care. you care about laws, i care about lives and peoples well being. no US led coup no trouble, sadly thats not the case.



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




yeah russia had rights to keep 25,000 troops there, whats your point?


On the base, but unless they had permission of Ukraine to roam the streets freely with their weapons they violated the sovereignty of Ukraine. And I doubt Ukraine gave them that permission.



no US led coup no trouble, sadly thats not the case.


Let me guess they spent 5 billion to do it, or is it because they have advisers in Ukraine helping them deal with certain problems left after Yanukovich decided to run for the hills.

So care to show something that proves the US led this coup?



posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

play dumb all you want. you know about the leaked phone calls. you know about the armed "protesters" on the maidan. you know who right sector and svoboda is. you know that poroshnko was a CIA plant. you know all of it. please stop talking to me. go back to debunking geo engineering or something.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

play dumb all you want. you know about the leaked phone calls. you know about the armed "protesters" on the maidan. you know who right sector and svoboda is. you know that poroshnko was a CIA plant. you know all of it. please stop talking to me. go back to debunking geo engineering or something.


speaking of playing dumb.. you've taken the cake with your post.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




play dumb all you want. you know about the leaked phone calls. you know about the armed "protesters" on the maidan. you know who right sector and svoboda is. you know that poroshnko was a CIA plant. you know all of it. please stop talking to me. go back to debunking geo engineering or something.



Don't like to be challenged I see.

Yes we have heard the calls that the separatists made when they shot down MH17, as for the armed protesters never said there wasn't, Right Sector and Svoboda are what because they don't have pull in the Government nor do Right Sector, And there is no evidence Poroshenko was a CIA plant...and the wiki cables that have been posted as evidence says nothing of the sort.

Now since you want to bring up BS how about you show something other than your opinion that backs your claims, or can you not do that?



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

no, i love a good challenge. you just aren't capable. the truth about euromaidan, mh17, US involvent, and Odessa are well documented and right here on the internet. anyone that has the courage to look at evidence objectively can find it.



posted on Nov, 29 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

no, i love a good challenge. you just aren't capable. the truth about euromaidan, mh17, US involvent, and Odessa are well documented and right here on the internet. anyone that has the courage to look at evidence objectively can find it.


Yet you don't produce them to refute whats stated.




top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join