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.

 

“Crimea was always Russian!” France’s Marine Le Pen schools CNN

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LuXTeN

I am more than well aware of what the crux of the argument is thank you very much.

All words have " Proper Meanings " Are you aware of the " Proper Meaning " of the word " Always" ?

As i have previously stated journalists and politicians do not involve themselves in " slang "




posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

you're very welcome

You're a liberal aren't you?


As i have previously stated journalists and politicians do not involve themselves in " slang "


I don't know how accurate that is, they behave like apes in parliament. But i'm glad you pointed that out, because the ironic contrast of that statement is... Journalists and Politicians don't involve themselves in slang.

They just involve themselves in Scandals, Lies, Cheating, Destroying Democracy and favoring certain groups, breaking the law etc etc etc. Need i say more?
edit on 7-2-2017 by LuXTeN because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:34 AM
link   
3 seperate refferendums dispute the claim that " crimea was always russian "



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
IMO here is some future history... Le Pen will be elected... that along with the UK exit and Germany's pending change in leadership will spell the basic end of the EU and their open border BS. Then we can all talk about European news besides rape pillage and plunder from foreign guest who sure seem to want to turn Europe into a 7th century religious cesspool of misguided belief .

Anyone who can stand up to the idiocy of CNN would darn sure have my vote and I ain't French... CNN is one network I have absolutely no respect as for their take on truth.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
democratic decisions that dictate outcomes in countries are in fact part of history

Yes, but they don't affect the history that has already happened.
If Miss Le Pen had not said "always", her point would have been reasonable.


You are perfectly correct because word "always" have no exact meaning. There were times when there was no Russia, no Russians, even no Crimea and for most part of "history" Earth did not existed. Word always should be eradicated from vocabulary because it have no real meaning. Nothing is always.

Only valid sentence probably is: Universe is always. Still it is subjective.
edit on 7-2-2017 by JanAmosComenius because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
democratic decisions that dictate outcomes in countries are in fact part of history

Yes, but they don't affect the history that has already happened.
If Miss Le Pen had not said "always", her point would have been reasonable.


You know Dis, Kiev has a long history of orthodox Christendom, not really Turkish or Muslim.
It was the capital of Russia for some time (those in charge of Rus lived there as well as the heads of the church)

It's worth studying it's history, I would call it Russian, once Lithuanian, once Polish, maybe once for a very short period even Mongolian
Crimea, North of Ukraine

So Crimea, not always Russian but mostly, i won't argue it.
edit on 7-2-2017 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:00 AM
link   
so Le Pen is doing her part of the deal with Putin. In exchange for money she defends Russia taking Crimea from Ukrain.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: whismermill

Fairy tales are fun sometimes, this one you've proposed, not so much.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman
Yes. I've been reading history for most of my life, and I'm aware of the different phases in the history of Kiev.
Just as there have been different phases in the history of the Crimea.
The most interesting point, for the purposes of the political debate, is that they haven't normally gone together. When Kiev was the capital of Russia, the Crimea was still occupied by the Goths. Arnold Toynbee calls it one of the "fastnesses" where the "fossils" of older cultures can take refuge after being swept away from the more accessible regions.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: LuXTeN




You're a liberal aren't you?


Why would my politics have any bearing on discussing the " Real Meaning " of a word from the English Language. I am confused why you should ask.





They just involve themselves in Scandals, Lies, Cheating, Destroying Democracy and favoring certain groups, breaking the law etc etc etc. Need i say more?


Are you aware of the role of a " News Editor " ?

A news script is presented to the " News Editor " for him to amend for any factual inaccuracies. If news is being broadcast incorrectly then you blame the News Editor and not the mouthpiece.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: LuXTeN

sure, fairytales




posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Bottom line, the Russians were ok with passing the Crimea to Ukraine as long as the Ukraine government was pro Russia.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   
originally posted by: [post=21866016]alldaylong





Why would my politics have any bearing on discussing the " Real Meaning " of a word from the English Language. I am confused why you should ask.


It seemed like a good question to ask at the time?


Are you aware of the role of a " News Editor " ?


Yes. They aren't as forthright and honest as i previously thought.


A news script is presented to the " News Editor " for him to amend for any factual inaccuracies. If news is being broadcast incorrectly then you blame the News Editor and not the mouthpiece.


Yes but this becomes null and Void when considering the MSM do it all the time. Criminals run these outlets, sort of like certain pockets of Gov't. where corruption is concerned. The only time a good majority of these 'News Editors' would be chastised would be for failing to LIE to the Public or, the Public calling them out for the LIE.


edit on 7-2-2017 by LuXTeN because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: whismermill

a star for humor



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Let's ignore the semantics argument and get in to what Le Pen actually said. She refers to a coup that occurred in Ukraine. What coup would that be? Is it the one where the democratically elected voted to impeach Yanukovych? Last time I checked that wasn't a coup. Hell, Yanukovych's own party voted to impeach him. Even Russia acknowledged the legitimacy of that move and the subsequent elections.

Then there's the case of the referendum. The OP keeps claiming that this was a democratic vote. Ignoring the fact that Russian soldiers were illegally patrolling the streets at the time and that there were no actual independent monitors present. Then there's the fact that following the referendum Russia's own Human Rights Council published numbers drastically different than what was reported. They found that only 30%-50% of the population voted and that only 50%-60% of these voters were actually in favor of the referendum. So in the end, at most, only 25% of the population actually cared enough to vote for annexation by Russia.

And while I said I wasn't going to focus on semantics it should be pointed out that Crimea has only been Russian for less than 100 years. While Russia may have owned it for longer the population was primarily Tatar until Stalin's horrific plan to Russify the peninsula.

Let's be honest, Le Pen is just spouting Russian propaganda. National Front has been on the receiving end of Russian funds for a long time. It's primarily thanks to that money that Le Pen was able to distance the party from her Nazi sympathizing father.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Almost all the lakes , rivers , valleys , mountains and hills have Turkic names in Crimea .

Even the name "Crimea" itself is Turkish.

Only in the dreams of a revisionist populist the Crimea has always been Russian.

Le Pen is pondering and spreading ignorance.
edit on 7-2-2017 by 23432 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: LuXTeN

It's hard to believe Amanpour didn't know the answer to that one.

Which tells me she probably doesn't know that the Port City of Odessa, also on the Black Sea has always been Russian since its founding by none other than Catherine the Great.

en.wikipedia.org...
Odessa and Crimea were part of the Crimea Khanate which was annexed by Russia in 1783, i.e., taken from the Turks.
See map at: en.wikipedia.org...

That map, BTW, goes a long way to explaining the "Pro-Russian" rebels in the Ukraine in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. Russians began settling that area between "Muscovy" and Odessa in 1783. You'll note as well that the area wasn't dominated at the time by Poland.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: 23432

Balderdash.

First, the Turks had no legitimate claim to the area you are talking about which was known as the Crimea Khanate. The population at the time were largely Tartars. "the Crimean khans were the patrilineal descendants of Toqa Temür, thirteenth son of Jochi and grandson of Genghis Khan through marriage; Temür married one of Genghis Khan's grand daughters en.wikipedia.org...

Odessa and Crimea were part of the Crimea Khanate which was annexed by Russia in 1783, i.e., taken from the Turks.
See map at: en.wikipedia.org...

That map, BTW, goes a long way to explaining the "Pro-Russian" rebels in the Ukraine in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. Russians began settling that area between "Muscovy" and Odessa in 1783. You'll note as well that the area wasn't dominated at the time by Poland. Ukraine, BTW, didn't even exist at the time.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: 23432

Balderdash.

First, the Turks had no legitimate claim to the area you are talking about which was known as the Crimea Khanate. The population at the time were largely Tartars. "the Crimean khans were the patrilineal descendants of Toqa Temür, thirteenth son of Jochi and grandson of Genghis Khan through marriage; Temür married one of Genghis Khan's grand daughters en.wikipedia.org...

Odessa and Crimea were part of the Crimea Khanate which was annexed by Russia in 1783, i.e., taken from the Turks.
See map at: en.wikipedia.org...

That map, BTW, goes a long way to explaining the "Pro-Russian" rebels in the Ukraine in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. Russians began settling that area between "Muscovy" and Odessa in 1783. You'll note as well that the area wasn't dominated at the time by Poland. Ukraine, BTW, didn't even exist at the time.




en.wikipedia.org...


The Tatars are a Turkic people[1] living in Asia and Europe who were one of the five major tribal confederations (khanlig) in the Mongolian plateau in the 12th century CE. The name "Tatar" first appears in written form on the Kul Tigin monument as 𐱃𐱃𐰺 (TaTaR).
Historically, the term "Tatars" was applied to a variety of Turco-Mongol semi-nomadic empires who controlled the vast region known as Tartary.

More recently, however, the term refers more narrowly to people who speak one of the Turkic[1] languages. The Mongol Empire, established under Genghis Khan in 1206, subjugated the Tatars.

Under the leadership of Genghis Khan's grandson Batu Khan (c. 1207–1255), the Mongols moved westwards, driving with them many of the Mongol tribes toward the plains of Russia.

The "Tatar" clan still exists among the Mongols and Hazaras.

The largest group by far that the Russians have called "Tatars" are the Volga Tatars, native to the Volga region (Tatarstan and Bashkortostan), who for this reason are often also simply known as "Tatars", with their language known as the Tatar language. As of 2002 they had an estimated population close to 6 million.



Crimean Tatar (Crimean Tatar: Къырымтатарджа Qırımtatarca, Къырымтатар тили Qırımtatar tili), also called Crimean Turkish[1] or simply Crimean,[1] is a language spoken for centuries in Crimea.
It is a Turkic language spoken in Crimea and the Crimean Tatar diasporas of Uzbekistan, Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria, as well as small communities in the United States and Canada. It should not be confused with Tatar proper, spoken in Tatarstan and adjacent regions in Russia; the languages are related but not mutually intelligible.
Though only distantly related, it has been extensively influenced by nearby Oghuz Turkic languages such as Turkish, Turkmen, and Azerbaijani.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 05:22 PM
link   
How can she say it was always Russian, when Russia gave it away? Even RT says this.


In 1954, a controversial decision of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, himself an ethnic Ukrainian, transferred the Crimea peninsula to the Ukrainian SSR, extracting it from Russian territory.



Russia repeatedly confirmed it does not doubt Crimea is a part of Ukraine, even though it understands the emotions of the residents of the region.

www.rt.com...
edit on 7-2-2017 by JimSmith because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join