The Ukraine Conflict


Did you know that in 2014 in the Ukraine a violent coup took place instigated by the USA to overthrow President Victor Yanukovich after he announced that he would no longer seek to
integrate (hand over) Ukraine to the EU

The ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine may be seen as the latest escalation of over two decades of geopolitical tensions between the US, NATO and Russia. More specifically, it may be seen as a first Russian military response to two decades of eastern expansion of the US/NATO military alliance.

After the independence of the former Soviet republic of Ukraine in 1991, the US initially hoped to peacefully acquire Ukraine as a client state within about 20 years, similar to other former Soviet or Warsaw Pact states in Eastern Europe.

We can see in the picture below how the U.S backed NATO has crept closer and closer over the decades to Russia's border with only the Ukraine and Belarus now standing in the way.

NATO push East.jpg

Below the USA Military bases that surround Russia.  It is almost laughable when the Western Media and governments say Russia is a threat and they never give the people the full context of the Ukraine conflict.  America spends $550 billion per year on it's defence, Russia $70 billion which is less than Saudi Arabia at the moment.  

Would America like it or allow it if Russia installed a Pro-Russian President in Mexico and then armed it with Russian air defence weapons and missiles pointing at the USA. America would never allow that and would dismantle the Russian weapons even before they arrived.  You only have to look at the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, a 4 day confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union which escalated into an international crisis when American deployments of missiles in Italy and Turkey were matched by Soviet deployments of similar ballistic missiles in Cuba.

USA bases.jfif

Imagine the following hypothetical scenario:  The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) with members: Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan)  as a defense military organisation continues to expand not only in Central Asia but also in Latin America.

First  way of expansion are the old Russian satellites: Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala. The next round is Brazil, Venezuela, Chile and Argentina. There are massive Russian military bases including Russian missile sites.  The door is finally open to Mexico and …Canada. In Canada there is a pro-Russian coup d’état. The regime in Ottawa becomes the most anti-American regime not only in the Western hemisphere but in the world, surpassing even Teheran’s anti-American fever. Russian military hardware is flooding in all Canadian provinces. In addition, along the 4,000 km US- Canada border, Russia installs 30 bio-lab (research centers) under the supervision of Russian bioweapon specialists.  Most importantly due to geographic proximity Russian missiles could now hit Washington DC and New York in under 5 minutes, which makes them, de facto defenceless…

Washington is desperate to de-escalate the standoff and launches a diplomatic demarch by proposing the removal of Russian missiles sites, and written guarantees for the neutrality status to its neighbours, namely Canada and Mexico. Moscow and CTSO flatly reject these proposals.

The above scenario is exactly what has happened to Russia by NATO and the USA!



Notes from a 1991 meeting prove that the US, UK, France, and Germany assured the Soviet Union that NATO would not expand east. It’s part of a growing body of evidence that the West broke its promise to Russia.

A newly discovered document provides more evidence that Western governments broke their promise not to expand NATO eastward after German reunification.

Notes from a 1991 meeting between top US, British, French, and German officials confirm that there was a “general agreement that membership of NATO and security guarantees [are] unacceptable” for Central and Eastern Europe.

Germany’s diplomatic representative emphasized that the Soviet Union was promised in 1990 that “we would not extend NATO beyond the Elbe” river, in eastern Germany.

The document, which was formerly classified as secret, comes from the British National Archives.

It was made widely known this February by the German newspaper Der Spiegel, but was actually first published by US political scientist Joshua Shifrinson in 2019.

NATO has added 14 member states east of Germany since end of First Cold War

Since the end of the First Cold War and the overthrow of the Soviet Union,14 countries in Central and Eastern Europe have joined the US-led NATO military alliance – all countries east of Germany, in flagrant violation of the promise not to expand.

In 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland joined NATO.

In 2004, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia joined as well.

In 2009, Albania and Croatia joined.

In 2017, Montenegro joined.

In 2020, North Macedonia joined.

NATO has also discussed the possibility of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine joining in the future.

In December 2021, the Russian Federation demanded that NATO agree to a series of security guarantees, including a promise not to add any more members. The United States and NATO rejected Moscow’s demands.


So is President Putin and Russia being unrealistic when it says it will not allow the Ukraine to join NATO and have missiles stationed in the Ukraine, just 5 minutes flight from Moscow.  No he is not being unrealistic and has every right for the security of Russia just as America did during the Cuban Missile crisis when America threatened to invade Cuba unless the USSR backed down.

Ukraine nuclear.JPG

Below on Gravitas Plus, Palki Sharma tells you how Western arrogance & NATO’s expansionism are also to blame, how their actions precipitated the crisis in Ukraine.

The US had to stage two regime changes or revolutions – the “Orange Revolution” in 2004 and the “EuroMaidan” in 2014 – to acquire Ukraine as a client or proxy state.

Timeline: Euromaidan, the Original “Ukraine Crisis” Coup 2014


The US Is the Major Instigator of the Ukraine Conflict. The Historical Facts

Fact 1. In February 2014, a coup overthrew the Ukrainian government which came to power in an election certified by the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation). The president, Viktor Yanukovich, was forced to flee for his life.

Fact 2. The coup was promoted by United States officials. Neo-conservatives such as Victoria Nuland and John McCain actively supported the protests. As confirmed in a secretly recorded phone call, Nuland determined the post-coup composition weeks in advance. Later, Nuland bragged they spent $5 billion in this campaign over two decades. Before the coup was “midwifed”, Nuland forcefully rejected a likely European compromise agreement which would have led to a compromise government. “F*** the EU!”,  she said. Nuland managed the coup but Vice President Biden was overall in charge. As Nuland says in the phone call, Biden would give the ultimate “atta boy” to the coup leaders. Subsequently, Joe Biden’s son personally benefited from the coup. Victoria Nuland has even more power now as the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Secret US forces such as the Central Intelligence Agency must also be involved.

Fact 3. The coup government immediately acted with hostility toward its Russian speaking citizens. Approximately 30% of Ukrainian citizens have Russian as their first language, yet on the first day in power, the coup regime acted to make Russian no longer an official state language. This was followed by more actions of hostility. As documented in the video “Crimes of the Euromaidan Nazis”, a convoy of buses going back to Crimea was attacked. In Odessa, over thirty  opponents of the coup government died when they were attacked and the trade union hall set afire.

Fact 4. During World War 2, there were Nazi sympathizers in western Ukraine when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union.  This element continues today in the form of Svoboda and other far right nationalist parties. The Ukrainian government has even passed legislation heroizing Nazi collaborators while removing statues honoring anti-Nazi patriots.  The situation was described three years ago in an article “Neo-nazis and the far right are on the march in Ukraine”.  The author questioned why the US is supporting this. Under President Poroshenko (2014 to 2019) nationalism surged and even the Orthodox Church split apart.

Fact 5. The secession of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are a direct result of the 2014 coup. In Crimea, a referendum vote was rapidly organized. With 83% turnout and 97% voting in favor, Crimeans decided to secede from Ukraine and re-unify with Russia. Crimea was part of Russia since 1783.  When the administration of Crimea was transferred to the Ukraine in 1954. they were all part of the Soviet Union. This was done without consulting the population.

In the provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk on the border with Russia, the majority of the population speaks Russian and had no hostility to Russia. The Kiev coup regime was hostile and enacting policies they vehemently disagreed with.  In spring 2014,  the Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples Republics declared their independence from the Kiev regime.

Fact 6. The Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015 were signed by Ukraine, Ukrainian rebels, Russia and other European authorities.  They were designed to stop the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine and retain the territorial integrity of Ukraine while granting a measure of autonomy to Luhansk and  Donetsk. This is not abnormal; there are 17 autonomous zones in Europe. These agreements were later rebuffed by the Kiev government and Washington. This led to the decision by Russia on 21 February 2022 to recognize the Peoples Republics of Donetsk (DPR) and Luhansk (LPR).

But isn’t secession illegal under international law? The US and NATO have little credibility to oppose secession since they promoted the breakup of Yugoslavia, secession of Kosovo from Serbia,  secession of South Sudan from Sudan, and Kurdish secessionist efforts in Iraq and Syria, etc.. The secession of Crimea is justified by its unique history and overwhelming popular support. The secession of Luhansk and Donetsk may be justified by the illegal 2014 Kiev coup.

US intervention, both open and secret, has been a major driver of the events in Ukraine. The US has been the major instigator of the conflict.


Russia responded, in 2014, by annexing or re-integrating Crimea (base of the Russian Black Sea fleet) and by backing the de facto secession of Russian-speaking parts of Eastern Ukraine. In addition, Russia warned against adding Ukraine as a member or partner to NATO, which was perceived as a direct military and strategic threat to Russia – similar to how the United States might perceive a Russian or Chinese military alliance with Mexico or Cuba.

In December 2021, Russia published a set of proposals or demands, addressed to the US and NATO, concerning mutual security guarantees.

In particular, Russia asked the US and NATO to remove their forces and military infrastructure from member states that joined the alliance after 1997 (i.e. all of Eastern Europe); to not admit former Soviet republics into NATO (e.g. Ukraine and Georgia); to remove US nuclear weapons from Europe; and to reinstate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (suspended by the US in 2019). See the full Russian proposals here and here.

In January 2022, both the US and NATO turned down these proposals or demands as unrealistic. “This alliance is not going to be rolling back time and returning to a completely different era, where we had a very different alliance with smaller and a very different footprint.”, the US NATO envoy said on January 11, 2022. Six weeks later, on February 24, 2022, Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine.

If the Russian military operation achieves its goals, this would lead to the loss of Ukraine as a US client or proxy state 

At the geopolitical level, the Russian intervention may have to be seen, so far, as a defensive and almost desperate move in response to 20 years of NATO expansion in Eastern Europe.

Indeed, many leading US geostrategists – including George Kennan, Henry Kissinger, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Cohen – have long been advising against the expansion of NATO to Eastern Europe and especially to Ukraine in order to avoid a direct confrontation with Russia.

The Russian government appears to argue somewhat differently, though. According to Russia, Kiev had been waging, since 2014, an eight-year military campaign against the Russian-language breakaway republics in Eastern Ukraine, described by Russia as a “genocide” that had cost up to 14,000 lives. On February 21, 2022, Russia formally recognized the separatist republics and asked Kiev to halt its military campaign. Russia argued that the formal recognition of the republics was backed by international law due to the Western precedents of Slovenia in 1991 and especially Kosovo in 2008.

The Ukraine Crisis: Facts versus Lies - An American Christian Perspective


Ukraine: The US and NATO Created this Mess

Eight Years Ago: US-NATO Installed a Neo-Nazi Government in Ukraine

The US Is Culpable in Today's Ukraine Crisis

The West’s Hands in Ukraine Are as Bloody as Putin’s


John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in Political Science and Co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, assesses the causes of the present Ukraine crisis, and he states that the Western nations are responsible

Russia-Ukraine war: A different invasion, the West's same 'madman' script

Ukraine crisis: Why Putin is negotiating with the West at the barrel of a gun

USA\NATO have been funding the Ukraine military for years

According to reports from the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, obscured by our mainstream which only talks about the Russian deployment, Ukrainian Army and National Guard units, amounting to about 150 thousand men, are positioned here. They are armed and trained, and thus effectively commanded, by US-NATO military advisers and instructors.

From 1991 to 2014, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service, the U.S. provided Ukraine with $4 billion in military assistance, which was added to by over $2.5 billion after 2014, plus over a billion provided by the NATO Trust Fund in which Italy also participates. This is only part of the military investments made by the major NATO powers in Ukraine.

Great Britain, for example, concluded various military agreements with Kiev, investing among other things 1.7 billion pounds in the strengthening of Ukraine’s naval capabilities: this program provides for the arming of Ukrainian ships with British missiles, the joint production of 8 fast missile launchers, the construction of naval bases on the Black Sea and also on the Sea of Azov between Ukraine, Crimea and Russia. In this framework, Ukrainian military spending, which in 2014 was equivalent to 3% of GDP, increased to 6% in 2022, corresponding to more than $ 11 billion.

In addition to the US-NATO military investments in Ukraine, there is the $10 billion plan being implemented by Erik Prince, founder of the private US military company Blackwater, now renamed Academi, which has been supplying mercenaries to the CIA, Pentagon and State Department for covert operations (including torture and assassinations), earning billions of dollars.

Erik Prince’s plan, revealed by a Time magazine investigation [1], is to create a private army in Ukraine through a partnership between the Lancaster 6 company, with which Prince has supplied mercenaries in the Middle East and Africa, and the main Ukrainian intelligence office controlled by the CIA.

It is not known, of course, what would be the tasks of the private army created in Ukraine by the founder of Blackwater, certainly with funding from the CIA. However, it can be expected that it would conduct covert operations in Europe, Russia and other regions from its base in Ukraine.

Against this background, it is particularly alarming that the Russian Defense Minister Shoigu denounced that in the Donetsk region there are “private US military companies that are preparing a provocation with the use of unknown chemicals”.

It could be the spark that causes the detonation of a war in the heart of Europe: a chemical attack against Ukrainian civilians in Donbass, immediately attributed to the Russians of Donetsk and Lugansk, which would be attacked by the preponderant Ukrainian forces already deployed in the region, to force Russia to intervene militarily in their defense.

In the front line, ready to slaughter the Russians in the Donbass, is the Azov battalion, promoted to a special forces regiment, trained and armed by the US and NATO, distinguished for its ferocity in attacks on the Russian populations of Ukraine.

The Azov, which recruits neo-Nazis from all over Europe under its flag traced from that of SS Das Reich, is commanded by its founder Andrey Biletsky, promoted to colonel [2]. It is not only a military unit, but an ideological and political movement, of which Biletsky is the charismatic leader, especially for the youth organization that is educated to hate the Russians with his book “The Words of the White Führer”.

The US Department of Defence funded at least 15 different bio-labs in Ukraine.

USA Bio weapons lab in Ukraine

The U.S. Department of Defense Funded 11 Bioweapon Labs in Ukraine…and that was as of 4 years ago.

“When the Fact Checkers Say it’s a Hoax…You Almost Know it’s True”: Bongino TORCHES the Fake News for Covering Up US-Funded Bioweapon Research in Ukraine

Russian forces have discovered that a Ukrainian military biological program funded by the Pentagon was hastily destroyed on February 24, the day Russian troops began advancing into Ukraine.

Why Did the US Embassy Official Website Just Remove All Evidence of Ukrainian Bioweapons Labs?

The US DOD funded at least 15 different bio-labs in Ukraine. These are not Chinese or Russian bio-labs. At least eight of these are bioweapons labs are operated exclusively by the US. These laboratories “consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern” to conduct “enhanced bio-security, bio-safety, and bio-surveillance measures” through “international research partnerships.” Each facility costs the US taxpayers anywhere from $1.8 to over $3 million. The DOD facilitated the permit process to allow Ukrainian scientists to work with pathogens of pandemic potential.

Below Independent author and historian Mike King of The Real History Channel joins the Realist Report to discuss the Russia-Ukraine conflict!

Why Putin Took Military Action

In his 3,350-word speech, Putin laid out in full detail the reasons he decided to take military action and what he hopes it will achieve. The speech is a devastating critique of U.S. policy toward Russia over the past 30 years, which no doubt will fall on deaf ears in Washington.

Western media is so far ignoring the speech or superficially dismissing it. But it has to be carefully studied if anyone is interested in understanding why Russia launched this military operation. 

Putin said the existential threat from NATO’s expansion was the main reason for military action:

“Our biggest concerns and worries, [are] the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year. I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border.

It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and, as I said, is approaching our very border.

Why is this happening? Where did this insolent manner of talking down from the height of their exceptionalism, infallibility and all-permissiveness come from? What is the explanation for this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to our interests and absolutely legitimate demands?”

 Putin called the Americans “con-artists” for lying about NATO expansion. He referred to:

“promises not to expand NATO eastwards even by an inch. To reiterate: they have deceived us, or, to put it simply, they have played us. Sure, one often hears that politics is a dirty business. It could be, but it shouldn’t be as dirty as it is now, not to such an extent. This type of con-artist behaviour is contrary not only to the principles of international relations but also and above all to the generally accepted norms of morality and ethics.”

Putin said Russia had long wanted to cooperate with the West.

“Those who aspire to global dominance have publicly designated Russia as their enemy. They did so with impunity. Make no mistake, they had no reason to act this way,” he said.

Putin then said this “absolutism,” with the Soviet Union no longer as a barrier, led to unchecked U.S. aggression, starting with NATO’s bombing of Serbia in 1999, the 2003 invasion of Iraq and U.S. involvement in Syria. Russia has been taking note of the destruction Washington has wrought, even as it seems whitewashed from American minds.

“First a bloody military operation was waged against Belgrade, without the UN Security Council’s sanction but with combat aircraft and missiles used in the heart of Europe. The bombing of peaceful cities and vital infrastructure went on for several weeks. I have to recall these facts, because some Western colleagues prefer to forget them, and when we mentioned the event, they prefer to avoid speaking about international law.

Then came the turn of Iraq, Libya and Syria. The illegal use of military power against Libya and the distortion of all the UN Security Council decisions on Libya ruined the state, created a huge seat of international terrorism, and pushed the country towards a humanitarian catastrophe, into the vortex of a civil war, which has continued there for years. The tragedy, which was created for hundreds of thousands and even millions of people not only in Libya but in the whole region, has led to a large-scale exodus from the Middle East and North Africa to Europe.

A similar fate was also prepared for Syria. The combat operations conducted by the Western coalition in that country without the Syrian government’s approval or UN Security Council’s sanction can only be defined as aggression and intervention.

But the example that stands apart from the above events is, of course, the invasion of Iraq without any legal grounds. They used the pretext of allegedly reliable information available in the United States about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. To prove that allegation, the US Secretary of State held up a vial with white power, publicly, for the whole world to see, assuring the international community that it was a chemical warfare agent created in Iraq.

It later turned out that all of that was a fake and a sham, and that Iraq did not have any chemical weapons. Incredible and shocking but true. We witnessed lies made at the highest state level and voiced from the high UN rostrum. As a result we see a tremendous loss in human life, damage, destruction, and a colossal upsurge of terrorism.

Overall, it appears that nearly everywhere, in many regions of the world where the United States brought its law and order, this created bloody, non-healing wounds and the curse of international terrorism and extremism.”

Putin said over the past days “NATO leadership has been blunt in its statements that they need to accelerate and step up efforts to bring the alliance’s infrastructure closer to Russia’s borders. In other words, they have been toughening their position. We cannot stay idle and passively observe these developments. This would be an absolutely irresponsible thing to do for us.”

Ukraine, he said, had essentially become a de-facto NATO member posing the greatest threat to Russia.

“Any further expansion of the North Atlantic alliance’s infrastructure or the ongoing efforts to gain a military foothold of the Ukrainian territory are unacceptable for us. Of course, the question is not about NATO itself. It merely serves as a tool of US foreign policy. The problem is that in territories adjacent to Russia, which I have to note is our historical land, a hostile “anti-Russia” is taking shape. Fully controlled from the outside, it is doing everything to attract NATO armed forces and obtain cutting-edge weapons.”

A Parting Shot at European Vassals

Putin also blasted America’s European allies for not having the strength of principle or the moral fiber to stand up to Washington. He said:

“The United States is still a great country and a system-forming power. All its satellites not only humbly and obediently say yes to and parrot it at the slightest pretext but also imitate its behaviour and enthusiastically accept the rules it is offering them. Therefore, one can say with good reason and confidence that the whole so-called Western bloc formed by the United States in its own image and likeness is, in its entirety, the very same ’empire of lies.’”

Read the full text of the Putin speech here:

14,000 people in the Donbass region have been killed by the Ukraine military in the past 8 years.  Where was the BBC, ITV, CNN reports on this.

They were silent.  What hypocrites.

Below John Pilger rips world leaders for ignoring Donbass shelling for years

Israel bombing palestine.JPG

The world is crying foul over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Did the world cry foul when NATO and the USA invaded and destroyed Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan?

Right now, for decades, in exchange for cheap oil the US gives the latest mass murder weapons to Saudi Arabia who then test them on Yemenis in their never ending Yemen V Saudi Arabia war.

Where’s the world’s sympathy then?


Does the below story about Yemen ever get reported on the front of the mainstream media in the Western World? The answer is no but when the find just one Ukraine civilian killed by a Russian military strike they put it on the front of the news and newspapers because they need to manipulate public consciousness.

US-Saudi war on Yemen has killed 377,000 people, 70% of those were children under 5 years old

The death toll of the US-UK-Saudi-Emirati war on Yemen is estimated to be at least 377,000 individuals, as of the end of 2021.

More than two-thirds of these Yemenis killed were likely children.

These statistics come from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which reported in November that the number of deaths by direct and indirect causes in Yemen was projected to surpass 377,000 by the end of 2021.

March 2022 will mark the seventh anniversary of this war, which has caused the largest humanitarian crisis on Earth.

Saudi Arabia initiated the war in March 2015 by launching airstrikes on its southern neighbor, with support and weapons from the United States, United Kingdom, and United Arab Emirates.

The US-NATO War of Aggression against Yugoslavia

So, Are Putin and the Russians as Good as These Guys? You Decide.

The 5 minutes video below from a young guy in Ukraine/Russia, lays out in the simplest way, what's going on with Russia and Ukraine, why Russia is right and why the rest of us should be supporting the demilitarization and Ukraine.

The Anglo-Zionist International Cabal of Gangsters and the distortion of the Media


We are all aware of the ability of the Anglo-Zionist International Cabal of Gangsters (ICG) to propagate the preferred story-line for every occasion, as with the Russia/Ukraine conflict today. Generally, they employ the power of the Western media to overwhelm the world’s publics with the accepted version of events. But how do the US and Israel, and the ICG, manage so well to avoid the negative publicity from their own foreign policy adventures? Most of us would instinctively believe we have the easy answer to this question, since it appears to hinge simply on media censorship, but we might be mistaken. There is more to a successful information blockade than is superficially obvious.

The first part of course is the nearly-universal control of all Western media by a relatively small handful of people, all Jews. This includes first the news services like AP and Reuters, then the newspapers plus most recognised magazines, radio and TV stations and networks, virtually the entire book publishing industry, all of the social media and related internet platforms like Wikipedia and Google, “fact-checkers” like the despicable Poynter Institute, as well as 90% of Hollywood which includes both motion pictures and television programs. Their control on information is nearly total.

Read the full article below and see the pictures and atrocities of what the USA-NATO-UK have done around the world

Propaganda and the Media — Part 3 – Establishing and Controlling the Narrative


Ukraine, the 'borderlands' between Russia and 'civilized' Europe is on fire. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and Russia's access to the Mediterranean.

The Maidan Massacre in early 2014 triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych, spurred Crimeans to secede and join Russia, and sparked a civil war in Eastern Ukraine.

Russia was portrayed by Western media as the perpetrator, and has been sanctioned and widely condemned as such. But was Russia responsible for what happened?

Ukraine on Fire provides a historical perspective for the deep divisions in the region which led to the 2004 Orange Revolution, the 2014 uprisings, and the violent overthrow of democratically-elected Yanukovych.

Covered by Western media as a 'popular revolution', it was in fact a coup d'état scripted and staged by ultra-nationalist groups and the US State Department.

Investigative journalist Robert Parry reveals how US-funded political NGOs and media companies have emerged since the 1980s, replacing the CIA in promoting America's geopolitical agenda abroad.

Executive producer Oliver Stone gained unprecedented access to the inside story through his on-camera interviews with former President Viktor Yanukovych and Minister of Internal Affairs Vitaliy Zakharchenko, who explain how the US Ambassador and factions in Washington actively plotted for regime change.

And, in his first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Stone solicits Putin's take on the significance of Crimea, NATO and the US's history of interference in elections and regime change in the region.


The Jewish Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, the man who sold Ukraine and greatly exacerbated Ukraine’s internal crisis while relentlessly provoking Russia.

Volodymyr Zelensky is the current President of Ukraine. He was elected in a landslide victory in 2019 on the promise of easing tensions with Russia and resolving the crisis in the breakaway republics in east Ukraine. He has made no attempt to keep his word on either issue. Instead, he has greatly exacerbated Ukraine’s internal crisis while relentlessly provoking Russia. Zelensky has had numerous opportunities to smooth things over​ with Moscow and prevent the outbreak of hostilities. Instead, he has consistently made matters worse by blindly following Washington’s directives.

Zelensky has been lionized in the west and praised for his personal bravery. But—as a practical matter—he has failed to restore national unity or implement the crucial peace accord that is the only path to reconciliation. The Ukrainian president doesn’t like the so-called Minsk Protocol and has refused to meet its basic requirements. As a result, the ethnically-charged, fratricidal war that has engulfed Ukraine for the last 8 years, continues to this day with no end in sight. President Vladimir Putin referred to Zelensky’s obstinance in a recent speech delivered at the Kremlin. He said:

“At yesterday’s event… the Ukrainian leadership publicly declared that they were not going to abide by these agreements. Not going to abide by them. Well, what else can you say about that?” (Vladimir Putin)

Most Americans fail to realize that Zelensky’s rejection of Minsk was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Russian officials had worked for 8 years on Minsk hammering out terms that would be agreeable to all parties. Then—at the eleventh hour—Zelensky put the kibosh on the deal with a wave of the hand. Why? Who told Zelensky to scrap the agreement? Washington?

Of course.

And why did Zelensky deploy 60,000 combat troops to the area just beyond the Line of Contact (in east Ukraine) where they could lob mortal shells into the towns and villages of the ethnic Russians who lived there? Clearly, the message this sent to the people was that an invasion was imminent and that they should either flee their homes immediately or take shelter in their cellars. What objective did Zelensky hope to achieve by forcing these people to huddle in their homes in fear for their lives? And what message did he intend to send to Moscow whose leaders looked on at these developments in absolute horror?

Did he know his actions would set off alarms in Russia forcing Putin to call up his military and prepare them for a possible invasion to protect his people from– what looked to be– a massive ethnic cleansing operation?

He did.

So, how are these actions consistent with Zelensky’s campaign promises to restore national unity and peacefully resolve Ukraine’s issues with Russia?

They’re not consistent at all, they are polar opposites. In fact, Zelenskyy appears to be operating off a different script altogether. Take, for example, his complete unwillingness to address Russia’s minimal security concerns. Did Zelensky know that Putin had repeatedly said that Ukraine’s membership in NATO was a “red line” for Russia? Did he know that Putin has been saying the same thing over-and-over again since 2014? Did he know that Putin warned that if Ukraine took steps to join NATO, Russia would be forced to take “military-technical” measures to ensure their own security? Does Zelensky know that NATO is Washington-controlled Alliance that has engaged in numerous acts of aggression against other sovereign states. Here’s a short list of NATO’s accomplishments:

  1. The destruction of Yugoslavia

  2. The destruction of Afghanistan

  3. The destruction of Libya

  4. The destruction of Iraq

  5. The destruction of Syria


Does Zelensky know that NATO is openly hostile to Russia and regards Russia a serious threat to its expansionist ambitions?

Yes, he knows all these things. Still, he publicly expressed his interest in developing nuclear weapons. What is that all about? Imagine the problem that would pose for Russia. Imagine if a US-backed puppet, like Zelensky, had nuclear missiles at his fingertips. How do you think that might impact Russia’s security? Do you think Putin could ignore a development like that and still fulfill his duty to protect the Russian people?

And why did Zelenskyy agree to allow shipment after shipment of lethal weaponry to be delivered to Ukraine if he sincerely sought peace with Russia? Did he think that Putin was too stupid to see what was going on right beneath his nose? Did he think he was normalizing relations by expanding his arsenal, threatening his own people, and jumping through whatever hoops Washington set out for him?

Or did he think that Putin’s requests for security assurances were unreasonable? Is that it? Did he think– that if the shoe was on the other foot– the US would allow Mexico to put military bases, artillery pieces and missile sites along America’s southern border? Is there any president in American history who wouldn’t have done the same thing that Putin did? Is there any president in American history who wouldn’t have launched a preemptive strike on those Mexican weapons and vaporized every living thing for a 20-mile radius?

No, Putin’s demands were entirely reasonable, but Zelenskyy shrugged them off anyway. Why?

Does Zelenskyy know that there are Right Sektor, neo-Nazis in the government, military and Security Services. Does he know that, while their numbers are small, they are a force to be reckoned with and factor heavily in the hatred and persecution of ethnic Russians? Does he know that these far-right elements participate in torchlight parades, imprint swastikas or SS tattoos on their arms, and revere the racialist ideology of Adolph Hitler? Does he realize that many these Nazis have engaged in criminal acts of brutality including the incinerating of 40 civilians at the Trade Union Building in Odessa in 2014? Does he think that the CIA’s covert programs to arm and train these right-wing militants builds confidence or does he think it reminds Moscow of a catastrophic war in which 27 million Russians were exterminated by Germany’s Wehrmacht?

Can you see how everything Zelensky has done, was done with the intention of provoking Russia?

All the talk of joining NATO, all the talk about building nukes, the steady buildup of lethal weaponry, the movement of troops to the east, the refusal to implement the Minsk Treaty and the rejection of Putin’s security demands. All of these were deliberate provocations. But, why? Why “bait the bear”; that’s the question?

Because Washington wants to lure Russia into a war so it can further demonize Putin, isolate Russia, launch a counterinsurgency operation against the Russian army, and impose harsh economic sanctions that will inflict maximum damage on the Russian economy. That’s Washington’s strategy in a nutshell, and Zelenskyy is helping Washington achieve its objectives. He’s allowing himself to be Washington’s tool. He is sacrificing his own country to advance the interests of the United States.

All this helps to underscore a point that is never considered by the media and never discussed by the pundits on cable news, that is, that Ukraine is going to lose the war, and Zelenskyy knows it. He knows the Ukrainian Armed Forces are no match for the Russian army. It is like a Giant swatting a fly. Ukraine is the fly. The public needs to hear this, but they’re not hearing it. Instead, they’re hearing blabber about heroic Ukrainians fighting the Russian invader. But this is nonsense, dangerous nonsense that is emboldening people to sacrifice their lives for a lost cause. The outcome of this conflict has never been in doubt: Ukraine is going to lose. That is certain. And, if you read between the lines, you’ll see that Russia is winning the war quite handily; they are crushing the Ukrainian army at every turn, and they will continue to crush them until Ukraine surrenders.

What can we deduce from the facts:

  1. Russia will prevail and Ukraine will lose.

  2. Ukraine is going to be partitioned. Putin is going to create the buffer he needs to assure his country’s security.

  3. Whoever governs the western part of Ukraine will be required to declare their “neutrality” (in writing) and reject any offers for NATO membership. If they violate that promise, they will be removed by force.


But here’s the important thing: All of the main actors in this fiasco knew from the very beginning that Ukraine had no chance of defeating the Russian army. That was a foregone conclusion. So–what we want to know– is why Zelenskyy didn’t take steps to avoid the tragedy before it unfolded?

The answer to this question helps to reveal ‘who Zelenskyy really is’.

Ask yourself this: Why didn’t Zelenskyy negotiate with Putin when he had the chance? Why didn’t he pull back his 60,000 troops from the east? Why didn’t he stop Washington’s weapons shipments? Why didn’t he implement the Minsk Treaty? Why didn’t he reject NATO’s offer for membership?

Finally, why was so intent on doing the things that he knew would anger Moscow and increase the likelihood of a war?

These questions are not hard to answer.

Zelenskyy has been acting on orders from Washington from the get-go. We know that. He’s also been implementing Washington’s agenda not his own and certainly not Ukraine’s. We know that, too. But that does not absolve him from responsibility. After all, he is a full-grown adult capable of distinguishing between right from wrong. He knows what he’s doing, and he knows that it’s wrong; worse than wrong, it’s inexcusable. He’s sending men to die in a war he knows they can’t win; he’s inflicting incalculable suffering and injury on his own people for no reason at all; and –worst of all– he’s cleared the way for the dissolution of Ukraine itself, the country he was sworn to defend. That country is going to be broken into bits as part of a final settlement with Russia, and Zelenskyy will share a good part of the blame.


It is interesting to note that Jewish-Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky is the financial sponsor not only of current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (who is also Jewish), but also of the so-called “neo-nazi” Azov battalion and several other anti-Russian nationalist battalions. These battalions may or may not hold anti-Jewish views, but at any rate they appear to serve as pawns in a much larger political and geopolitical game.

Ihor Kolomoyskyi and Zelenskyy

If Putin was in fact looking for a mega-rich, influential cabal-operating Ukrainian Jew guilty of perpetrating violence against Russians, he wouldn’t have to look much further than Ihor Kolomoyskyi. The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (Russia’s FBI) has initiated more than 400 criminal cases targeting Ukrainian officials, military servicemen, and volunteer fighters, and that Kolomoyskyi was on the list.

Russia has been trying to get it hands on Kolomoyskyi since 2014. Kolomoyskyi, who owns Ukraine’s biggest bank, plus airlines, huge stakes of Ukrainian media, and other companies, was accused in July 2014 of founding and funding Dnipro-1 Special Tasks Patrol Police Battalion. The unit was held responsible by Amnesty International in December of the same year for blocking food aid, and attempting to starve the Russian-speaking populations of the separatist “republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk. Operating under the mask of Ukrainian patriotism, Kolomoyskyi, who offered bounties of thousands of dollars for Russian separatists, was in fact trying to stem the separatist movement so that it wouldn’t expand to the heartland of his business interests, his home city of Dnipropetrovsk. Together with fellow Jew Hennadiy Korban, who was later investigated for embezzlement and exiled to Israel, the pair “not only made political capital by saving [Dnipropetrovsk] from war, but used this emergence of Dnipropetrovsk as a ‘pro-Ukrainian’ city to protect [Kolomoyskyi’s] business interests.”

Kolomoyskyi’s Ukrainian “patriotism” and anti-Russian attitudes had already been significantly inflamed by the 2014 seizure of his assets in Crimea by the new Russian authorities. In 2016, RT reported that the authorities would sell the assets in order to compensate residents of Crimea who had been exploited by Kolomoyskyi’s PrivatBank:

Twenty businesses formerly owned by Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoisky will be sold by the Crimean authorities. The region’s government is seeking to compensate people who lost money in Ukrainian banks, mostly Kolomoisky’s PrivatBank. Crimea’s Deputy Speaker Konstantin Bakharev says the oligarch’s assets will be sold by year-end for 2 billion rubles (about $30 million). “The money will be transferred to the depositor protection fund for compensation payments to residents of the Crimea, whose deposits in the Ukrainian banks exceeded 700,000 rubles ($10,500),” he said.

When then-President Petro Poroshenko nationalized Kolomoyskyi’s PrivatBank (which was also operated by fellow Jew Gennadiy (Zvi Hirsch) Bogolyubov) in 2016, Kolomoyskyi threw his influence behind fellow Jew and popular actor Volodymyr Zelenskyy, now a hero and darling of the Western media. Zelensky’s campaign, strangely enough, began with his appearance on Kolomoyskyi’s media channel as the star of the television series Servant of the People, where he played the role of the president of Ukraine. In the series, Zelenskyy’s character was a high-school history teacher in his 30s who won the presidential election after a viral video showed him ranting against government corruption in Ukraine. In retrospect, the show was a masterwork of social engineering and life imitating art.

Then, presto, enter Victoria Nuland $5 billion U.S. dollars and Zelenskyy was suddenly the real president and is now a billionaire and good friends with Hunter Biden, son of the American president, both bankrolled by the same guy, both drug addicts.


Reuters later reported:

One of Ukraine’s most popular TV channels 1+1, owned by oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, has given Zelenskyy a powerful platform in recent months during his meteoric rise to the brink of the presidency. On Saturday, a day before Zelensky won the first round of the presidential contest and set up a run-off with the incumbent Petro Poroshenko, 1+1 filled its schedule with back-to-back shows by the comedian and actor.

There was initially some unease that the whole thing might be too obvious. “There are legitimate reasons to worry about the future of Ukrainian Jewry,” said Vladislav Davidzon, the editor-in-chief of the magazine Odessa Review. “Having a Jewish president, who is also backed by a picaresque Jewish oligarch might cause any failings to be directed at the Jewish community.” He needn’t have worried. Zelenskyy sky-rocketed to prominence, and one of his earliest measures was to nominate fellow Jew Volodymyr Groysman as Prime Minister and target Poroshenko, setting in motion a sequence of events that would result in the reversal of the nationalization of PrivatBank and the return of the bank to Kolomoyskyi. Although posturing as an anti-corruption populist, Zelenskyy’s links to Kolomoyskyi have continued to dog him, and in October 2021 it was revealed via the Pandora Papers that Zelenskyy, who constantly denied that he was a “puppet” of the Jewish oligarch, and his associates had received $40 million into offshore accounts from funds linked to Kolomoyskyi.

Jewish crook zelensky fortune.JPG

Most of this money has been bled from the Ukrainian people. Kolomoyskyi, who acted as President of the United Jewish Community of Ukraine, generously shared his wealth with Jews worldwide, and founded the European Jewish Union with Vadim Rabinovich, has been investigated for years by both the FBI and America’s Justice Department, in particular for pursuing a “vast scheme to steal millions of dollars from Ukraine’s largest bank and move the money into the U.S. to buy steel mills and skyscrapers.” In a special investigation, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported last week that Kolomoyskyi’s efforts to launder stolen Ukrainian money in the United States, via his Jewish associates in South Florida Mordechai “Motti” Korf and Uriel Laber, left a wake of economic devastation

Victor Pinchuk

Less outwardly ebullient than Kolomoyskyi is Victor Pinchuk, founder of both the pro-NATO Victor Pinchuk Foundation and the pro-EU Yalta European Strategy (the lobby group behind all those prominent polls showing massive Ukrainian support for NATO membership and a general tilt to the West). Pinchuk has been highly influential in driving Ukraine in a pro-NATO direction, including his funding of a free concert in 2008 headlined by Paul McCartney that was “shown on giant screens in five cities across the country” and designed to soothe growing splits between West and East Ukraine over Ukraine’s application that year to begin a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP). Pinchuk’s vision of Ukraine is less explicitly orientated for the protection of business interests, and more towards turning Ukraine into a clone of Western liberal democracies. As well as funding Steven Spielberg to produce a feature-length Ukrainian Holocaust film, Pinchuk describes himself as active in “human rights projects with George Soros.” In 2015, Pinchuk began the drive to further liberalize attitudes to homosexuals, and integrate Ukraine into “GloboHomo,” by inviting Elton John to speak at Yalta European Strategy. The speech was in many respects a typical example of neoliberal propaganda. John remarked:

What has [homosexuality] to do with a conference about the future of politics, security and the economy of the Ukraine? Because critical moments also exist in the lives of societies and nations. The choice of freedom over repression; democracy over totalitarianism; acceptance over hatred. Today there are more critical choices. … I suggest to you that your stance on human rights will also be a defining characteristic of the new Ukraine, and that there is no clearer touchstone on the issue of human rights than the respect and dignity afforded your LGBT citizens. … Being tolerant and inclusive is not only the morally right thing to do, for the new Ukraine; it is the smart thing to do. Basic fairness is an investment in human capital, and human capital is what drives business. … I suggest to you that accepting people regardless of age, race, gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation is today the measure of an open, tolerant, and democratic society. I ask you to begin this dialogue. … The people in this room are among the most powerful in the Ukraine, and in some cases the most powerful anywhere in the world. You have the power to help bring about this new era.

Russia sanctioned Pinchuk in 2018, as part of a broader approach to anti-Russian figures in Ukraine.

In a 2017 article, EuroMaidanPress made it clear that “The most important goal for oligarchs is money and not Ukraine’s national interests. … The sooner Ukraine pursues a long overdue policy of de-oligarchisation the better — although this will be impossible as long as Ukraine is led by an oligarch.” It’s clear that at least two of the oligarchs sucking on the blood of Ukraine have led them on a collision course with Putin’s Russia.

All of this, of course, is not to say that Putin’s Russia is much, or any, better. I still find it stunning that, when informed of Kolomoyskyi’s comment that he was a “schizophrenic shorty,” Putin didn’t reply that he was a crook for stealing from Ukrainians, Crimeans, or Russians, but that he was a crook who had “scammed Russian [Jewish] oligarch Roman Abramovich for billions of dollars.” In other words, much of what we are seeing here is not just grand geopolitics and clashing nationalisms, but a subtext of oligarchic feuds. In many respects, what we are seeing play out is a kind of perverse morbid rehash of the Middle Ages, when one king, funded and supported by “his Jews,” would wage war on another funded by his own group of Jews.


The Jewish role in the Ukraine crisis

The end result is normally richer Jews and a lot of European dead.