Home > Uncategorized > Interview: Ukraine: a Nazi-like victory of US/NATO lawlessness

Interview: Ukraine: a Nazi-like victory of US/NATO lawlessness

Voice of Russia
March 2, 2014

Ukraine: a Nazi-like victory of US/NATO lawlessness – Rick Rozoff
John Robles
Recorded on February 24, 2014

Download audio file

The US/NATO takeover of Ukraine, thought out and planned by the Neo-Conservative geopolitical architects and Zbigniew Brzezinski acolytes in the United States who have been driving the US policy of aggressive war and the destruction of countries since the events of 9-11, is not exactly going according to their plan for attaining complete global domination, uni-polarity and American hegemony.

Their ignorance of the peoples of the countries they are invading and attempting to subvert, their use of everything from Islamic extremists to militarized neo-nazis groups and their threats of sanctions and “prices to pay” are guaranteeing their own failure, and it is about time.

Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff spoke to us about the revocation of a 2012 Ukrainian federal law that permitted language rights to linguistic groups, which means in areas where Russian is spoken by a majority of people it cannot be used. Mr. Rozoff says that the cultural pogrom we have seen in Ukraine is on a level that is almost unimaginable and compares it to the ascension to power of Hitler’s National Socialists in Germany after 1933. Rozoff call the events in Ukraine: “…the worst thing that has occurred in our lifetime for what it signals: the utter triumph of lawlessness internationally, the utter triumph of international gangsterism and I mean the big gangsters in the West who are behind this ultimately and their gutter-snipes and their punks on the streets who are delivering the goods for them.” As for financial aid Rozoff says the usurpers in Kiev are simply asking for their pay-off money.

This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff – the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and international mailing list.

Robles: Hello Rick, how are you?

Rozoff: Good John, despite the circumstances.

Robles: Yeah, I have no words right now myself. But I would like to hear your take on what is going on right now in Ukraine, and especially with the outlawing of the Russian language?

Rozoff: Ukraine is divided right now. It is not only divided between people who are Russian-speaking primarily, or Russian and Ukrainian bilingual and those fanatics and extremists in Western Ukraine who insist on speaking Ukraine only, Ukrainian, rather, only. I mean there is linguistic and general cultural geographical divide that exists in the country, but really what we are talking about is ideological and I would argue ultimately moral divisions within the country.

What occurred on Saturday, let’s call it by its proper name, it was the most overt coup that has occurred in Europe since before World War II; there’s no question about that. The only comparison, and we’ve discussed it before, would be something on the order of Benito Mussolini’s March on Rome in 1922.

If the previous color revolutions, including the so-called Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004 and 2005 was essentially an illegal seizure of power, and it’s my contention it was, it was at least done under the auspices or under the pretense of it being a parliamentary electoral transition, that is a special election was held and there was a change of regime based on the result of the election, whether or not that was a legitimate election or not.

What happened this past Saturday, however, is of a totally caliber. What we have seen is a group of violent mob activists, essentially chasing the government out of power, in collusion with certain forces within the parliament, within the Rada. But for the most part a mob – mob rule – has taken over in Ukraine, and what we are going to see that, given the flavor or the nature of the real core of the opposition on the streets in Kiev, in Lviv and elsewhere in the country, which is extreme nationalist, fanatically and intolerantly nationalist to the point of fascist, is what we can expect to see is a series of punitive measures – vendettas, pogroms – and these will be directed against, first of all, political adversaries, there is a statement I believe on Interfax today where a leader of the Party of Regions, formally the governing party, only a few days ago after all, only four days ago, stated that “we are now operating at gun-point.” And he’s a deputy in the parliament, in the Verkhovna Rada, and it’s something we’ve all suspected that not only have members of the now-opposition parties, formally governing parties, operating under duress but that in essence there have been threats to their lives and the lives of their families and that is what I suspect is occurring, and that’s why you see some of the defections if not most that we’ve seen.

We also have to realize that there is a movement afoot, as you indicate, to revoke a 2012 federal law that permitted language rights to any linguistic group that represented ten or more percent of the population in any given political entity and province, and that has now been revoked. That means in areas where Russian is spoken by a majority of people, technically, it cannot be used as a state language, one of two state languages.

Similarly with other ethnic minorities, Hungarian and others in the west of the country, Romanian perhaps. We have already heard about an attack on a synagogue in Kiev. We’ve heard anti-Semitic language, clearly anti-Russian. We’ve seen that monument erected to the victory of the Soviet Union in World War II over Nazi Germany desecrated. We’ve seen a statue to General Kutuzov, who led the Russian army in the war against Napoleon in 1812, destroyed.

We have seen a cultural pogrom on a level that is almost unimaginable: the only comparison I could possibly think of is shortly after the ascension to power of Hitler’s National Socialists in Germany after 1933, you know the book burnings and the other cultural assaults against ethnic and other minorities in the country, this is what we are seeing right now.

Look, I have right in front of me right now, a photograph of the City Hall in Kiev from two or three days ago, and there are pillars, columns, in the center of it. The Svoboda banners or pennants are hanging from both sides – you know the three fingers and the fist, a roughly a variation of the OTPOR, you know clenched fist salute of all the colored revolutions. In the middle is a giant representation of Stepan Bandera, the Ukrainian nationalist and accused Nazi collaborationist in World War II. This is what’s taken over in Kiev; this is what’s taken over in much of Ukraine

Robles: What would you say about Secretary of State John Kerry. Two statements I would like you to comment on, one by John Kerry, he says: “Ukraine is going through an extraordinary transition and developments there shouldn’t be viewed as a West against East scenario”.

And also, this is the so-called opposition, or I don’t know if you can call people who have used force to occupy the houses of government as new leaders, but that’s what the Western media is calling them.
“The new leaders in Ukraine have promised to fight separatism”, as the European Union and Russia called on them to ensure the country’s integrity’. Can you comment on those two statements?

Rozoff: John Kerry’s comment? I would first of all just counterpose his comment…There’s a useful duplicity amongst American politicians; when they’re actually part of the governing administration they speak, at least in the public, with a degree of restraint that belies their true intention, which came to the fore or was revealed a couple of weeks ago when the Victoria Nuland tape was aired – this is how they talk privately, right, telling the European Union to get “f’ed” and dictating terms for the next regime in Ukraine after the coup that occurred on Saturday.

But while they are speaking at least to the public, to the media, they use restrained language like Mr Kerry. However, within the last 24 hours John McCain, one of the ranking senators in the US Senate and a former presidential candidate not too long ago, was on television stating this is a question, this is a distinction between East and West, there is a conflict between East and West.

The Ukrainian people, he states as though he’s empowered to speak on their behalf or can divine what their true intentions are, he says the Ukrainian people want to be a part of the West and not the East. East carries a negative connotation – the reference is clearly to Russia – that there is something inherently bad about the East and about Russia, and of course no sane Ukrainian in Mr McCain’s view would possibly want to affiliate with his kith and kin across the border in Russia, who are seen as inherently inferior or inherently savage or and barbarian and so forth.

He also said, and I think this worth … your listeners ought to know about this, that the events and the takeover, the bloody and violent coup in Ukraine last Saturday – he said this twice – should make Russian President Vladimir Putin “a little nervous”.

This is the same McCain who said, right after Muammar Gaddafi was killed in October 2011 that Vladimir Putin ought to pay attention, in so many words that he’s next. This is again he is a senior member of the US Senate, a presidential candidate. He is speaking the truth of what the American political establishment means. Kerry is simply sugar-coating his words.

Robles: So they are threatening Vladimir Putin, this a provocation in your opinion?

Rozoff: Again. Well I don’t know what else to say, but McCain twice in the television interview said to Vladimir Putin, given the events, recent events in Ukraine, “ought to be a little nervous.” That’s a quote.

Robles: I see, I see. What about the new “leaders”, these “peaceful protesters” that they are going to fight separatism? Can you comment on that?

Rozoff: Well, let’s keep in mind separatism is a two-edged sword and these people have played both bloody ends of it. On the one hand, had they not succeeded in bringing down the government, the legally elected and universally-, internationally-recognized government of Ukraine last Saturday, then they themselves would have played the separatist card in northwest Ukraine, around the Lviv area, calling for independence or breaking away or at least some autonomy status.

Now having taken control of the capital in a putsch, in a coup, they are against separatism, and the US and NATO of course are right behind the extremists, the Molotov cocktail-hurling and the sniper rifle-wielding extremists who took power on Saturday, are coming in – that is, the US and NATO and the European Union – and saying, we will not tolerate separatism or the fragmentation of Ukraine.

That is an unquestionable reference in the first place to Crimea. That should any efforts be made by the duly-established authorities in Crimea to assert the rights, say, of the Russian language and so forth that can then be construed or exploited by the whatever anarchic mob of gangsters that’s running the affair currently in Kiev that threaten Crimea and then call on their Western patrons to back them up.

Robles: But they actually have under international law and under normal international standards, they have the right to secede from Ukraine if their human rights and their right to self-determination and the right to speak the language that is native to them, if that’s infringed upon, they have the right to secede from Ukraine. SO what they are doing is the exact opposite, they are forcing the breakup of Ukraine themselves..

Rozoff: When the first and the real color revolution succeeded in 2003-2004, that is in Georgia, where Mikhail Saakashvili came to power with an irredentist and uncompromising hostile towards Russia, his first manoeuvre, within a month or two of taking office, was to threaten an autonomous region within Georgia, just as Crimea is an autonomous region within Ukraine, and I’m talking about Adjara or Adjaria. And he threatened the country, there was still a small handful Russian peacekeepers there, he actually moved his military right up to the border.

Eventually it lead to the president of Adjara having to flee to Moscow and then they took over the area. This is what I believe the new extremists in Kiev are going to replicate if they can. They are going to have their, just like Hitler distinguished himself by remilitarizing the Rhineland and then eventually bombing Spain or moving into the Sudetenland…Everyone of this ilk needs some military campaign to consolidate power and I fear that threats against Crimea would be the most likely scenario for consolidating some sort of fascistic power in Kiev.

Robles: I see. Where do you see NATO in all of this, Rick, please? That is very important.

Rozoff: It is in a very thick of it. I mean despite the fact that NATO is going out of its way to keep a low profile, because to do otherwise is to expose the real essence of what is occurring in Ukraine, which is: that a country of vital geostrategic significance, one that is not only close to Russia, but is arguably almost inseparable to it, the way Syrians and Lebanese may have felt in the past is I think how Ukrainians and Russians do now. They see themselves as at one time being part of one political entity. There are quite literally relatives on each side of the boarder and certainly particularly in the Crimea.

NATO has said a couple of things. Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen two days ago, on February, 23 made a statement in to the effect that Ukraine is a vital partner of NATO and NATO is a friend to the Ukrainian people.

Robles: A vital partner?

Rozoff: Yes. Impressing the stamp of NATO, in other words we’ve branded you, we’ve marked you off as our territory, and there is an upcoming meeting of defense ministers in Brussels. I believe it’s occurring tomorrow, for two days, 26 and 27, our time here.

And there is going to be a regular scheduled meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission, something set up to help integrate Ukraine fully into NATO as though the coup had never occurred, right? As though there had been no disruption. Everything else has gone by the wayside. I’m sure public transportation, I’m sure health services, I’m sure everything else has been impacted or impeded by the upheaval in Ukraine but not the meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission which is going on their schedule tomorrow.

We had occasion in the past to mention that even under Yanukovich, and you think how much worse it is going to be now under whatever junta is implanted in Kiev, that even under Yanukovich Ukraine became the first country to assign a naval vessel to two, permanent, NATO maritime operations, one in the Mediterranean, one in the Indian Ocean, Operation Active Endeavour and Operation Ocean Shield respectively, and that Ukraine became the first none-full member of NATO to supply military forces for NATO’s Response Force. So the process of integrating Ukraine into NATO has been going on for decades. It has been intensified in recent years rather than the opposite. And that opportunity now presents the US and its allies with the opportunity to further absorb and consolidate control over Ukraine.

This is possibly the worst thing that occurred in our lifetime and I do not exaggerate, for what it signals: the utter triumph of lawlessness internationally, the utter triumph of international gangsterism, and I mean the big gangsters in the West who are behind this ultimately and their guttersnipes and their punks on the streets who are delivering the goods for them.

To the tune by the way, as the new even fluid and amorphous regime in Kiev is asking of the West $35 billion in bailout money.

Robles: That is the first thing they got in there, the first thing they did was saying: “Oh, Russian –it is illegal as a language, so therefore other Russians are also illegal. And we need several billion dollars”. That is a first thing they did.

Rozoff: Yeah, they are asking for their pay-off money.

You were listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff – the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and international mailing list.

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. Giordano Bruno
    March 2, 2014 at 2:02 pm

    “Maidan. Inconvenient truth : shooting in the back” http://rutube.ru/video/93802748ac84d98b69294da71162d03f/


  2. March 9, 2014 at 10:13 pm

    for your information…

    From: David Morrison
    Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 4:15 PM
    Subject: William Hague deceived the House of Commons about the legitimacy of the new regime in Ukraine

    William Hague deceived the House of Commons about the legitimacy of the new regime in Ukraine

    Foreign Minister William Hague deceived the House of Commons about the legitimacy of the new regime in Ukraine in a statement on 4 March 2014.

    He led the House to believe that the Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, had removed President Yanukovich from power on 22 February 2014 in accordance with the Ukrainian constitution and that therefore “it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities” (see here).

    It is simply untrue that the Rada followed the procedure laid down in the Ukrainian constitution to impeach and remove a president from power.

    * * * *

    This procedure, laid down in Article 111 of the constitution (see text below), is not unlike that required for the impeachment and removal from power of a US president, which could take months.

    Thus, Article 111 obliges the Rada to establish a special investigatory commission to formulate charges against the president, seek evidence to justify the charges and come to conclusions about the president’s guilt for the Rada to consider.

    Prior to a final vote to remove a president from power, it requires

    (a) the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to review the case and certify that the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration has been followed, and

    (b) the Supreme Court of Ukraine must certify that the acts of which the President is accused are worthy of impeachment.

    The Rada didn’t follow this procedure at all. No investigatory commission was established and the Courts were not involved. On 22 February 2014, the Rada simply passed a bill removing President Yanukovych from office.

    Furthermore, the bill wasn’t even supported by three quarters of the members of the Rada, as required by Article 111 for the removal of a president from office – it was supported by 328 members, when it required 338 (since the Rada has 450 members).

    * * * *
    Justifying UK support for the new regime in Kiev in the House of Commons on 4 March 2014, William Hague said:

    “Former President Yanukovych left his post and then left the country, and the decisions on replacing him with an acting President were made by the Rada, the Ukrainian Parliament, by the very large majorities required under the constitution, including with the support of members of former President Yanukovych’s party, the Party of Regions, so it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities.”

    That is a calculated deception of the House of Commons, designed to give the impression that the procedure prescribed in the Ukrainian constitution for the removal of a president from office had been followed, when it hadn’t.

    Annex: Article 111 of the Ukrainian Constitution

    The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.

    The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is initiated by the majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

    To conduct the investigation, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine establishes a special temporary investigatory commission whose composition includes a special procurator and special investigators.

    The conclusions and proposals of the temporary investigatory commission are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

    For cause, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, by no less than two-thirds of its constitutional composition, adopts a decision on the accusation of the President of Ukraine.

    The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.

    David Morrison

    8 March 2014

    Tel +44 (0) 28 90 209 239+44 (0) 28 90 209 239; +44 (0) 7949 925 938+44 (0) 7949 925 938


    Send SMS
    Add to Skype
    You’ll need Skype CreditFree via Skype


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: