The Truth Will Set You Free .....
On the outside and the peripheral of Europe is where the UK is better-of placed. An independent island, not locked-in land mass that it seems to have now become.
The UK needs to be able to overlook and see what’s truly happening on the horizon and make its own self-determining predictions and decisions beneficial to the people of Britain, as opposed to the current disadvantageous decision making that’s being taken by an unelected body of bureaucrats comfortably sat in Brussels, for as each day goes by Europe is on the brink of WWIII.
So with these additional dilemmas to hit the regions of the Europe and much worse than any financial crisis or its austerity measures; there’s a serious threat of WWIII looming upon the horizon following Ukraine’s 2014 coup d’état, and something we should all be concerned about.
As already mentioned, it appears that Greece will not be able to escape the austerity measures and stranglehold of the EU, despite being given a four month lifeline in February 2015. Though when June 2015 comes around nothing would have really changed in Greece and they’ll be back to square one and in more debt than ever.
It’s the masses whom governments fear. For it is them who ultimately votes in the next leader and government or take matters into their own hands and as displayed in Independence Square in Kiev.
“They” know the austerity measures inflicted on the deprived populations of Europe are unsustainable and therefore the whole of the EU, and especially those member states such as the PIIGS, are sitting on a powder-keg of explosives and no one knows when it may explode.
“They”, other European leaders have seen how many of the politicians were treated in Ukraine; beaten, shot, slapped about, murdered, dragged from behind their desks and down to the streets and thrown into dustbins, then covered in eggs, flour or paint.
Many European politicians are without doubt very concerned over their own safety and what their “own people” may do to them if they have to continuously announce more debt being imposed on the country along with austerity measures and no chance of jobs or a better standard of living is on the table, that full scale rioting and protests are but a hairs breadth away.
So in order to try and prevent the inevitable explosion it’s in all “their” interests to destabilise Europe even more and by sending “their” nations to a ‘wag-the-dog’ war.
“War’s” are a far more easier excuse to come up with than trying to justify where all the trillions of pounds or euros have gone missing from their countries public purses and why they owe so much money - and to who they owe it to – the 1%.
Wag-the-dog wars are ideal scapegoats as they permit them from having to defend and explain all their incompetence and deliberate failings that many politicians around the world have too financially benefited from.
Not only from the banking financial crises, but from the numerous wars they regularly endorse and get their countries involved in. And like with what has already been explained; they get to know all about the procurement deals and multimillion pound contracts that their governments will be investing in and long before it becomes public knowledge.
On the 24th February 2015, in the Guardian it read; “Britain was pulled closer towards a renewed cold war with Russia when David Cameron announced UK military trainers are to be deployed to help Ukraine forces stave off further Russian backed incursions into its sovereign territory.”
Two weeks later on the 9 March 2015, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, calls for a European army.
On the 17 March 2015, addressing a media conference, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, accused the US of inciting Kiev to end the crisis in eastern Ukraine by force - by supporting the recent Ukrainian law on the special self-governing status of Donbass.
He said; “If Washington welcomes the action, which undermines the Minsk-2 deal/agreements, then we can only conclude that Washington is inciting Kiev to resolve the issue by military means.”
Let’s not forget what first took place in Ukraine - which all started over the question of ‘national debt’ and austerity measures.
Viktor Yanukovych, was the democratically elected president, in November 2013 and like most European countries and the rest of the world, Ukraine too suffered from corruption, mismanagement, lack of economic growth and a currency devaluation following the world financial crisis.
The Orange Revolution of late 2004 improved Ukraine’s prospects of entering the EU; it was Viktor Yushchenko who hinted that he would press the EU for deeper ties and described a four-point plan: acknowledgement of Ukraine as a market economy, entry in the World Trade Organisation, associate membership in the European Union, and, finally, full membership.
Viktor Yushchenko asked Brussels mid-December 2004 for a clearer indication of Ukraine’s prospects for membership, saying that; “The approved Action Plan reflects only the level of Ukraine-EU relations that we could have reached before the presidential elections in 2004.”
Ironically, in 2012 the EU entitled deals on free trade and political association with Ukraine; however, EU leaders stated that these agreements would not be ratified unless Ukraine addresses concerns over a “stark deterioration of democracy and the rule of law”, including the imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuriy Lutsenko in 2011 and 2012.
Despite all this, Ukraine, is still not a member state of the EU, and like many other European countries, their cupboards were bare and too in need of a financial bailout.
This is when Viktor Yanukovych sees the Troika as a way to getting the funds the country needed. This would have established closer relations with the EU.
Ukraine has long been seen as an important but difficult political partner of the European Union.
According to some observers, this is due to certain factors; such as the unwillingness of the EU to expand into post-Soviet space, poor performance of the Ukrainian economy, lack of democracy (during the 1990’s) and internal instability (following the Orange Revolution).
Also, some “experts” acknowledge the importance of the Russian factor in Ukraine-EU relations. Ukraine’s desire to join the European institutions dates back to 1994 when the government declared that integration to the EU is the main foreign policy objective.
In reality, little was done since Kiev had to take into account Russia, which remained its major trade partner and natural gas and fossil energy supplier.
So it appears the EU/Ukraine/Russian pact and question has long been in the making and was a matter of time before something was about to give.
Though, and what the EU has become famous for, which is their love of control and austerity measures, there was an association agreement with the European Union which would provide Ukraine with the funds it required, but depending to reforms in almost all aspects of Ukrainian society – including austerity measures.
At first the Ukrainian leader was going to accept the contingencies, but subsequently Russia offered them a far better financial deal, so Yanukovych ultimately refused to sign-up with the EU and signed a treaty and multi-billion dollar loan with Russia instead.
This obviously put a few noses out of joint and why it’s alleged ‘outside’ interference came into play that led to protests and the occupation of Kiev’s Independence Square.
In January 2014, this developed into deadly clashes in the square and in other areas across Ukraine, as Ukrainian citizens confronted the Berkut and other special police units.
The following month, Ukraine appeared to be on the brink of civil war, as violent clashes between protesters and special police forces led to many deaths and injuries.
On 21 February 2014, Yanukovych claimed that, after lengthy discussions, he had reached an agreement with the opposition.
However, later that day, he fled the capital for Kharkiv, travelling next to the Crimea, and eventually to exile in southern Russia.
On 22 February, the Ukrainian parliament voted to remove him from his post, on the grounds that he was unable to fulfil his duties, although the legislative removal lacked the number of votes required by Ukraine’s then-current constitution.
Parliament set the 25 May 2014 as the date for the special election to select his replacement, then on the 24 February 2014 issued a warrant for his arrest, accusing him of “mass killing of civilians.”
Yanukovych, still declares himself to remain “the legitimate head of the Ukrainian state elected in a free vote by Ukrainian citizens,” and if we are to accept democracy for what it is, then surely this is still the case.
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on 1 March 2014, a week after Mr Yanukovych was overthrown, that Moscow has the right to take military action in Ukraine to protect Russian speakers. This has created the biggest confrontation between Moscow and the West since the Cold War.
According to Ewen MacAskill, in the Guardian 5 March 2014; “A leaked phone call between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet revealed that the two discussed a conspiracy theory that blamed the killing of civilian protesters in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, on the opposition rather than the ousted government.”
In an 11-minute conversation which was posted on YouTube – it revealed that telephone calls between western diplomats discussing the crisis and shootings in Ukraine had been bugged.
The above shot is from another country - yet agent-provocateurs are present at all large protests.
In the call, Urmas Paet said; “…he had been told snipers responsible for killing police and civilians in Kiev were protest movement agent-provocateurs rather than supporters of then-president Viktor Yanukovych.” - Catherine Ashton responds: “I didn't know … Gosh.”
The leak came a day after Vladimir Putin, said the snipers may have been opposition provocateurs.
During the conversation, Paet is quoting a woman named Olga, Russian media identified her as Olga Bogomolets, a doctor – blaming snipers from the opposition shooting the protesters.
“What was quite disturbing, this same Olga told that, well, all the evidence shows that people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides,” Paet said.
He continued; “So she also showed me some photos, she said that as medical doctor, she can say
it is the ‘same handwriting’, the ‘same type of bullets’, and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened.”
“So there is a stronger and stronger understanding, that behind the snipers it was not Yanukovych, it was somebody from the new coalition,” Paet says.
As recent as February 2015 and with Greece’s newly elected Alexis Tsipras, threatening to veto sanctions, EU foreign ministers recently gathered in Brussels for an emergency meeting over Russia’s alleged actions in Ukraine.
The session had been prompted by a bloody surge in vicious fighting around the eastern Ukrainian seaport of Mariupol, where a rocket attack killed 30 people on the 25 January 2015.
It is the latest escalation of a bloody conflict that has seen an estimated 5,300 murdered as separatists and Ukrainian nationalists contest territory. The Ukrainian government has consistently alleged Russian backing of the separatist movement – a charge strongly denied by the Kremlin.
And still the irony continues; as one of the alleged reasons the Treaty of Rome was first formed was so that it would make it impossible for European countries to go to war again.
Yet those sensing this major shift of discontentment simmering away in Europe, - and whose interest it is in and by hook-or-by-crook to keep the EU intact and no matter what it takes; is it conceivable dark-forces could be at play?
Is there some kind of diversion tactics being deployed that will help dim the spotlight and take away all the attention from those complaining about the severity of the austerity measures being forced upon their nations, - that are on the brink of revolution?
We have to question; are EU “leaders” being coerced into having to think of much more dangerous adversaries such Ukraine and “the Russians are coming” on one front and “ISIS” on another with its newly born Islamic state in Iraq and Syria, - than rather think about and address the financial problems their countries are facing?
For it appears “someone” has pulled out of a hat a series of distractions; as according to news reports ISIS has a growing number of franchises in other Mediterranean states, a point not only underlined by the recent alleged terrorist attacks in Paris, where it’s claimed on the 7 January 2105 - 12 people were killed during the Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris.
On the 15 February 2015 Denmark was on high alert and a massive manhunt was under way after a man sprayed bullets at a Copenhagen cafe hosting a debate on freedom of speech and blasphemy, killing one person and wounding three police officers.
Hours after the cafe attack, further shots were fired at a Copenhagen synagogue. Two police officers were wounded by gunfire and a civilian was shot multiple times in the head. “We feel certain now that it was a politically motivated attack, and thereby it was a terrorist attack,” Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt told journalists, close to the site of the first incident.
On the 28 February 2015, a leading Russian opposition politician, former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, was shot dead in Moscow by unidentified attacker/s in a car. He died hours after appealing for support for a march on Sunday 1 March 2015 in Moscow, against the war in Ukraine and the growing economic crisis in this country.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has condemned the murder. Investigators said it could have been “a provocation aimed at destabilising the country.”
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko described Mr Nemtsov as a “bridge between Ukraine and Russia.” “The murderer’s shot has destroyed it. I think it is not by accident,” he said in a statement published on his administration’s Facebook page.
The investigative committee said in a statement, that several motives for the killing were being considered including “Islamic extremism”, as Nemstov has spoken out about the Charlie Hebdo murders.
A lawyer for Mr Nemtsov reported that he had received death threats over social media in recent months; but for now there’s only speculation as to why he was targeted. He openly opposed Moscow’s role in the crisis in Ukraine - and the annexation by Russia of Crimea.
Mr Nemtsov was shot at around 23:40 (20:40 GMT) while crossing Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge within a spitting distance of St Basil’s Cathedral and the Kremlin.
Though you would have assumed a far less obvious location would have been preferred, so as to take the clear indication of guilt away from Putin. The assassin/s might as well have done it outside Putin’s own personal residence.
It was alleged he was shot four times with a pistol. The alleged killers then jumped into a white car which then fled the scene.
Many of the West’s media are pointing the finger of blame at Vladimir Putin, though it seems far too convenient for our liking.
There’s the old saying; “…don’t shit on your own doorstep!”
Besides, knowing there would be such a backlash and accusation, why would you make such a public display of his murder, when there’s so many other ways the kill someone so as it looks like an accident.
At least it keeps everyone guessing if they still don’t believe they died that way.
It’s almost like some kind of contract killing so as the finger of blame would obviously be pointed at Putin and it has been.
It was reported in the media on 12 March that five Chechens, had been arrested and confessed to shooting Boris Nemtsov on the 5 March 2015.
It’s been alleged they were most likely forced to confess under duress and tortured during detention.
After visiting the three of the Chechens, who were imprisoned in Lefortovo Prison in Moscow, Andrei Babushkin, a rights activist, said that the men had suffered multiple injuries after their arrest.
In a summary of the visit posted on the council’s website, Mr Babushkin also reported that Mr Rustam arrested at the same time as the main suspect Zaur Dadayev, had disappeared and said he had asked Russia’s Federal Security Service, previously the KGB, to account for his whereabouts.
According to Mr Babushkin, Mr Dadayev, previously a lieutenant in the Interior Ministry's forces in Chechnya and decorated for bravery, said that Mr Rustam was his former subordinate and that he had confessed to killing Mr Nemtsov because he was told Mr Rustam would be released unharmed if he did. Mr Dadayev and Mr Gubashev, were both charged with murder, and ordered to be jailed until April 28.
The other three suspects were not formally charged but were jailed pending further investigation.
Who can say for sure what’s happened here, other than someone carried out the murder, and either the accused was set-up and informed on after their involvement or they’re being framed.
According to News reports on the 19 March 2015, ISIS has apparently claimed responsibility for a deadly terrorist attack on the 18 March at the Bardo museum in the heart of that country’s capital in Tunis, Tunisia.
In an alleged audio statement posted online; “ISIS” identified two men Abu Zakariya al-Tunisi and Abu Anas al-Tunisi and thought to be the two gunmen killed during the attack.
It said they used “automatic weapons and hand grenades” to kill and injure what it called “crusaders and apostates” in the attack.
Tunisian Health Minister Said Aidi said 23 people are believed to have been killed, including at least one British women, 57 year old Sally Adey.
And that bloodshed, the ISIS message warned; “…this is just the start."
Tunisian authorities claimed there have already arrested nine people in connection with the attack, including four directly linked to the bloodshed, according to a statement from Tunisian President Beji Caid Essebsi.
The above was an extract from the book "Immigration, immigration, immigration!"