General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow Ukraine Commemorates the Holocaust
Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute.
?55ac53
How Ukraine Commemorates the Holocaust
Exclusive: Pundit Thomas Friedman says the new Ukraine regime shares our values but as much of the world marked the 70th anniversary of the Nazi Holocaust finally being ended by Russian and U.S. armies politicians in Kiev were busy honoring Ukraines Nazi collaborators, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
ConsortiumNews, April 17, 2015
The U.S.-backed Ukrainian government came up with a curious way to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Holocaust being brought to an end. The parliament in Kiev voted to extend official recognition to Ukrainian fascists who collaborated with the Nazis in killing Jews.
Though Official Washington and the mainstream U.S. media continue to dutifully ignore the key role played by neo-Nazis in Ukraines February 2014 coup and in the post-coup regimes subsequent military offensives against ethnic Russians in the east, Ukrainian politicians cant stop their arms from snapping into Heil Hitler salutes like the fictional character Dr. Strangelove. They cant hold back this reflex even as the world stopped this week to recall the Nazi barbarity that claimed the lives of some six million Jews as well as other minorities.
On April 9, the Ukrainian parliament passed a bill making the ultra-nationalist Ukrainian Insurgent Army eligible for official government recognition, a demand that has been pushed by Ukraines current neo-Nazi and ultra-nationalist movements, the same forces that spearheaded the overthrow of elected President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 and then the slaughter of thousands of ethnic Russians who resisted the new order.
Ukraines honor-the-Nazi-collaborators vote came amid increased repression of opposition politicians and journalists who dare to criticize the U.S.-backed regime as it moves to repudiate the political settlement envisioned by Februarys Minsk-2 agreement and instead prepares for a resumption of the war to crush the resistance in eastern Ukraine once and for all. [See Consortiumnews.coms Ukraines Poison Pill for Peace Talks.]
Emergence of Death Squads
Over the past several months, there have been about ten mysterious deaths of opposition figures some that the government claimed to be suicides while others were clearly murders. It now appears that pro-government death squads are operating with impunity in Kiev.
On Wednesday, Oleg Kalashnikov, a political leader of the opposition Party of Regions, was shot to death in his home. Kalashnikov had been campaigning for the right of Ukrainians to celebrate the Allied victory in World War II, a gesture that infuriated some western Ukrainian neo-Nazis who identify with Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich and who now feel they have the current government in their corner.
On Thursday, unidentified gunmen murdered Ukrainian journalist Oles Buzina, a regime critic who had protested censorship being imposed on news outlets that didnt toe the governments propaganda line. Buzina had been denounced by a pro-regime journalistic outfit which operated under the Orwellian name Stop Censorship and demanded that Buzina be banned from making media appearances because he was an agent of the Kremlin.
This week, another dissident journalist Serhiy Sukhobok was reportedly killed in Kiev, amid sketchy accounts that his assailants may have been caught although the Ukrainian government has withheld details.
These deaths are mostly ignored by the mainstream U.S. news media or are mentioned only in briefs with the victims dismissed as pro-Russian. After all, these death squad activities, which have also been reported in government-controlled sections of eastern Ukraine, conflict with the preferred State Department narrative of the Kiev regime busy implementing democratic reforms.
But many of those democratic reforms amount to slashing old-age pensions, removing worker protections, and hiking the price of heating fuel as demanded by the International Monetary Fund in exchange for a $17.5 billion bailout for Ukraines collapsing financial structure.
Similarly, the decision by the Ukrainian parliament to bend to the demands of neo-Nazi and other ultra-right groups to honor Ukrainian fascists who joined in the orgy of mass murder against Jews, Poles and other impure ethnic grounds is also downplayed or ignored by the major U.S. media.
The Holocaust in Ukraine
During World War II, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, an offshoot of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, collaborated with the Nazis in their extermination campaigns against Jews and Poles. The UIA also joined with the Nazis in fighting against the Soviet Unions Red Army, although some UIA elements did ultimately turn against the Germans over their occupation of Ukraine.
Ukraine was the site of several major Holocaust atrocities including the infamous massacre at Babi Yar in Kiev, where local Ukrainian fascists worked alongside the Nazi SS in funneling tens of thousands of Jews to a ravine where they were slaughtered and buried.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the Simon Wiesenthal Center condemned Ukraines recognition of the UIA as well as a second bill that equated Communist and Nazi crimes.
The passage of a ban on Nazism and Communism equates the most genocidal regime in human history with the regime which liberated Auschwitz and helped end the reign of terror of the Third Reich, said Wiesenthal Center director for Eastern European Affairs Dr. Efraim Zuroff, adding:
In the same spirit the decision to honor local Nazi collaborators and grant them special benefits turns Hitlers henchmen into heroes despite their active and zealous participation in the mass murder of innocent Jews. These attempts to rewrite history, which are prevalent throughout post-Communist Eastern Europe, can never erase the crimes committed by Nazi collaborators in these countries, and only proves that they clearly lack the Western values which they claim to have embraced upon their transition to democracy.
Not Seeing Nazis
Despite propaganda efforts by the Obama administration and the major U.S. news media to play down western Ukraines legacy of Nazi collaboration, one of the heroes honored during the Maidan protests, which led to the Feb. 22, 2014 coup, was Stepan Bandera, an OUN leader who worked with the Nazis before falling out with them over issues of Ukrainian independence.
After spearheading the 2014 coup, the neo-Nazi and ultra-nationalist militias from western Ukraine were enlisted as the shock troops to attack ethnic Russian cities in eastern Ukraine, which had been the political base for ousted President Yanukovych. Even though some of those militias sported Swastikas and SS symbols, the mainstream U.S. news media either ignored those inconvenient realities or acknowledged them in the final paragraphs of long stories. [See Consortiumnews.coms Seeing No Neo-Nazi Militias in Ukraine.]
The recognition of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army was demanded last October by Ukraines right-wing and neo-Nazi groups, including the Svoboda party and the Right Sektor, which surrounded the parliament in Kiev with 8,000 protesters.
At that time, with U.S. officials sensitive to the image of the Ukrainian government caving in to rioters carrying neo-Nazi banners, the legislation was defeated. However, in recent weeks with the Kiev leadership leaning more heavily on the neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists to carry out the war against ethnic Russians in the east, more concessions are being made to the extremists.
Lurches to the Right
These lurches to the right have again been largely ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, which continues to blame the ethnic Russians for not submitting to the post-coup regime in Kiev and to demonize Russian President Vladimir Putin as the supposed instigator of all the trouble.
But the Jerusalem Post noted, While Jewish worries over anti-Semitism have been on the back burner due to the war [in Ukraine], several recent developments have shown that antipathy toward Jews, or at least indifference toward such attitudes when held by important military or political figures, still exists in Ukraine.
Last November Jewish organizations expressed their displeasure when it was disclosed that the newly appointed police chief for the Ukrainian province in which Kiev is located came under fire after it was alleged that he had past ties with a neo-Nazi organization.
The Jerusalem Post also took note of the Kiev regimes recent appointment of right-wing extremist Dimitri Jarosch, who organized many of the fighters behind the February 2014 putsch, to be an official adviser to the army leadership.
The larger historical context is that Nazism has been deeply rooted in western Ukraine since World War II, especially in cities like Lviv, where a cemetery to the veterans of the Galician SS, a Ukrainian affiliate of the Nazi SS, is maintained. These old passions were brought to the surface again in the battle to oust Yanukovych and sever historic ties to Russia.
The muscle behind the U.S.-backed Maidan protests against Yanukovych came from neo-Nazi militias trained in western Ukraine, organized into 100-man brigades and bused to Kiev. After the coup, neo-Nazi leader Andriy Parubiy, who was commander of the Maidan self-defense forces, was elevated to national security chief and soon announced that the Maidan militia forces would be incorporated into the National Guard and sent to eastern Ukraine to fight ethnic Russians resisting the coup.
As the U.S. government and media cheered on this anti-terrorist operation, the neo-Nazis and other right-wing battalions engaged in brutal street fighting against Russian ethnic rebels. Only occasionally did this nasty reality slip into the major U.S. news media. For instance, an Aug. 10, 2014 article in the New York Times mentioned the neo-Nazi paramilitaries at the end of a lengthy story on another topic.
The fighting for Donetsk has taken on a lethal pattern: The regular army bombards separatist positions from afar, followed by chaotic, violent assaults by some of the half-dozen or so paramilitary groups surrounding Donetsk who are willing to plunge into urban combat, the Times reported.
Officials in Kiev say the militias and the army coordinate their actions, but the militias, which count about 7,000 fighters, are angry and, at times, uncontrollable. One known as Azov, which took over the village of Marinka, flies a neo-Nazi symbol resembling a Swastika as its flag. [See Consortiumnews.coms NYT Discovers Ukraines Neo-Nazis at War.]
Meeting the Nazis
The conservative London Telegraph offered more details about the Azov battalion in an article by correspondent Tom Parfitt, who wrote: Kievs use of volunteer paramilitaries to stamp out the Russian-backed Donetsk and Luhansk peoples republics
should send a shiver down Europes spine.
Recently formed battalions such as Donbas, Dnipro and Azov, with several thousand men under their command, are officially under the control of the interior ministry but their financing is murky, their training inadequate and their ideology often alarming. The Azov men use the neo-Nazi Wolfsangel (Wolfs Hook) symbol on their banner and members of the battalion are openly white supremacists, or anti-Semites.
Based on interviews with militia members, the Telegraph reported that some of the fighters doubted the reality of the Holocaust, expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler and acknowledged that they are indeed Nazis.
Andriy Biletsky, the Azov commander, is also head of an extremist Ukrainian group called the Social National Assembly, according to the Telegraph article which quoted a commentary by Biletsky as declaring: The historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen.
In other words, for the first time since World War II, a government had dispatched Nazi storm troopers to attack a European population and officials in Kiev knew what they were doing. The Telegraph questioned Ukrainian authorities in Kiev who acknowledged that they were aware of the extremist ideologies of some militias but insisted that the higher priority was having troops who were strongly motivated to fight. [See Consortiumnews.coms Ignoring Ukraines Neo-Nazi Storm Troopers.]
Since the coup, the New York Times and other mainstream U.S. news outlets have decried any recognition of the significant neo-Nazi presence in Ukraine as Russian propaganda. So, Ukraines new initiative to honor Nazi collaborators in legislation coinciding with the commemoration of the end of the Holocaust also must be ignored.
The pro-coup propaganda in the U.S. media has been so pervasive that a powerful group think took hold with the Kiev regime revered as white-hatted good guys, certainly not brown-shirted neo-Nazis. Or as the New York Times dimwitted foreign policy pundit Thomas L. Friedman declared in a column earlier this year, the new leaders of Ukraine share our values.
SOURCE w links: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/04/17/how-ukraine-commemorates-the-holocaust/
NOTE: Robert Parry allows DU to post ConsortiumNews articles in their entirety. The guy's a real U.S. journalist -- one who appreciates democracy and the First Amendment.
elias49
(4,259 posts)Now we wait for those who will lambast the messenger and ignore the message. That's how it's done here by the uber-nationlists.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)You do realize that the OP lambasts messengers?
elias49
(4,259 posts)DetlefK
(16,423 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)Like I said. Bone up! The authoritarians despise him. Sigh...
Octafish
(55,745 posts)From 2006:
This is for the "blm is nuts" crowd - Does Robert Parry read blm, Octafish
Thank you for standing up for the First Amendment, among other important issues, elias49.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)The source shouldn't matter. For all the ranting how we shouldn't trust these or those suppliers of media, there seems to be a number of sources that you blindly trust.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)If by rant, you mean my posting about Corporate Owned News, here's an example of where I spell out why I'm angry when it comes to Ukraine:
Shocking: Did Rupert Murdoch Push Tony Blair on Iraq War?
Agence France Presse / Alternet, June 16, 2012, 7:02am
Rupert Murdoch took part in an "over-crude" attempt by US Republicans to push Tony Blair into action before the invasion of Iraq, the former British prime minister's ex-media chief claimed Saturday.
Alastair Campbell said the News Corporation media baron warned Blair in a phone call of the dangers in delaying signing up to the March 19, 2003 invasion, as part of an attempt to speed up Britain joining the military campaign.
SNIP...
"Both TB and I felt it was prompted by Washington, and another example of their over-crude diplomacy. Murdoch was pushing all the Republican buttons, how the longer we waited the harder it got."
The following day he added: "TB felt the Murdoch call was odd, not very clever."
CONTINUED...
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/970894/shocking%3A_did_rupert_murdoch_push_tony_blair_on_iraq_war/
Here's another "rant": The US news media work CIA.
Mussolini did the same thing in the 20's as the NAZIs would later do in Germany and their descendants around the world, today. Of course, in between, somebody had to remove the US liberal leadership. It's hard to get the word out about that, sad to report, because "Conservatives" control, own and operate the media, lock stock and barrel.
Speaking of Capitalism's Invisible Army:
THE CIAS MOP-UP MAN: L.A. TIMES REPORTER CLEARED STORIES WITH AGENCY BEFORE PUBLICATION
BY KEN SILVERSTEIN
The Intercept, 9/4/14
A prominent national security reporter for the Los Angeles Times routinely submitted drafts and detailed summaries of his stories to CIA press handlers prior to publication, according to documents obtained by The Intercept.
Email exchanges between CIA public affairs officers and Ken Dilanian, now an Associated Press intelligence reporter who previously covered the CIA for the Times, show that Dilanian enjoyed a closely collaborative relationship with the agency, explicitly promising positive news coverage and sometimes sending the press office entire story drafts for review prior to publication. In at least one instance, the CIAs reaction appears to have led to significant changes in the story that was eventually published in the Times.
Im working on a story about congressional oversight of drone strikes that can present a good opportunity for you guys, Dilanian wrote in one email to a CIA press officer, explaining that what he intended to report would be reassuring to the public about CIA drone strikes. In another, after a series of back-and-forth emails about a pending story on CIA operations in Yemen, he sent a full draft of an unpublished report along with the subject line, does this look better? In another, he directly asks the flack: You wouldnt put out disinformation on this, would you?
Dilanians emails were included in hundreds of pages of documents that the CIA turned over in response to two FOIA requests seeking records on the agencys interactions with reporters. They include email exchanges with reporters for the Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and other outlets. In addition to Dilanians deferential relationship with the CIAs press handlers, the documents show that the agency regularly invites journalists to its McLean, Va., headquarters for briefings and other events. Reporters who have addressed the CIA include the Washington Posts David Ignatius, the former ombudsmen for the New York Times, NPR, and Washington Post, and Fox News Brett Baier, Juan Williams, and Catherine Herridge.
Dilanian left the Times to join the AP last May, and the emails released by the CIA only cover a few months of his tenure at the Times. They show that in June 2012, shortly after 26 members of congress wrote a letter to President Obama saying they were deeply concerned about the drone program, Dilanian approached the agency about story that he pitched as a good opportunity for the government.
The letter from lawmakers, which was sent in the wake of a flurry of drone strikes that had reportedly killed dozens of civilians, suggested there was no meaningful congressional oversight of the program. But Dilanian wrote that he had been told differently by people I trust. He added:
Not only would such a story be reassuring to the public, I would think, but it would also be an opportunity to explore the misinformation about strikes that sometimes comes out of local media reports. Its one thing for you to say three killed instead of 15, and its another for congressional aides from both parties to back you up. Part of what the story will do, if you could help me bring it to fruition, is to quote congressional officials saying that great care is taken to avoid collateral damage and that the reports of widespread civilian casualties are simply wrong.
Of course, journalists routinely curry favor with government sources (and others) by falsely suggesting that they intend to amplify the official point of view. But the emails show that Dilanian really meant it.
CONTINUED...
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/04/former-l-times-reporter-cleared-stories-cia-publication/
Guy still has a job in journalism, unlike a bunch of my journalists who actually did their jobs and told the truth, like Robert Parry, once a big shot at AP and PBS, part of what I rant about as "Corporate McPravda."
malaise
(269,004 posts)who don't acknowledge The Soviet Union's/Russia's role in ending not only the holocaust, but also WW2.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)doxyluv13
(247 posts)What can you possibly mean by "wipe Ukrainians off the map"? They were on the map, of the Soviet Union. The Holodomor, as its called in a play on "Holocaust"was the famine caused in the effort by the Soviet government to force collectivization of the farms. The same brutal policy of forced collectivization was pursued widely in the USSR, and so was not specifically aimed at Ukraine which was part of the Soviet Union because the communists won the Ukrainian Civil War. The idea that the Holodomor was a genocide perpetrated by Russian Communists (or Muscovite Jews as they also frequently call them, conflating the hate) on unwilling Ukrainians is bullshit; many Ukrainians were enthusiastic or highly-place Communists. It's this historical fantasy--that Ukrainians were victims of the USSR rather than participants--that's key to why even the Western, Democratic and modernizing elements in the Kiev Government are disgustingly comfortable with Fascists and anti-semites. Their own sense of innocent victimhood, makes them indifferent to anyone else's victimization. The Holodomor trumps the Holocaust.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Last edited Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:30 PM - Edit history (1)
PROTIP: Holodomor and Holocaust don't share the same roots. Holocaust comes from the Greek holos (whole) and kaustos (burnt). Holodomor comes from the Ukrainian holod (hunger) and mor (plague).
840high
(17,196 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)In a day when Democracy is for sale, or the highest bidder, I can't afford to participate other than the Internet. For example, I imagine a few minds would get blown to learn:
Senator COTTON who spearheaded letter to Iran got $1 million from PNAC's KRISTOL outfit: Emergency Committee for Israel
Thank you, Sister. You know, democracy would be impossible without knowing there are at least two of us who believe in it.
malaise
(269,004 posts)Blind partisanship in every sphere of life.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)That's not cool.
Please link to where that was said.
Thanks in advance!
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)But while you're looking for them, do a search for Holodomor.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)And if I link, your Tag Team cohorts can hit Alert till the Hosts come home.
And if I don't link, your Tag Team cohorts can make out that I'm a Stalin lover and Putin apologists till the cows come home.
It's like Catch-22. Have you read that book, stevenleser?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Show where malaise is wrong. Her posting record as a DUer is second-to-none.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Putin's mouthpiece strikes again.
Sid
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Where does Parry, by reporting the facts, act as Putin's mouthpiece?
renegade000
(2,301 posts)Let's face it, both Russia AND Ukraine are horribly illiberal and corrupt countries... we can certainly have a needed debate about the appropriate US role in this conflict, but to paint it as anything other than a larger, increasingly authoritarian country (Russia) enacting its geo-political desires through military force on a smaller, comparatively unsavory nation, is to basically propagandize for one side or the other...
elias49
(4,259 posts)it's when some come to these boards to STIFLE one side or another that they should be called out.
And there are some that refuse to acknowledge Parry, Greenwald, Assange, Snowden have a right to a voice.
Thanks, Octafish, for your all your work.
malaise
(269,004 posts)doxyluv13
(247 posts)and drove Eastern Ukraine into rebellion by having right-wing gangs put down their Maidan-like demonstrations. Plus the first thing the rump parliament did was to abolish the equality of the Russian language.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Otherwise your contention makes no sense.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Reply 9, from 2010: Haitian Economy is the Blueprint for Future USA
Years of time devoted to lolcat. Yet, no answer when asked about it: "Why?"
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)They pushed for war on Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, and now Ukraine.
Neocons and Liberals Together, Again
The neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has signaled its intention to continue shaping the government's national security...
Tom Barry, last updated: February 02, 2005
The neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has signaled its intention to continue shaping the government's national security strategy with a new public letter stating that the "U.S. military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume." Rather than reining in the imperial scope of U.S. national security strategy as set forth by the first Bush administration, PNAC and the letter's signatories call for increasing the size of America's global fighting machine.
SNIP...
Liberal Hawks Fly with the Neocons
The recent PNAC letter to Congress was not the first time that PNAC or its associated front groups, such as the Coalition for the Liberation of Iraq, have included hawkish Democrats.
Two PNAC letters in March 2003 played to those Democrats who believed that the invasion was justified at least as much by humanitarian concerns as it was by the purported presence of weapons of mass destruction. PNAC and the neocon camp had managed to translate their military agenda of preemptive and preventive strikes into national security policy. With the invasion underway, they sought to preempt those hardliners and military officials who opted for a quick exit strategy in Iraq. In their March 19th letter, PNAC stated that Washington should plan to stay in Iraq for the long haul: "Everyone-those who have joined the coalition, those who have stood aside, those who opposed military action, and, most of all, the Iraqi people and their neighbors-must understand that we are committed to the rebuilding of Iraq and will provide the necessary resources and will remain for as long as it takes."
Along with such neocon stalwarts as Robert Kagan, Bruce Jackson, Joshua Muravchik, James Woolsey, and Eliot Cohen, a half-dozen Democrats were among the 23 individuals who signed PNAC's first letter on post-war Iraq. Among the Democrats were Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution and a member of Clinton's National Security Council staff; Martin Indyk, Clinton's ambassador to Israel; Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute and Democratic Leadership Council; Dennis Ross, Clinton's top adviser on the Israel-Palestinian negotiations; and James Steinberg, Clinton's deputy national security adviser and head of foreign policy studies at Brookings. A second post-Iraq war letter by PNAC on March 28 called for broader international support for reconstruction, including the involvement of NATO, and brought together the same Democrats with the prominent addition of another Brookings' foreign policy scholar, Michael O'Hanlon.
CONTINUED...
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/articles/display/Neocons_and_Liberals_Together_Again
That's from Rightweb. They're full of facts, for those who take the time to read and learn. One name to pay attention to is Victoria Nuland, our woman in Ukraine, who is married to PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan
Robert Kagan's brother is Frederick Kagan
Frederick Kagan's spouse is Kimberly Kagan
Brilliant people, big ideas, etc. The thing is, that's a lot of PNAC. And the PNAC approach to international relations means more wars without end for profits without cease, among other things detrimental to peace, justice and democracy.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)see it all as it has happened over the past few years in each of those countries, and more, and Obama has swatted away all the pleas for war.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)What comes next with the new POTUS?
From what I can see, PNAC's well represented, but those interested in peace, not so much.
malaise
(269,004 posts)Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Insisting on taking the narrative of the 2014-2015 all the way back to World War II, and also insisting on painting the current conflict as Neo-Nazis (the Ukrainian government) vs. anti-fascists (the pro-Russian separatists) and then whining like a child when others don't see it like he does.
Regarding the first part, there's no question that tragically, there were Nazi-led atrocities in Ukraine during World War II and the Nazis were able to recruit members of the local Ukrainian populace to aid and abet them in their crimes. Most notorious was the 1941 Babi Yar massacre. However, it also bears noting that Ukraine has not denied the existence of these events and has made efforts to memorialize the victims. In fact, as it relates to Babi Yar specifically, the Ukrainian government's efforts to memorialize those events far exceded those of the previous Soviet government, who wanted to paint the massacre as an anti-Soviet massacre, and not one targeting Jewish people in particular. See the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babi_Yar_memorials
But Parry also stupidly ignores the greater dynamic of the hellish atmosphere in Ukraine during the 1930s and 1940s, instead essentially claiming that all Ukrainian nationalists allied with the Nazis. The fact of the matter is, there were Ukrainians who allied themselves with the Nazis, although many of them did so under the misguided belief that the Nazis would be preferable to the Stalinists who had inflicted so much damage and death upon the Ukrainian people in the 1930s. Then, there were the Ukrainians who fought for the Soviets against the Nazis for the simple reason that they were conscripted to do so by the Soviet government and they either did so out of duty or for fear of persecution if they didn't fight.
And then, most interestingly, you had the Ukrainians who opposed both the Nazi and Soviet regimes and realized them for the truly evil forces that they were. Just for example, you had Ukrainian Catholic Metropolitan Archbishop Andrey Sheptytsky of Lviv who hid hundreds of Jews in his monasteries from the Nazis even while the Soviet government was simultaneously cracking down on the Ukrainian Catholic Church for its dissent. Or his brother, Klymentiy Sheptytsky, who also worked tirelessly to save Jews from the Nazis during the Holocaust and after war was imprisoned by the Soviets. Both Sheptyskys are among the over 1000 Ukrainians who were designated as Righteous Among the Nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Righteous_Among_the_Nations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Sheptytsky
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klymentiy_Sheptytsky
Of course, why Parry feels the need to build up an oversimplified and misleading narrative of events taking place decades ago is rather puzzling, except that it appears he feels it necessary in order to build up his oversimplified and misleading narrative of events taking place today. He certainly takes every opportunity to mention the infamous Azov Battalion, one of dozens of private battalions not officially affiliated with the Ukrainian government but nonetheless fighting alongside the Ukrainian army in the battle against the pro-Russian separatists and Russian forces. And yes, while there are members of this particular battalion who do appear to espouse fascist beliefs and no doubt that is rather disturbing, painting the picture of neo-Nazis vs. "anti-fascists" is extremely misleading.
When considering the worst of the worst in the Azov battalion, you also must consider the fact that those they are fighting are really not any different in their ideologies. The pro-Russian separatist movement in Eastern Ukraine is teeming with fascist and Russian ultra-nationalist mindsets. Any pro-separatist thinker worth his salt loves to quote the pro-Russian Vineyard of the Saker blog, which is replete with anti-semetic language and arguments. Last month in St. Petersburg, far-right and fascist parties converged at a conference rallying behind the pro-Russian movement in Ukraine.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/21/1372431/-Russia-invites-European-right-wing-extremists-to-St-Petersburg-conference#
Also consider that one of the first leaders of the separatist movement to emerge in Eastern Ukraine was one Pavel Gubarev, who was a member of the neo-Nazi Russian National Unity and who offered no apologies for his involvement with that group.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Gubarev
The situation in Ukraine today is much more complex than Parry wishes us to believe, just as the situation in Ukraine 70 years ago was much more complex than Parry wishes us to believe.
This is just yet another example of Parry being Parry, spinning the Kremlin line and further desecrating whatever admirable credentials he may have had 30 years ago.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)My grandfather was part of the Latvian anti-Soviet partisans. Moscow illegally invaded the entire Baltic region, and when somebody with a capable armed forces came along to kick the Soviets out, he joined.
That doesn't make him a Nazi sympathizer.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)You basically had the two most horrific tyrants of the 20th Century fighting over the same patch of land. The terrible brutality that followed was tragically not a surprise.
Kudos to the people who saw both Hitler and Stalin for the terrors that they were and attempted to resist both of them.
doxyluv13
(247 posts)..than any news story can reflect. But why don't you try refuting the facts in the story?
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Starting with his claims that there was a "coup" in Ukraine in February 2014 and that neo-Nazi fascists were the ones spearheading it, and then moving on his distortion of facts regarding fascist and neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine in both past and present.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)that supposedly show them to be right.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)The asshat doesn't have a bit of shame anymore.
doxyluv13
(247 posts)Pretty much proves the case against the current Kiev government.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)It's like shaping reality, huh?
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)No doubt the Wikipedia format creates the potential for abuse, but in terms of the links I provided there's nothing that appears to have been manipulated in any way. All link to outside sources that appear to be reputable.
All I've done was show that World War II era Ukraine and the people who lived there was far more complex in terms of its attitudes and sympathies than the agenda driven Parry wishes you to believe.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)We the People aren't authorized to see what our own government does in our name or with our tax dollars. That is un-democratic. We also can't see what they are doing to shape our opinions and beliefs, contrary to the original intent when the CIA and national security state were founded in 1947.
But when it comes to misinformation, even more than Russia, where a large percentage of the populace still remembers Pravda, the people in the United States are fed propaganda for news. Most have never heard the phrase "Media Monopoly."
The New Communications Cartel
from the
Preface to the Fifth Edition (1997)
of the book
The Media Monopoly
by Ben H. Bagdikian
published by Beacon Press, 1997
In the last 5 years, a small number of the country's largest industrial corporations has acquired more public communications power-including ownership of the news-than any private businesses have ever before possessed in world history.
Nothing in earlier history matches this corporate group's power to penetrate the social landscape. Using both old and new technology, by owning each other's shares, engaging in joint ventures as partners, and other forms of cooperation, this handful of giants has created what is, in effect, a new communications cartel within the United States.
At issue is not just a financial statistic, like production numbers or ordinary industrial products like refrigerators or clothing. At issue is the possession of power to surround almost every man, woman, and child in the country with controlled images and words, to socialize each new generation of Americans, to alter the political agenda of the country. And with that power comes the ability to exert influence that in many ways is greater than that of schools, religion, parents, and even government itself.
Aided by the digital revolution and the acquisition of subsidiaries that operate at every step in the mass communications process, from the creation of content to its delivery into the home, the communications cartel has exercised stunning influence over national legislation and government agencies, an influence whose scope and power would have been considered scandalous or illegal twenty years ago.
The new communications cartel has been made possible by the withdrawal of earlier government intervention that once aspired to protect consumers and move toward the ideal of diversity of content and ownership in the mass media. Government's passivity has emboldened the new giants to boast openly of monopoly and their ability to project news, commercial messages, and graphic images into the consciousness and subconscious of almost every American.
Strict control of public information is not new in the world, but historical dictatorships lacked the late twentieth century's digital multimedia and distribution technology. As the country approaches the millennium, the new cartel exercises a more complex and subtle kind of control.
CONTINUED...
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/CommunCartel_Bagdikian.html
Third World Traveler has an excellent resource on it: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/MediaMonopoly_Bagdikian.html
I've brought up on DU why I refer to America's "Corporate Owned News" as Corporate McPravda in order to demonstrate how corporate influence, including by government agencies such as CIA, influence the information environment:
Wanna Know Why We the People Really Don't Know Squat?
Corporate McPravda owns the airwaves.
And Corporate Tee Vee is still where most Americans get most of their information, including their ideas about these two statues. Wonder what people would think were they to learn from the tee vee what pater and fils have really done with their power?
The Propaganda System That Has Helped Create a Permanent Overclass Is Over a Century in the Making
Pulling back the curtain on how intent the wealthiest Americans have been on establishing a propaganda tool to subvert democracy.
Wednesday, 17 April 2013 00:00
By Andrew Gavin Marshall, AlterNet | News Analysis
Where there is the possibility of democracy, there is the inevitability of elite insecurity. All through its history, democracy has been under a sustained attack by elite interests, political, economic, and cultural. There is a simple reason for this: democracy as in true democracy places power with people. In such circumstances, the few who hold power become threatened. With technological changes in modern history, with literacy and education, mass communication, organization and activism, elites have had to react to the changing nature of society locally and globally.
From the late 19th century on, the threats to elite interests from the possibility of true democracy mobilized institutions, ideologies, and individuals in support of power. What began was a massive social engineering project with one objective: control. Through educational institutions, the social sciences, philanthropic foundations, public relations and advertising agencies, corporations, banks, and states, powerful interests sought to reform and protect their power from the potential of popular democracy.
SNIP...
The development of psychology, psychoanalysis, and other disciplines increasingly portrayed the public and the population as irrational beings incapable of making their own decisions. The premise was simple: if the population was driven by dangerous, irrational emotions, they needed to be kept out of power and ruled over by those who were driven by reason and rationality, naturally, those who were already in power.
The Princeton Radio Project, which began in the 1930s with Rockefeller Foundation funding, brought together many psychologists, social scientists, and experts armed with an interest in social control, mass communication, and propaganda. The Princeton Radio Project had a profound influence upon the development of a modern "democratic propaganda" in the United States and elsewhere in the industrialized world. It helped in establishing and nurturing the ideas, institutions, and individuals who would come to shape Americas democratic propaganda throughout the Cold War, a program fostered between the private corporations which own the media, advertising, marketing, and public relations industries, and the state itself.
CONTINUED...
http://truth-out.org/news/item/15784-the-propaganda-system-that-has-helped-create-a-permanent-overclass-is-over-a-century-in-the-making
Here's how much of the nation's press were magically transformed from watchdogs into lapdogs:
The Powell Memo (also known as the Powell Manifesto)
The Powell Memo was first published August 23, 1971
Introduction
In 1971, Lewis Powell, then a corporate lawyer and member of the boards of 11 corporations, wrote a memo to his friend Eugene Sydnor, Jr., the Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The memorandum was dated August 23, 1971, two months prior to Powells nomination by President Nixon to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Powell Memo did not become available to the public until long after his confirmation to the Court. It was leaked to Jack Anderson, a liberal syndicated columnist, who stirred interest in the document when he cited it as reason to doubt Powells legal objectivity. [font color="red"]Anderson cautioned that Powell might use his position on the Supreme Court to put his ideas into practice in behalf of business interests.[/font color]
Though Powells memo was not the sole influence, the Chamber and corporate activists took his advice to heart and began building a powerful array of institutions designed to shift public attitudes and beliefs over the course of years and decades. The memo influenced or inspired the creation of the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Accuracy in Academe, and other powerful organizations. Their long-term focus began paying off handsomely in the 1980s, in coordination with the Reagan Administrations hands-off business philosophy.
Most notable about these institutions was their focus on education, shifting values, and movement-building a focus we share, though often with sharply contrasting goals.* (See our endnote for more on this.)
So did Powells political views influence his judicial decisions? The evidence is mixed. [font color="red"]Powell did embrace expansion of corporate privilege and wrote the majority opinion in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, a 1978 decision that effectively invented a First Amendment right for corporations to influence ballot questions.[/font color] On social issues, he was a moderate, whose votes often surprised his backers.
CONTINUED...
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/
Thankfully, to help spread light when the protectors of the First Amendment won't, Maria Galardin's TUC (Time of Useful Consciousness) Radio. The podcast helps explain how we got here and what we need to do to move forward, starting with putting the "Public" into Airwaves again:
Alex Carey: Corporations and Propaganda
The Attack on Democracy
The 20th century, said Carey, is marked by three historic developments: the growth of democracy via the expansion of the franchise, the growth of corporations, and the growth of propaganda to protect corporations from democracy. Carey wrote that the people of the US have been subjected to an unparalleled, expensive, 3/4 century long propaganda effort designed to expand corporate rights by undermining democracy and destroying the unions. And, in his manuscript, unpublished during his life time, he described that history, going back to World War I and ending with the Reagan era. Carey covers the little known role of the US Chamber of Commerce in the McCarthy witch hunts of post WWII and shows how the continued campaign against "Big Government" plays an important role in bringing Reagan to power.
John Pilger called Carey "a second Orwell", Noam Chomsky dedicated his book, Manufacturing Consent, to him. And even though TUC Radio runs our documentary based on Carey's manuscript at least every two years and draws a huge response each time, Alex Carey is still unknown.
Given today's spotlight on corporations that may change. It is not only the Occupy movement that inspired me to present this program again at this time. By an amazing historic coincidence Bill Moyers and Charlie Cray of Greenpeace have just added the missing chapter to Carey's analysis. Carey's manuscript ends in 1988 when he committed suicide. Moyers and Cray begin with 1971 and bring the corporate propaganda project up to date.
This is a fairly complex production with many voices, historic sound clips, and source material. The program has been used by writers and students of history and propaganda. Alex Carey: Taking the Risk out of Democracy, Corporate Propaganda VS Freedom and Liberty with a foreword by Noam Chomsky was published by the University of Illinois Press in 1995.
SOURCE: http://tucradio.org/new.html
If you find a moment, Locrian, here's the first part (scroll down at the link for the second part) of a wonderful web-based radio program on Carey:
http://tucradio.org/AlexCarey_ONE.mp3
It's important for there to be more than a handful of companies providing "news." Democracy depends on it. Thank you for grokking, Locrian.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)"Liberal Interventionism" is currently vogue.
http://portside.org/2014-08-27/obama-neo-cons-and-liberal-interventionists
Portside.org spells out a lot, I've just noticed.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Maybe O intends to keep all sides confused, off guard and not knowing what to expect.
"Yet, Obamas scattershot approach to foreign policy lacking any consistent theme has made his approach to the world chaotic and left many allies and adversaries confused. When Official Washingtons pols and pundits talk about Obama being weak on foreign policy, they mean that he hasnt projected American military power enough, that he hasnt been a consistent tough guy, that he hasnt always done what they want done."
http://portside.org/2014-08-27/obama-neo-cons-and-liberal-interventionists#sthash.sEhVKfK0.dpuf