Literally not a single Western outlet touched this. Ukrainian media did, focusing entirely on the speculative passages suggesting Russia and anti-Maidan activists *could* have some blame to bear over what happened (without making concrete accusations or offering providing evidence). Meanwhile, the Ukrainian government simply blamed its 'Russian-infiltrated' post-Maidan police and security forces for what happened. Quite an amazing blackout.
Russia never "invaded" Ukraine, unless you deny Donbass Republics their independent status and deny that these republics had a legal right to ask for military assistance from Russia as the Ukrainian regime "counter-terrorist operation" against them began, exterminating civilians in order to take the land.
Russia interfered in this slaughter to defend DPR and LPR.
The people do need to know this back story, but the mainstream media isn't going to report on this ruling. We're not supposed to remember anything before 2022.
Well compiled. Glad that you are doing it - the mainstream media are of course pretending this fact finding doesnt exist. While their "fact checkers" continue to greenlight them publishing lies about this event and subsequent ones.
Limited hangout time? Or the ECHR may have somehow missed a few minor details.
No mention of Dniepro Kharkiv football club hooligans financial and business connections to Ihor Kolomoyskyi. No mention of the existing videos showing some of those several hundred "ultra nationalist" "football club members" from Kiev, Kharkiv & Western Ukraine arriving at Odessa with their own armored personnel carriers (or who provided them with heavy weapons). No mention of who additionally provided Georgian mercenaries, military/COIN training and issued at least some tactical commands at key points during "anti separatist" operations in Kiev, Kharkiv and finally, Odessa. The name of Brian Christopher Boyenger, formerly of the 101st Airborne Division does not feature.
You could learn more about how the regime change was directed and how their enforcers worked in 8 or 10 years, if you weren't better off politically/financially by not knowing much (and safer from at least semi organized associations of Ukrainian thugs spread all through Europe now)?
I grew up in WI and was quite surprised recently to find a Banderite "youth camp" near where I grew up, complete with statues of several WWII era Ukrainian "heroes", AKA fascists, genocidaires and SS members: Stepan Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, Yevhen Konovalets and Symon Petliura.
More and more, independent journalists are writing the truth about things and that is a good thing. I agree, why are taxpayers across the EU and North America being forced to pay for these ultra-national corrupt regimes? The answer is obvious. The elites are making huge sums of money for their personal bank accounts while the peasants suffer under their tyranny. The Americans and the French had revolutions to stop those kinds of abuses. Maybe it's time to do that again.
As far as Ukraine goes, not that I'm a Putin fan, but I say let Russia finish their military operation and the west be damned. Kick out the corrupt Ukrainian politicians, take back all of the money they stole from their people, and the western countries they stole from and put them in jail in the Hague. I'm sure Russia will make some concessions if saner heads from the west were to come to the table and have a talk about restoring Ukraine, what's left of it anyway, and make deals to share the bounties. By sharing, I don't mean with the U.S. but with Ukraines neighbors and the Ukrainian people themselves. GIve Ukraine a reason to bring its people back from exile across the world.
Excellent article, as usual, Kit. I'm wondering why now would the ECHR make this ruling? Perhaps Russia's progress in the war and the increasing weakness of the Nazi regime suddenly raises some concerns in Europe that these martyers for a better Ukraine will never be forgotten and could become a battle cry for Odessa's large Russian speaking population should Russia move on the city.
One are the main instigators of the Odessa fire got shot in the head by father of a son that was killed on the front line a couple of weeks ago
It was posted on Lord beto telegram channel the son owned a fitness gym had some confrontation with the instigator and then they recruitment office came and got the son the owner of the gym and sent him to the front line where he died
The father shoots the instigator azov dude at point-blank in the head. It was captured on CCTV. It was posted on the 18th if anyone wants to go watch it.
Zelensky's arrival gave NATO expansion and Minsk's burial a democratic face no previous Ukrainian leader could have provided. Convenient timing, or just how these things tend to work out?
Kit: I'm wondering about your statement that "Wholly unconsidered by the ECHR was the prospect that....the lethal incineration of anti-Maidan activists in May 2014 was an intentional and premeditated act of mass murder, conceived and directed by Kiev’s US-installed far-right government." Is this because the evidence was not presented to the tribunal (in which case it could not have considered it) or because the evidence was presented but not discussed in the decision? I read the decision and there seem no indication that such evidence was presented. Do you have access to the evidentiary record? Thanks and keep up the good work.
This is quite the eye-opener, and a damning condemnation of the Ukrainian government at the time.
It should be noted however that during this time Oleksandr Turchynov was serving as the acting President of Ukraine after stepping into the role when Viktor Yanukovych was removed from office in February 2014. Turchynov held this position until Petro Poroshenko was elected and inaugurated in June 2014.
Anti-Maidan activists in Ukraine were generally pro-Russian and opposed the Euromaidan movement, which sought closer ties with Europe. They supported President Viktor Yanukovych and his government, advocating for policies that favoured stronger connections with Russia. Some factions within the movement also pushed for federalisation of Ukraine or even separatism. Their protests often included anti-EU sentiments and calls for maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty on terms favourable to Russia.
There were instances where anti-Maidan activists were involved in violent actions. These included clashes with pro-Maidan supporters, as well as confrontations with law enforcement during the height of the Euromaidan protests in 2013–2014. Some anti-Maidan groups were also linked to the escalation of violence in eastern Ukraine, particularly in the early stages of the conflict that led to the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas.
The term "neo-Nazis" has been used by critics to describe certain factions within the pro-Maidan movement due to the involvement of far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector. These groups have been associated with ultra-nationalist ideologies, and some members have displayed Nazi symbols or expressed xenophobic views. The use of this label has been highly politicised, with some parties exaggerating these associations for propaganda purposes.
The proportion of Euromaidan supporters classified as neo-Nazis was relatively small. Far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector were involved in the movement, but they represented a minority among the protesters. Their influence was amplified by their organisational skills and visibility during key events, but the majority of Euromaidan supporters were focused on democratic reforms and opposing corruption.
This is quite the eye-opener, and a damning condemnation of the Ukrainian government at the time.
It should be noted however that during this time Oleksandr Turchynov was serving as the acting President of Ukraine after stepping into the role when Viktor Yanukovych was removed from office in February 2014. Turchynov held this position until Petro Poroshenko was elected and inaugurated in June 2014.
Anti-Maidan activists in Ukraine were generally pro-Russian and opposed the Euromaidan movement, which sought closer ties with Europe. They supported President Viktor Yanukovych and his government, advocating for policies that favoured stronger connections with Russia. Some factions within the movement also pushed for federalisation of Ukraine or even separatism. Their protests often included anti-EU sentiments and calls for maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty on terms favourable to Russia.
There were instances where anti-Maidan activists were involved in violent actions. These included clashes with pro-Maidan supporters, as well as confrontations with law enforcement during the height of the Euromaidan protests in 2013–2014. Some anti-Maidan groups were also linked to the escalation of violence in eastern Ukraine, particularly in the early stages of the conflict that led to the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas.
The term "neo-Nazis" has been used by critics to describe certain factions within the pro-Maidan movement due to the involvement of far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector. These groups have been associated with ultra-nationalist ideologies, and some members have displayed Nazi symbols or expressed xenophobic views. The use of this label has been highly politicised, with some parties exaggerating these associations for propaganda purposes.
The proportion of Euromaidan supporters classified as neo-Nazis was relatively small. Far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector were involved in the movement, but they represented a minority among the protesters. Their influence was amplified by their organisational skills and visibility during key events, but the majority of Euromaidan supporters were focused on democratic reforms and opposing corruption.
This is such an important element in the buildup to Russia's military operation in Ukraine.
I wonder how many mainstream media outlets will report this ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.
People need to understand the back story.
Literally not a single Western outlet touched this. Ukrainian media did, focusing entirely on the speculative passages suggesting Russia and anti-Maidan activists *could* have some blame to bear over what happened (without making concrete accusations or offering providing evidence). Meanwhile, the Ukrainian government simply blamed its 'Russian-infiltrated' post-Maidan police and security forces for what happened. Quite an amazing blackout.
People have been led down such a rabbit hole, and many are willing to believe the narrative. Thanks for reporting on this, Kit.
@Diana van Eyk
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
-Sinclair Lewis
Russia never "invaded" Ukraine, unless you deny Donbass Republics their independent status and deny that these republics had a legal right to ask for military assistance from Russia as the Ukrainian regime "counter-terrorist operation" against them began, exterminating civilians in order to take the land.
Russia interfered in this slaughter to defend DPR and LPR.
Donbass was not already not Ukraine.
An important correction, Lena.
In fairness, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson referendums happened much after the SMO started.
yes, and Russia did not appear there in February 2022. Only later when Ukrainian regime started to politically-ethnically cleanse the region.
Come on Lena. Kherson was conquered on March 1st 2022.
Technically, it did.
Initial movement of military in the direction of Kiev is the bit.
The most important thing is not how to label it, but why it happened.
All superpowers have inalienable right to intervene and this one was, to a reasonable person, without a doubt a response to actions by the other side.
Unlike other superpowers.
The people do need to know this back story, but the mainstream media isn't going to report on this ruling. We're not supposed to remember anything before 2022.
Well compiled. Glad that you are doing it - the mainstream media are of course pretending this fact finding doesnt exist. While their "fact checkers" continue to greenlight them publishing lies about this event and subsequent ones.
Well someone's got to do it! Literally...
Limited hangout time? Or the ECHR may have somehow missed a few minor details.
No mention of Dniepro Kharkiv football club hooligans financial and business connections to Ihor Kolomoyskyi. No mention of the existing videos showing some of those several hundred "ultra nationalist" "football club members" from Kiev, Kharkiv & Western Ukraine arriving at Odessa with their own armored personnel carriers (or who provided them with heavy weapons). No mention of who additionally provided Georgian mercenaries, military/COIN training and issued at least some tactical commands at key points during "anti separatist" operations in Kiev, Kharkiv and finally, Odessa. The name of Brian Christopher Boyenger, formerly of the 101st Airborne Division does not feature.
You could learn more about how the regime change was directed and how their enforcers worked in 8 or 10 years, if you weren't better off politically/financially by not knowing much (and safer from at least semi organized associations of Ukrainian thugs spread all through Europe now)?
They may be in America too where I still see too many UkroNam flags....
Clearly they don't want peace
I grew up in WI and was quite surprised recently to find a Banderite "youth camp" near where I grew up, complete with statues of several WWII era Ukrainian "heroes", AKA fascists, genocidaires and SS members: Stepan Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, Yevhen Konovalets and Symon Petliura.
https://wisconsinexaminer.com/2021/03/29/ukrainian-baraboo-nazi-statues/
I do so love those who stormed the police station to demand the release of the victims. That immediate collective response is so needed everywhere.
I actually am sort of shocked that the ECHR was able, in its weaktea way, to admit the obvious.
Not that it will matter. Good luck collecting any judgment, much less changing the mind of any goodthink european or their government.
Russians didn't start the Ukraine war!
More and more, independent journalists are writing the truth about things and that is a good thing. I agree, why are taxpayers across the EU and North America being forced to pay for these ultra-national corrupt regimes? The answer is obvious. The elites are making huge sums of money for their personal bank accounts while the peasants suffer under their tyranny. The Americans and the French had revolutions to stop those kinds of abuses. Maybe it's time to do that again.
As far as Ukraine goes, not that I'm a Putin fan, but I say let Russia finish their military operation and the west be damned. Kick out the corrupt Ukrainian politicians, take back all of the money they stole from their people, and the western countries they stole from and put them in jail in the Hague. I'm sure Russia will make some concessions if saner heads from the west were to come to the table and have a talk about restoring Ukraine, what's left of it anyway, and make deals to share the bounties. By sharing, I don't mean with the U.S. but with Ukraines neighbors and the Ukrainian people themselves. GIve Ukraine a reason to bring its people back from exile across the world.
Excellent article, as usual, Kit. I'm wondering why now would the ECHR make this ruling? Perhaps Russia's progress in the war and the increasing weakness of the Nazi regime suddenly raises some concerns in Europe that these martyers for a better Ukraine will never be forgotten and could become a battle cry for Odessa's large Russian speaking population should Russia move on the city.
X refuses to allow me to share this article
Now you know what the "fact checking" actually is.
1984.
One are the main instigators of the Odessa fire got shot in the head by father of a son that was killed on the front line a couple of weeks ago
It was posted on Lord beto telegram channel the son owned a fitness gym had some confrontation with the instigator and then they recruitment office came and got the son the owner of the gym and sent him to the front line where he died
The father shoots the instigator azov dude at point-blank in the head. It was captured on CCTV. It was posted on the 18th if anyone wants to go watch it.
Zelensky's arrival gave NATO expansion and Minsk's burial a democratic face no previous Ukrainian leader could have provided. Convenient timing, or just how these things tend to work out?
I bet you won’t see this on any mainstream media 🤬🤬🤬 because Russia is not the culprit
Took how long?
Kit: I'm wondering about your statement that "Wholly unconsidered by the ECHR was the prospect that....the lethal incineration of anti-Maidan activists in May 2014 was an intentional and premeditated act of mass murder, conceived and directed by Kiev’s US-installed far-right government." Is this because the evidence was not presented to the tribunal (in which case it could not have considered it) or because the evidence was presented but not discussed in the decision? I read the decision and there seem no indication that such evidence was presented. Do you have access to the evidentiary record? Thanks and keep up the good work.
This is quite the eye-opener, and a damning condemnation of the Ukrainian government at the time.
It should be noted however that during this time Oleksandr Turchynov was serving as the acting President of Ukraine after stepping into the role when Viktor Yanukovych was removed from office in February 2014. Turchynov held this position until Petro Poroshenko was elected and inaugurated in June 2014.
Anti-Maidan activists in Ukraine were generally pro-Russian and opposed the Euromaidan movement, which sought closer ties with Europe. They supported President Viktor Yanukovych and his government, advocating for policies that favoured stronger connections with Russia. Some factions within the movement also pushed for federalisation of Ukraine or even separatism. Their protests often included anti-EU sentiments and calls for maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty on terms favourable to Russia.
There were instances where anti-Maidan activists were involved in violent actions. These included clashes with pro-Maidan supporters, as well as confrontations with law enforcement during the height of the Euromaidan protests in 2013–2014. Some anti-Maidan groups were also linked to the escalation of violence in eastern Ukraine, particularly in the early stages of the conflict that led to the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas.
The term "neo-Nazis" has been used by critics to describe certain factions within the pro-Maidan movement due to the involvement of far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector. These groups have been associated with ultra-nationalist ideologies, and some members have displayed Nazi symbols or expressed xenophobic views. The use of this label has been highly politicised, with some parties exaggerating these associations for propaganda purposes.
The proportion of Euromaidan supporters classified as neo-Nazis was relatively small. Far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector were involved in the movement, but they represented a minority among the protesters. Their influence was amplified by their organisational skills and visibility during key events, but the majority of Euromaidan supporters were focused on democratic reforms and opposing corruption.
This is quite the eye-opener, and a damning condemnation of the Ukrainian government at the time.
It should be noted however that during this time Oleksandr Turchynov was serving as the acting President of Ukraine after stepping into the role when Viktor Yanukovych was removed from office in February 2014. Turchynov held this position until Petro Poroshenko was elected and inaugurated in June 2014.
Anti-Maidan activists in Ukraine were generally pro-Russian and opposed the Euromaidan movement, which sought closer ties with Europe. They supported President Viktor Yanukovych and his government, advocating for policies that favoured stronger connections with Russia. Some factions within the movement also pushed for federalisation of Ukraine or even separatism. Their protests often included anti-EU sentiments and calls for maintaining Ukraine's sovereignty on terms favourable to Russia.
There were instances where anti-Maidan activists were involved in violent actions. These included clashes with pro-Maidan supporters, as well as confrontations with law enforcement during the height of the Euromaidan protests in 2013–2014. Some anti-Maidan groups were also linked to the escalation of violence in eastern Ukraine, particularly in the early stages of the conflict that led to the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas.
The term "neo-Nazis" has been used by critics to describe certain factions within the pro-Maidan movement due to the involvement of far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector. These groups have been associated with ultra-nationalist ideologies, and some members have displayed Nazi symbols or expressed xenophobic views. The use of this label has been highly politicised, with some parties exaggerating these associations for propaganda purposes.
The proportion of Euromaidan supporters classified as neo-Nazis was relatively small. Far-right groups like Svoboda and Right Sector were involved in the movement, but they represented a minority among the protesters. Their influence was amplified by their organisational skills and visibility during key events, but the majority of Euromaidan supporters were focused on democratic reforms and opposing corruption.