Відповіді

• 2005.09.21 | Хвізик

  всім відомо, що метою оранжової революції є реклама цитрусових(-

  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.09.21 | casesensitive

    судя по Ющенко - дефолиантов (сорри за черный юмор) (-)

• 2005.09.21 | Пані

  Повний англійський текст - для історії

  http://www.sandersresearch.com/Sanders/NewsManager/ShowNewsGen.aspx?NewsID=1050
  
  www.sandersresearch.com
  
  All News is Lies
  
  A Ukrainian orange
  
  John Laughland
  
  14th September 2005
  
  In one of the most famous cult movies in Hungary, The Witness (1969) a collective farm receives the order to grow oranges. After much effort – the climate is totally unsuitable – a single orange is produced. A ceremony is organised, at which the Minister of Agriculture is to eat one of the newly produced fruits. Unfortunately, a child eats the single orange and so a lemon is substituted. The Minister eats it anyway, winces in pain and disgust, and is told, “Don’t worry, comrade, it’s a Hungarian orange.”
  
  It is an indication of the relative liberalism of Hungary’s post-1956 regime that a film lampooning Communism could be made at the height of it – relative, that is, to the situation in today’s West. Here, it is very difficult for anyone in the mainstream media to make fun of the central tenets of the New World Order’s ideology. Perhaps Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 proves me wrong, but it was effectively impossible last November and December to puncture the absurd credulousness of the so-called free world about the reality of the so-called “orange revolution” in Ukraine. No one in the West seemed to know or care that propaganda about ‘revolution’ was not exactly new in a country which has been so cruelly governed by Bolsheviks and their successors since 1917.
  
  Now, however, the Ukrainian orange revolutionaries have fallen out – like thieves – and so things are changing. Following his decision on 9th September to sack his entire government, Viktor Yushchenko is suddenly getting a bad press. The bad press is, as usual, unanimous: the Financial Times pronounced that, “Much of the blame for the collapse of his first government falls squarely on Mr Yushchenko” (9th September 2005), while the New York Times told its readers that the sacking of Prime Minister and gas oligarch, Yulia Timoshenko, was “popular” (12th September 2005). Our media repeat ad nauseam stories about how President Yushchenko’s son drives around in a sports car, heavily implying that he is corrupt, but they seldom if ever mention the fact that Mrs Timoshenko is wanted by the Military Prosecutor in Russia for bribery and fraud, or that last year she was briefly listed on Interpol’s listed of wanted international criminals.
  
  The situation in Ukraine is effectively identical to that which arose in Serbia in October – December 2000. In that “revolution”, in which armed gangs, trained assassins and Mafia paramilitary groups overthrew Slodoban Milošević, [1] a boring man in a suit – Vojislav Koštunica – was pushed forward as President of Yugoslavia (a largely honorific post) in order to hide the fact that the truly powerful job of running the government was about to fall into the hands of a deeply unpopular man, Zoran Djindjić, who became Prime Minister of Serbia in December 2000. (Djindjić was eventually assassinated by one of the thugs who had brought him to power – he who lives by the sword … etc – and Koštunica is now Prime Minister of Serbia. By the same token, real power in Montenegro is in the hands of the Prime Minister there, the cigarette-smuggling billionaire, Milo Djukanović.)
  
  Similarly, in Ukraine, Yushchenko was pushed forward to hide the fact that Yulia Timoshenko was about to gain control of the government in Kiev. As anyone who has seen an interview with Yushchenko on Western television will know, the man is probably the most stultifyingly dull politician in the world. He is a man with no charisma whatever, and without even any apparently normal human behaviour patterns. He rarely smiles and seems unable to say more than two or three words at a time; what he does say is usually impenetrable nonsense. Even the way he punched the air while on stage during the street demonstrations last Christmas was about as exciting as a rainy November afternoon in Belfast. It is, once again, proof of the ability of our media to manufacture virtual reality that anyone ever believed that this stuffed dummy could do anything on his own initiative, still less wow a large crowd. His presence as the ostensible leader of the ‘orange revolution’ was intended merely to hide the reality that power was about to pass into the hands of an immensely powerful gas oligarch.
  
  Because the West sponsored the Orange revolution in order to bring Mrs Timoshenko surreptitiously to power, the publicity she receives is universally positive. We know that the West intended her to have real power because, at the height of the crisis last December, it forced Yushchenko to accept radical changes to the Ukrainian constitution, creating a parliamentary rather than presidential system.[2] This meant that real power is in the hands of the Prime Minister, not the President. Yulia Timoshenko has confirmed that her intention is now to run for election next March, hoping to regain the Prime Ministership then.
  
  The issue between the various factions in Ukraine is business, especially the energy business. The Financial Times has concentrated on the tussle between various parties trying to re-privatise the steel sector – i.e. to expropriate the present croney capitalists for the benefit of other ones connected to the new people in power – but the real fight is over gas. Big money is involved: Deutsche Bank has recently accorded the Ukrainian state oil and gas company a credit line of $2 billion. Indeed, one of the reasons why Ukraine is strategically important for the USA and the West is that a lot of gas pipelines cross its enormous territory, bringing gas from Russia and Central Asia to Europe. On the Russian side, it is no coincidence that Viktor Chernomyrdin, the former head of the Russian conglomerate Gazprom, is the Russian ambassador to Ukraine. Indeed, the battle between Timoshenko and the chief security minister, Petro Poroshenko, which led to the government’s collapse, was precisely over the country’s energy sector and the organised crime which permeates it.[3]
  
  In June, the head of the Ukrainian Security Service, Alexander Turchinov, had called for an investigation into corruption in the Ukrainian gas industry. This was greeted by immediate calls for Turchinov’s dismissal. The row seemed to threaten Russia’s sale of gas to Ukraine and shortly afterwards, Gazprom announced that it would raise its gas prices to Ukraine to market levels. Meanwhile, the Prosecutor’s Office in Moscow confirmed that the Ukrainian Prime Minister was still wanted for fraud. One of the key figures in this dispute, the deputy Yuri Boyko who used to head the state oil and gas company, Naftogas Ukraini, has alleged that Yulia Timoshenko was determined to scupper gas deals between Russia and Ukraine for her own personal interest.[4] As it happens, the policies of Mrs Timoshenko’s government has led to chronic shortages of petrol (and other goods like sugar) in Ukraine in recent months – although quite how this is supposed to have made her so popular, as the FT and its friends pretend, is a mystery.
  
  
  
  The row erupted shortly after a deal was signed providing for Ukraine to buy gas from Turkmenistan. Any such deal would have dealt a blow to Russia: Russia buys gas from Turkmenistan and then sells it on to other former Soviet states. If the gas had gone directly to Ukraine instead, there would not have been enough capacity for Turkmen sales to Russia as well.[5] Russia’s enemies allege that she uses these gas sales for geopolitical purposes, which probably means that they would like to do the same thing themselves. The deal is on ice for the time being,[6] following the collapse of the government in Kiev, and the fact that the Russians were against the deal was underlined when Viktor Chernomyrdin welcomed Timoshenko’s dismissal.[7]
  
  The prospect of an anti-Russian gas alliance between Kiev and Ashgabat (the Turkmen capital) is intriguing. Turkmenistan is usually presented as one of the most retrograde dictatorships in the former Soviet space: the Turkmen president, Sparmurat Niyazov, has fostered an intense personality cult, erecting statues to himself all over the country. This did not prevent US ally Yushchenko from visiting him in March to conclude the gas deal:[8] evidently the geopolitical imperatives of encircling Russia override any considerations about democracy in Turkmenistan, especially when it is reported that “the leader of the Turkmen” (Niyazov) is contemplating allowing the Americans to open an air base on his vast territory.[9]
  
  On the other hand, Washington cannot have liked it when Viktor Yushchenko said in early February that he would visit Iran in order to explore the possibility of concluding a gas deal with the Islamic Republic. Iran may have 18% of the world’s gas reserves,[10] and Ukraine could profit from importing Iranian oil while helping the Iranians with engineering and other technologies, but the meetings between Yushchenko and the Iranian Foreign Minister at Davos in February, and between the Ukrainian deputy oil and energy minister and the Iranian Deputy Prime Minister in Tehran in early March will not have gone down well in Washington – especially since the only possible routes for the transportation of this gas would be through the Caucasus, and in particular through Georgia, which the US controls.
  
  Often, when unintelligent men like Yushchenko are pushed forward to occupy positions of power, it goes to their head. They forget that they are servants and that they are expected to behave as such. Yushchenko may have overstepped himself when he started flirting with the Iranians, or when he tried to scupper Mrs Timoshenko’s anti-Russian gas deals. I predict that within a matter of months he will have been effectively sidelined from power, and that all the court journalists who attacked me for criticising him last Christmas will turn on him mercilessly.
  
  [1] As I have pointed out in numerous articles for this column (Chicken Kiev (Nov. 8, 2004); A Clockwork Orange? Or: What makes Viktor Yushchenko tick (Dec. 6, 2004), the truth about the ‘revolution’ in Belgrade on 5th October 2000 is in the public domain, and in English, in various books and articles.
  
  [2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4079193.stm
  
  [3] “Ukraine: A Conflict Over Gas And Power,” by Roman Kupchinsky, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 12th September 2005
  
  [4] http://en.for-ua.com/news/2005/08/17/170029.html, “Boyko says PM Tymoshenko to blame for gas supply disputes with Russia” ForUm, 17th August 2005
  
  [5] “East: Ukraine, Russia spar over Turkmen Gas,” by Roman Kupchinsky, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 18th April 2005
  
  [6] http://www.mosnews.com/money/2005/09/07/ukraineturkmengas.shtml, Moscow News, 7th September 2005
  
  [7] “Chernomyrdin welcomes Timoshenko’s Ouster,” Moscow Times, 13th September 2005, http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/09/13/015.html
  
  [8] “Ukraine: Kyiv secures Turkmen gas supplies for 2006” , Radio Free Europe, 28th June 2005, http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/06/c9f49cbb-ce83-494e-a475-3676af24ae55.html
  
  [9] “Is Washington exploring a base deal with Turkmenistan?”, Eurasianet, 31st August 2005, http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/06/c9f49cbb-ce83-494e-a475-3676af24ae55.html
  
  [10] See US Department of Energy country report on Iran, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iran.html
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  © 2003-5. Sanders Research Associates. All rights reserved.
  [ Feedback ] [ Terms of Service ]
  Developed by Sansui Software (UK) Ltd.
  Best viewed in 800 x 600
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.09.21 | Сахаров

    Чи варте уваги те г..но. Нам своє робить (-)

    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2005.09.21 | Пані

      Хай буде для історії

      А то, знаєте, на багатьох сайтах архіви таки горять тільки не в нас.

• 2005.09.21 | Хвізик

  повна херня, звиняйте (-)

• 2005.09.21 | Забойщик

  Ребята! Ну вы даёте....! Уже сутки обсуждаем...

  http://www2.maidan.org.ua/n/free/1127248510
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.09.21 | observer

    ну звиняйте, не помітив (-)

• 2005.09.21 | Sean

  Угу. Вірю, бо сам брехун (с)

  Мне бы шашку и коня,
  да на линию огня
  
  (с)Л.Филатов
  
  Оце про Тимошенко. З її будьоновсько-троцькими методами ставка на неї Заходу виглядає...гм, як би це мовити, малоймовірною
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.09.21 | Хвізик

    абсолютно точно:

    > Оце про Тимошенко. З її будьоновсько-троцькими методами ставка на неї Заходу виглядає...гм, як би це мовити, малоймовірною