Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ukrainian army attacks eastern towns of Mariupol, Konstantinovka

RT | May 3, 2014

The Ukrainian military has started an operation against pro-autonomy activists in the city of Mariupol, southeastern Ukraine, as well as the town of Konstantinovka, according to local self-defense activists.

The troops have moved into Mariupol and have surrounded an administrative building held by anti-government protesters.

There are a few hundred activists inside the building. They told RT that the army is warning them that if they do not leave the building in the coming minutes, they will be fired at and the building will be seized.

“I am in the center of the city, there are a lot of ambulances outside the local administration building, gunfire is being heard, armored vehicles have entered the city and are moving towards the center,” witness Tatyana told RT by phone. “People are going there as well, to prevent the soldiers form shooting. We are hoping they won’t shoot at civilians, though from what we’ve seen before, we are not sure anymore.”

Mikhail Krutko from the self-defense headquarters told Interfax news agency: “Residents are unarmed, they blocked roads in the city center, built up barricades from tires and other things not to let hardware pass. They set tires on fire.”

People on the ground told RT’s Paula Slier that there are 300-500 anti-Kiev protesters there and they are unarmed. There have so far been no reports of injuries.

A bank building has been set ablaze in Mariupol, local news website 0629 reported.

“There is no fatalities so far, but I can’t say anything about the number of injured. Right now police have returned from the scene, but people in dark uniforms can be seen in other parts of the city,” another witness named Dmitry told RT.

At the same time, a convoy of Ukrainian APCs has forced its way through self-defense checkpoints near the Donetsk Region town of Konstantinovka. Shots and alarm can be heard inside the city.

There are reports that at least two people have been killed, Paula Slier says. The TV building has reportedly been seized by the army and all transmissions are currently off-air, she adds.

Self-defense units earlier seized the security services headquarters in the town.

Ukraine’s acting interior minister, Arsen Avakov, has confirmed that a special operation is underway in the town of Konstantinovka, adding that several soldiers have been injured.

screen_shot_2014-05-04_at_00.48.31_copy

Image from maps.google.com

Menawhile National Security Council secretary Andrey Parubiy has said that Kiev is planning to begin special military operations in other regions of Ukraine after it completes its current operations in Slavyansk and Kramatorsk.

Over the past few days, Ukraine has stepped up its military operations in southeastern Ukraine against pro-autonomy activists. The main opposition strongholds include Kramatorsk, Slavyansk, Lugansk, and others.

In Lugansk, self-defense forces have declared a state of emergency and full mobilization amid Kiev’s punitive military operation in the region on Saturday.

At the same time, outraged residents of Kramatorsk have lashed out at troops entering the city’s streets. The Ukrainian military is currently occupying the city of Kramatorsk following an assault early on Saturday, a local self-defense unit said. Activists said that 10 people died in fighting overnight and two others were “killed by snipers.”

Meanwhile, clashes between pro-nationalist radicals and anti-Kiev activists have intensified. On Friday, more than 45 anti-Kiev protesters were killed in Odessa; some died in clashes, while others died from burns or suffocation after being trapped inside the House of Trade Unions building by the ultra-nationalist Right Sector group.

May 3, 2014 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

Will Ukraine Be NYT’s Waterloo?

By Robert Parry | Consortium News | May 3, 2014

For Americans interested in foreign policy, the New York Times has become the last U.S. newspaper to continue devoting substantial resources to covering the world. But the Times increasingly betrays its responsibility to deliver anything approaching honest journalism on overseas crises especially when Official Washington has a strong stake in the outcome.

The Times’ failures in the run-up to the disastrous Iraq War are, of course, well known, particularly the infamous “aluminum tube” story by Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller. And, the Times has shown similar bias on the Syrian conflict, such as last year’s debunked Times’ “vector analysis” tracing a sarin-laden rocket back to a Syrian military base when the rocket had less than one-third the necessary range.

But the Times’ prejudice over the Ukraine crisis has reached new levels of extreme as the “newspaper of record” routinely carries water for the neocons and other hawks who still dominate the U.S. State Department. Everything that the Times writes about Ukraine is so polluted with propaganda that it requires a very strong filter, along with additives from more independent news sources, to get anything approaching an accurate understanding of events.

From the beginning of the crisis, the Times sided with the “pro-democracy” demonstrators in Kiev’s Maidan square as they sought to topple democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych, who had rebuffed a set of Western demands that would have required Ukraine to swallow harsh austerity measures prescribed by the International Monetary Fund. Yanukovych opted for a more generous offer from Russia of a $15 billion loan with few strings attached.

Along with almost the entire U.S. mainstream media, the Times cheered on the violent overthrow of Yanukovych on Feb. 22 and downplayed the crucial role played by well-organized neo-Nazi militias that surged to the front of the Maidan protests in the final violent days. Then, with Yanukovych out and a new coup regime in, led by U.S. hand-picked Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the IMF austerity plan was promptly approved.

Since the early days of the coup, the Times has behaved as essentially a propaganda organ for the new regime in Kiev and for the State Department, pushing “themes” blaming Russia and President Vladimir Putin for the crisis. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’sUkraine, Though the US ‘Looking Glass.’”]

In the Times’ haste to perform this function, there have been some notable journalistic embarrassments such as the Times’ front-page story  touting photographs that supposedly showed Russian special forces in Russia and then the same soldiers in eastern Ukraine, allegedly proving that the popular resistance to the coup regime was simply clumsily disguised Russian aggression.

Any serious journalist would have recognized the holes in the story – since it wasn’t clear where the photos were taken or whether the blurry images were even the same people – but that didn’t bother the Times, which led with the scoop. However, only two days later, the scoop blew up when it turned out that a key photo – supposedly showing a group of soldiers in Russia who later appeared in eastern Ukraine – was actually taken in Ukraine, destroying the premise of the entire story.

Soldiering On

The Times, however, continued to soldier on with its bias, playing up stories that made Russia and the ethnic Russians of eastern Ukraine look bad and playing down anything that might make the post-coup regime in Kiev look bad.

On Saturday, for instance, the dominant story from Ukraine was the killing of more than 30 ethnic Russian protesters by fire and smoke inhalation in Ukraine’s southern port city of Odessa. They had taken refuge in a union building after a clash with a pro-Kiev mob which reportedly included right-wing thugs.

Even the neocon-dominated Washington Post led its Saturday editions with the story of “Dozens killed in Ukraine fighting” and described the fatal incident this way: “Friday evening, a pro-Ukrainian mob attacked a camp where the pro-Russian supporters had pitched tents, forcing them to flee to a nearby government building, a witness said. The mob then threw gasoline bombs into the building. Police said 31 people were killed when they choked on smoke or jumped out of windows.

“Asked who had thrown the Molotov cocktails, pro-Ukrainian activist Diana Berg said, ‘Our people – but now they are helping them [the survivors] escape the building.’”

By contrast, here is how the New York Times reported the event in its Saturday editions as part of a story by C.J. Chivers and Noah Sneider focused on the successes of the pro-coup armed forces in overrunning some eastern Ukrainian rebel positions.

“Violence also erupted Friday in the previously calmer port city of Odessa, on the Black Sea, where dozens of people died in a fire related to clashes that broke out between protesters holding a march for Ukrainian unity and pro-Russian activists. The fighting itself left four dead and 12 wounded, Ukraine’s Interior Ministry said. Ukrainian and Russian news media showed images of buildings and debris burning, fire bombs being thrown and men armed with pistols.”

Note how the Times evades placing any responsibility on the pro-coup mob for trying to burn the “pro-Russian activists” out of a building, an act that resulted in the highest single-day death toll since the actual coup which left more than 80 people dead from Feb. 20-22. From reading the Times, you wouldn’t know who had died in the building and who had set the fire.

Normally, I would simply attribute this deficient story to some reporters and editors having a bad day and not bothering to assemble relevant facts. However, when put in the context of the Times’ unrelenting bias in its coverage of the Ukraine crisis – how the Times hypes every fact (and even non-facts) that reflect negatively on the anti-coup side – you have to think that the Times is spinning its readers, again.

For those who write for the Times – and the many more people who read it – the question must be whether the Times is so committed to its prejudices here that the newspaper will risk whatever credibility it has left. The coup regime from Kiev may succeed in slaughtering many ethnic Russians in the rebellious east — as the Times signals its approval — but will this bloody offensive become a Waterloo for whatever’s left of the newspaper’s journalistic integrity?

~

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

May 3, 2014 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Evo’s Bolivia: Continuity and Change

By Linda C. Farthing and Benjamin H. Kohl

Out now. An accessible account of Evo Morales’s first six years in office, offering analysis of major issues as well as interviews with a wide variety of people, resulting in a valuable primer on Bolivia and Morales’s “process of change”.

In this compelling and comprehensive look at the rise of Evo Morales and Bolivia’s Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS), Linda Farthing and Benjamin Kohl offer a thoughtful evaluation of the transformations ushered in by the western hemisphere’s first contemporary indigenous president. Accessible to all readers, Evo’s Bolivia not only charts Evo’s rise to power but also offers a history of and context for the MAS revolution’s place in the rising “pink tide” of the political left. Farthing and Kohl examine the many social movements whose agendas have set the political climate in Bolivia and describe the difficult conditions the administration inherited. They evaluate the results of Evo’s policies by examining a variety of measures, including poverty; health care and education reform; natural resources and development; and women’s, indigenous, and minority rights. Weighing the positive with the negative, the authors offer a balanced assessment of the results and shortcomings of the first six.

Available in paperback for $16.72

May 3, 2014 Posted by | Book Review, Economics, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

312 Palestinians Kidnapped By Israeli Army In April

BlqEnxpCIAEeFZa

By Saed Bannoura | IMEMC News | May 2, 2014

The Ahrar Center for Detainees Studies and Human Rights issued its monthly report, revealing that the Israeli army kidnapped 312 Palestinians in different parts of the occupied West Bank, occupied Jerusalem, and the besieged Gaza Strip.

Ahrar said the army carried out dozens of invasions into the occupied territories, kidnapping 312 Palestinians, mainly after breaking into their homes and properties, and violently searching them, causing excessive property damage.

Most of the arrests have been carried out in the Hebron District, as the soldiers kidnapped 94 Palestinians, followed by Jerusalem, 92, Nablus, 36, Bethlehem, 21, Jenin, 18, Ramallah, 16, Gaza Strip, 15 including 11 kidnapped near the border fence, Qalqilia, 10, Salfit, 7, Tulkarem, 2, and one in Tubas.

Ahrar added that the army kidnapped four Palestinian women in April, and released two of them later on.

Mariam Barghouthi, from Ramallah, and Samira al-‘Akel, from Hebron, are still imprisoned, while Tahani Abu Mayyala and Hanin Abu Aisha, from Hebron, were released.

“There are 21 Palestinian women who are still imprisoned by Israel,” Ahrar stated.

Head of the Ahrar Center, Fuad al-Khoffash, stated that April witnessed the beginning of one of the strongest hunger strikes by Administrative Detainees held with charge or trial, and that the detainees are determined to continue their strike.

Al-Khoffash added that the striking detainees are subject to constant attacks and harassment, in the attempt by authorities to force them to end their strike, while many have been moved into solitary confinement and are denied the right to family visits.

May 3, 2014 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

The US, Cuba and Terrorism

By Robert Fantina | CounterPunch | May 2, 2014

The United States State Department, in its infinite wisdom, has once again designated Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism. The newest Country Report on Terrorism, issued on April 30, 2014, includes Cuba in a list of nations that “repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism”. The island country in the Caribbean has been so designated since 1982.One reads about the U.S. calling any other nation a ‘sponsor of terrorism’ in shocked disbelief. That the U.S., the greatest purveyor of terrorism on the planet, has the audacity to accuse any other nation of sponsoring terrorism is beyond all credibility.

Just since the beginning of the new millennium, the U.S. has unleashed horrific terrorism on the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, resulting in the deaths of at least hundreds of thousands of men, women and children, and the displacement of millions, and is currently sending drones to Yemen and other nations, ostensibly to kill ‘terrorists’, but resulting in the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Is this not terrorism?

And what of the U.S.’s continued and unwavering financial support of Israeli terrorism against the Palestinians? Not only does the U.S. finance that apartheid regime, it blocks any attempt by the international community to put a halt to it.

So 1982 is the year that the U.S. first decided that Cuba was a state sponsor of terrorism. This, despite U.S. antagonism toward that country since 1959, when the repressive and widely hated, U.S.-supported regime of Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by a popular resistance movement, led by the young leftist, Fidel Castro. At that time, the U.S. controlled 80% of Cuban utilities, 90% of its mines and cattle ranches, and nearly all of its oil refineries. No wonder Mr. Castro has incurred the wrath of the U.S. since then: when the American bottom line is threatened, no efforts are too great to protect it.

And what has the U.S., that shining beacon of peace, freedom and democracy, been doing on the world stage since 1982, when it first singled out Cuba as a terrorist state? It has either invaded, or covertly or overtly worked for the overthrow of the governments of the following countries, sometimes on multiple occasions, and sometimes constantly:

Cuba

Nicaragua

Angola

Philippines

Iraq

Iran

Venezuela

Palestine

Afghanistan

Somalia

Haiti

If one were to go back just to the middle of the twentieth century, these countries could be added to the list:

Syria

Guatemala

Tibet

Indonesia

Democratic Republic of the Congo

South Vietnam

Brazil

Ghana

Chile

Turkey

Poland

Korea

El Salvador

Grenada

And what of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, including waterboarding, which the United Nations and every civilized country in the world, except for the U.S., condemns? By any but U.S. standards, these are acts of terrorism.

And while we’re talking about Cuba, let’s not forget Guantanamo, the U.S.’s, Cuban-based torture chamber. And the U.S. policy of ‘extraordinary rendition’, the practice of kidnapping suspected terrorists and sending them to foreign countries where prohibitions against torture don’t exist, can only be seen as terrorism.

So while the U.S. wages war, tortures political prisoners, holds prisoners for years without any concept of due process, destabilizes democratically-elected governments which displease it, and finances governments with long records of the most shocking human rights abuses, it actually has the nerve to accuse another country of supporting terrorism.

The Cuban response to this designation is milder than one might expect. A statement from that country’s foreign ministry said that Cuba “… energetically rejects the manipulation of a matter as sensitive as international terrorism by turning it into an instrument of policy against Cuba and it demands that our country be definitively excluded from this spurious, unilateral and arbitrary list.”

So what are the specific reasons the U.S. has for continuing to designate Cuba a sponsor of terrorism? It hardly matters, considering the U.S.’s own ongoing, horrific terrorist activities around the globe, but let’s note them anyway.

* Past support for the Basque separatist group ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna ( Basque Homeland and Freedom), and

* Support for Colombia’s FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) rebels.

Yet the report concedes that Cuban ties to ETA ‘have become more distant’, and it points out that Cuba is hosting talks between the Colombian government and the FARC in Havana.

There are, of course, opposing views for why the U.S. actually has so designated Cuba:

Said Mauricio Claver-Carone, of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, an influential lobby group in Washington: Cuba “fails to meet the statutory criteria for being removed” (whatever that is).

Alana Tummino, director of policy at the Americas Society/Council for the Americas in New York, had a different view: “Sadly, unless the State Department has more evidence than it’s providing, it appears that political motivations have once again driven this determination.”

Can there be any doubt that political motivations are, in fact, behind the U.S.’s continuation of a policy that makes no logical sense? For nearly sixty years, the U.S. has embargoed, boycotted, sanctioned, blockaded and invaded Cuba, all because of ongoing resentment against the takeover by the government by Cubans from the Americans. The electoral vote in Florida is usually vital in presidential elections, and the importance of the Cuban-American voting bloc, although diminishing, is still worth courting. So such considerations as human rights, justice and statesmanship have no role in policy-making, when the goal is always re-election.

One looks in vain for any substantive change to U.S. policy towards Cuba.

Robert Fantina’s latest book is Empire, Racism and Genocide: a History of US Foreign Policy (Red Dill Press).

May 3, 2014 Posted by | Deception, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | 1 Comment