Poro hat das ja auch nicht behauptet, sondern ein "ihm Nahestehender ...".jeremybrood schrieb:PR-Gag von Poroschenko
UKRAINE
EU-Steuergelder weg: Staatliche Eisenbahn der Ukraine meldet Insolvenz an
Natürlich. Das ist die Quintessenz aus dem ganzen Beitrag. Mir liegen aber die einzelnen Aussagen nicht vor, weswegen man dann den Admins von Facebook vertrauen müsste. So muss man dann auch erstmal die Aussagen Zuckerbergs hinnehmen.Phantomeloi schrieb:Nochmal - es wurden Facebook accounts von ukrainischen Usern geblockt nachdem sie gegen die FB-Regeln (Hass-Sprüche nicht erlaubt) verstießen.
Gut so, dass man den Hasspredigern die Seite zumacht.
Macht Allmy nicht anders.
As Ukraine continues its battle against separatists, corruption and a collapsing economy, it has taken a dangerous step that could further tear the country apart: Ukraine's parliament, the Supreme Rada, passed a draft law last month honoring organizations involved in mass ethnic cleansing during World War Two.http://www.jpost.com/International/Putin-says-Ukraine-being-overrun-by-fascists-and-he-may-be-right-403205
The draft law - which is now on President Petro Poroshenko's desk awaiting his signature - recognizes a series of Ukrainian political and military organizations as “fighters for Ukrainian independence in the 20th century” and bans the criticism of these groups and their members. (The bill doesn't state the penalty for doing so.) Two of the groups honored - the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) - helped the Nazis carry out the Holocaust while also killing close to 100,000 Polish civilians during World War Two.
The law is part of a recent trend of contemporary Ukrainian nationalism promoted by those on the extreme right to break with the country's Communist past and emphasize Ukraine's suffering under the Soviet regime. In addition to the moral problem of forbidding the criticism of Holocaust perpetrators, the law hinders Ukraine's European ambitions - and validates Russian President Vladimir Putin's claims that the country is overrun by neo-Nazis.
The OUN was founded in 1929 as a revolutionary organization designed to liberate Ukraine from Soviet rule and create an independent Ukrainian state. Many OUN leaders were trained in Nazi Germany, and the group's philosophy was influenced by Nazi racial theorists such as Alfred Rosenberg. OUN literature, for example, declared the need to “combat Jews as supporters of the Muscovite-Bolshevik regime… Death to the Muscovite-Jewish commune! Beat the commune, save Ukraine!”
The OUN fought both the Nazis and the Soviets, and many Ukrainian nationalists have argued that the OUN was primarily a national liberation movement. But while the OUN's core goal may have been the creation of an independent Ukrainian state, along the way its members were responsible for terrible atrocities.
Starting with a pogrom in Lviv shortly after the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, OUN militias - with the support of the Nazis - embarked on a killing spree in Western Ukraine that claimed the lives of tens of thousands of Jews. After the Nazis dissolved these militias, many of their members joined the Ukrainian Auxiliary Police in German service, where they received weapons-training and became one of the most important instruments of the Holocaust in Belarus and Western Ukraine.
By 1943 the OUN had seized control of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), a Ukrainian nationalist paramilitary group, and declared itself opposed to both the retreating Germans and the oncoming Soviets. Although no longer in Nazi service, the UPA nevertheless continued to target and kill Jews, herding them into labor camps for execution. The UPA also engaged in the mass ethnic cleansing of Poles during this time, killing nearly 100,000 people.
Even after the Red Army pushed the Germans from Ukraine in the summer of 1944, the UPA continued to fight a partisan war against Soviet forces well into the 1950s, before it was finally crushed by the massive power of the Red Army. It is this legacy of sacrifice that explains the Rada's decision to pass a law honoring the OUN and the UPA.
This law echoes a recent trend of glorifying right-wing Ukrainian nationalist organizations with controversial pasts. Under former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, a number of leading Ukrainian nationalists were honored with a memorial at Babi Yar - site of the single-worst massacre of Jews during the Holocaust. Yushchenko also bestowed the highest government honor of “Hero of Ukraine” upon the controversial former OUN leader Stepan Bandera - a step roundly condemned by the chief rabbi of Ukraine, the president of Poland and the European Union.
More recently, radical nationalists played a key role as “shock troops” on the Maidan, and the anti-government camp was full of OUN-UPA flags and cries of “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!” - chants that originated with the OUN. Currently, a number of OUN-UPA apologists occupy important government positions, including the minister of education, the head of the Security Service of Ukraine and the director of the Ukrainian government's Institute of National Memory. Even Poroshenko has gotten into the act, laying a wreath in honor of the OUN at Babi Yar last year.
The draft law has a number of downsides beyond the moral problem of giving the OUN and UPA a free pass for atrocious crimes. Most obviously, making criticism of Holocaust perpetrators illegal is not compatible with Ukraine's European ambitions. It is natural that many Ukrainians would wish to define themselves in opposition to the former Soviet Union, but as a budding democracy, banning criticism of any organizations - particularly those with such dark pasts - is the wrong way to build national identity.
Kiev also must remember that its conflict with Putin's Russia is taking place in cyberspace as well as the Donbass. Kiev has now handed the Kremlin “evidence” for Putin's claim that Russia is facing off against fascists. Not surprisingly, Russian state-owned media outlets have had a field day condemning the law.
Perhaps the worst effect of this law is the way it would split the country. Eastern and western Ukrainians already possess widely diverging views on recent political events such as the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Maidan revolution. The law would only exacerbate these regional differences. Historically, support for the “OUN-cult” originated primarily in the western Ukrainian regions of Galacia and Volhynia, where they are seen as heroic freedom fighters against Soviet oppression. Eastern Ukrainians, by contrast, grew up viewing these groups as Nazi collaborators to be feared and condemned rather than celebrated.
The Rada's passage of this law has already greatly harmed Ukraine. It is now up to Poroshenko to mitigate the damage by vetoing it.
Josh Cohen is a former USAID project officer involved in managing economic reform projects in the former Soviet Union. He contributes to a number of foreign policy-focused media outlets and tweets at @jkc_in_dc .
One Year After Russia Annexed Crimea, Locals Prefer Moscow To Kievfortsetzung: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed-crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/
The U.S and European Union may want to save Crimeans from themselves. But the Crimeans are happy right where they are.
One year after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, poll after poll shows that the locals there — be they Ukrainians, ethnic Russians or Tatars are mostly all in agreement: life with Russia is better than life with Ukraine.
At some point, the West will have to recognize Crimea’s right to self rule. Unless we are all to believe that the locals polled by Gallup and GfK were done so with FSB bogey men standing by with guns in their hands.
In June 2014, a Gallup poll with the Broadcasting Board of Governors asked Crimeans if the results in the March 16, 2014 referendum to secede reflected the views of the people. A total of 82.8% of Crimeans said yes. When broken down by ethnicity, 93.6% of ethnic Russians said they believed the vote to secede was legitimate, while 68.4% of Ukrainians felt so. Moreover, when asked if joining Russia will ultimately make life better for them and their family, 73.9% said yes while 5.5% said no.
In February 2015, a poll by German polling firm GfK revealed that attitudes have not changed. When asked “Do you endorse Russia’s annexation of Crimea?”, a total of 82% of the respondents answered “yes, definitely,” and another 11% answered “yes, for the most part.” Only 2% said they didn’t know, and another 2% said no. Three percent did not specify their position.
With two studies out of the way, both Western-based, it seems without question that the vast majority of Crimeans do not feel they were duped into voting for annexation, and that life with Russia will be better for them and their families than life with Ukraine.
The GfK survey also asked if the Ukrainian media have given Crimea a fair assessment. Only 1% said that the Ukrainian media “provides entirely truthful information” and only 4% said it was “more often truthful than deceitful.”
KIEV: A Ukrainian military spokesman says two Russian soldiers captured in the war-torn east of the country are on their way to the capital, Kiev.Na mal sehen ob und was die beiden zu sagen haben. Und obs geglaubt wird XD
Ukrainian officials said Sunday two Russians were wounded and taken prisoner near the front line in the Luhansk region. Russia has vehemently denied it is supplying separatists in eastern Ukraine either with weaponry or troops.
Vladislav Seleznev, spokesman for the Ukrainian General Staff, told The Associated Press on Monday that the two men are now being questioned by the Ukrainian Security Service and are on their way to Kiev where they will face the media.
A video posted by a member of parliament on Sunday showed one man who said he was a Russian Army sergeant and that he has been based in Ukraine since March.
Forbes: Einheimische von der Krim bevorzugen Moskau statt Kiev.. One year after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, poll after poll shows that the locals there — be they Ukrainians, ethnic Russians or Tatars are mostly all in agreement: life with Russia is better than life with UkraineDas sieht zusammenfabriziert aus.
A high-ranking member of the Crimean Tatar assembly has begun a hunger strike at the facility where he awaits trial for allegedly organizing "mass disorder" ahead of Russia's annexation of Crimea.
Ahtem Ciygoz began his protest on May 6 after being placed in solitary confinement this week.
In April, Crimea's Russian authorities arrested Eskender Nebiyev, a cameraman for a Crimean Tatar television channel that was shut down on April 1. Nebiyev was also arrested over the clashes outside parliament.
In March, Crimean Tatar activist Talyat Yunusov was arrested and charged with assaulting a man during the clashes.
Activists Iskender Kantemirov and Ali Asanov were earlier arrested in connection with the clashes.
Da hast Du etwas falsch verstanden.
WahlmodusSchwierig über den Status Quo vor Beginn der Krise zu stimmen, wenn kein legitimes Parlament und keine legitime Regierung mehr vorhanden ist.
Am 16. März 2014 begann das Referendum zum Status der Ukraine. Rund 1,5 Millionen Wahlberechtigte konnten in 1200 Wahllokalen eine aus zwei Optionen (jeweils in den Sprachen Russisch, Ukrainisch und Krimtatarisch aufgeführt) auswählen:[40]
Sind Sie für eine Wiedervereinigung der Krim mit Russland mit den Rechten eines Subjekts der Russischen Föderation?
Sind Sie für eine Wiederherstellung der Gültigkeit der Verfassung der Republik Krim von 1992 und für einen Status der Krim als Teil der Ukraine?
Ob die Halbinsel bei einer Rückkehr zur Verfassung von 1992 unabhängig bliebe oder ob es nur um eine Ausweitung der Autonomierechte bei Verbleib im ukrainischen Staatsverband ginge, geht aus den Fragen des Referendums nicht hervor. Eine Optionsmöglichkeit für das Verbleiben in der Ukraine ohne Wiederherstellung der Verfassung von 1992 – also für den Status quo vor Beginn der Krise – gab es nicht.[41][42][43]
"Die Verfassung der Krim von 1992" war eine illegitime, von der Zentralregierung der Ukraine nicht anerkannte Verfassung, die das Krimparlament 1992 sich selbst gegeben hat und die de facto dieAutonomie für die Krim bedeutet hätte.Senigma schrieb:Sind Sie für eine Wiederherstellung der Gültigkeit der Verfassung der Republik Krim von 1992 und für einen Status der Krim als Teil der Ukraine?
Russland hat keine legitime Regierung, da es keine unabhängigen Massenmedien und keine unabhängige Justiz gibt
Original anzeigen (0,2 MB)Genau, nach der Auflösung der Sowjetunion wollte die Krim mit der Ukraine schon nichts mehr zutun haben.
Von GfK oder was?
Wie kommst du darauf, dass die Tataren alle der selben pro-Kiev Meinung sein müssen?
Nun, vielleicht ist das alles in Ukrainischen Nachrichten erfunden und einfach dahergesagt worden, und hat es letztendlich auch in die Deutschen Medien geschafft weil es einfach ins Konzept passt?
ATR hat sich selbst geschlossen wenn man ukrainischen Nachrichten glauben schenkt.
Roskomnadzor: Crimean Tatar ATR channel has stopped broadcasting by the fault of the owners. The ATR channel four times filed in Roskomnadzor "incomplete" documents, said the head of Department Alexander Zharov.http://gordonua.com/news/crimea/Roskomnadzor-Krymskotatarskiy-telekanal-ATR-prekratil-veshchanie-po-vine-vladelcev-77897.html (Archiv-Version vom 30.07.2015)
Crimean Tatar ATR channel has stopped broadcasting because of his owners, said the head of Roskomnadzor Alexander Zharov.
According to "BBC Ukraine", the official assured that the government was not going to turn off the TV.
He stressed that the ATR will receive a broadcasting license, as soon they filed a "complete set of documents".
"The TV station was going to submit documents for registration. The documents, which were presented four times, all four times were incomplete," said Zharov.
Wovon redest du? Die Option "Krim als Teil der Ukraine" stand buchstäblich auf dem Wahlzettel drauf.
1. Sind Sie für eine Wiedervereinigung der Krim mit Russland mit den Rechten eines Subjekts der Russischen Föderation?Wikipedia: Referendum über den Status der Krim
2. Sind Sie für eine Wiederherstellung der Gültigkeit der Verfassung der Republik Krim von 1992 und für einen Status der Krim als Teil der Ukraine?
Prozesse gegen Terroristen liefen aber sogar fairer ab als z.B. in Guantanamo.. Musst dir also was Anderes zurechtlügen
Und? Autonomie und Verbleib in der Ukraine schließen sich aus?
Es gab also nur die Wahl beim Referendum zwischen Annexion und der Autonomie
Wieso das denn aufeinmal?^^^
lange vorher schon!
Klar, die Krimtataren können Moskau nur dankbar sein, dass Sowjetrussland 30% der KrimtatarenUkrop schrieb:Vielleicht sind es auch gar nicht die echten politischen Führer der Tataren sondern nur Opportunisten die von Kiev bezahlt werden um sich als politische Führer der Tataren auszugeben?
Im Bild sitzen noch 2 weitere Verbrecher.
