How come that BBC never gives any relevant background to the Ukraine war? Finland's president Alexander Stubb: Yes, cooperation with Russia was stupid. We're much better off with US DCA* occupation and secret nukes.

* DCA means US occupies Finland with as many military personnel (with families etc.) it seems appropriate, and that these people are outside Finnish law, drive vehicles with false registration plates (similar as ordinary plates but withous identity) etc. All these people have secret diplomat status on steroids. Add to this that what military equipment US brings to the Russian border is kept secret from the Finnish authorities. This info is based on reports of similar DCA in Sweden. Moreover, the whole war crazy floodgate in Finland and Sweden would never have happened without Russia's special operation which would never have happened if the aggressive US/Nato nuke expansion never had happened.    

How climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa.  

 How craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

Finland's defense blogger Peter Klevius: You also want cooperation with China, but doesn't seem to understand that all of this US enforced war politics is caused by US desperation to lose its stolen hegemony - since 1971 when US robbed the world dollar for itself - because of China's success which undermines US dollar hegemony to a point where the 1971 chickens inevitably are coming home to roost! 

Sackur (BBC): "You've lived in La la land. You ignored Putin's expansionist desires. You were Prime Minister and you tried to convince me that Finland and Europe should learn to work together with Russia. You said Nordstream is a great idea, "we need access to cheap Russian energy". You said that we Finns will build a nuclear power plant together with Russia, that it is good for Finland. You said that we must learn to trust the Russians. You were completely wrong.

Stubb: In those two cases – absolutely yes. In politics, it is important to understand that you make mistakes and learn from them. My idea was to achieve greater cooperation with Russia through integration.

Peter Klevius: How ignorant (or worse) of both of you! It was US/Nato's expansionist desires, starting with Obama administration's 2013 plan to take over Sevastopol (see below).

Sackur: You ignored clear signals of Russian aggression. You decided that a pragmatic agreement in which Georgia effectively lost territory was the right thing to do – without punishing Russia. You decided that the right way forward was to seek cooperation with Russia. You personally ignored all signals of Putin's expansionist desires.

Stubb: After the peace talks in Georgia, I wanted Finland to change its attitude towards Russia, impose sanctions on Russia and Finland join NATO As recently as 2018.

Peter Klevius: Could the 2008 Georgia crisis have anything to do with US/NATO's membership offer to Georgia?! Look at the map and you'll sea how US planned to place its nukes at Black sea as a stranglehold against Russia. And today US "rules based order" and US "democracy defense" has constantly meddled against the democratically chosen majority in the Georgian parliament who wanted to pass a law against foreign meddling - with a text that is meaker than similar laws in US, UK etc. Western "democracies".

Sackur: Despite what Russia did in Ukraine in 2014, Lavrov was still your friend in 2018. Here you sit and say that Europe should stop living in 'La la land'. You yourself have lived in "La la land".

Stubb: I think I have been in many ways. I think we should admit that we all were. Now it's about how we change tactics. One must learn from the mistakes of the past. I have been one of the most "hawkish" politicians in Finland vis-à-vis Russia and one of the toughest advocates of NATO. There was a rapid change of opinion among Finns regarding NATO membership after Russia launched its ground invasion of Ukraine in spring 2022. Ukraine's place is in NATO.

Peter Klevius: From a peaceful PM working in the best interest of Finland, to a warmongering puppet president aiding US attack plans ultimately against China, but first building a stranglehold on and weakening of Russia. And you don't seem to understand that US, not Russia or China, is the main threat to Erupe because US is facing collaps if it lets China continue to grow - and you have now contributed to transfer Finland from a neutral country to a US nuke base against Russia! And although you don't know when US brings its nukes, Russia may well know - and if scared enough may start protecting itself against possible false flag initiated US nuke attacks from Finnish soil. 

The Obama Regime’s Plan to Seize the Russian Naval Base in Crimea

November 2, 2019 | Categories: Guest Contributions | Tags: | Print This Article Print This

by Eric Zuesse

Clear and convincing evidence will be presented here that, under U.S. President Barack Obama, the U.S. Government had a detailed plan, which was already active in June 2013, to take over Russia’s main naval base, which is in Sevastopol in Crimea, and to turn it into a U.S. naval base. There can now be no question that the war in Ukraine started, and resulted from, the U.S. Government’s plan to take over all of Ukraine, and especially to take over that Russian naval base, in Crimea, which then was in Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine didn’t start at the time when a lot of people think that it did, with the overthrow of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych. It was already underway considerably before that time, because it started in Washington, as the folloowing masterful 11-minute documentary makes clear — it started as a subterranean war by Washington to take over Ukraine, before it became an overt war (a “civil war”) within Ukraine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkfpGCAAuw

The CIA-edited and written Wikipedia claims that the war commenced in “a series of military actions that started in February 2014”; and, that, from the outset, it has been a “Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present)” — not any sort of American intervention in Ukraine. However, to the extent that Russia has been involved in the Ukrainian war, that involvement came later, and was a reaction against what the U.S. Government and its agents had done to Ukraine (which nation is, of course, on Russia’s doorstep, and so Russia inevitably did respond). Therefore, the propagandistic function of Wikipedia must be acknowledged, even though Wikipedia is adequate for providing an introductory overview of some non-geostrategic subjects.

The U.S. regime, under Barack Obama, had been planning, ever since June 2011, a takeover of Ukraine, in order to become enabled ultimately to place its nuclear missiles within less than five minutes flying-time to a first-strike blitz destruction of the Kremlin (thus preventing any effective Russian counter-attack). However, things didn’t work out quite according to the plan for the takeover of Ukraine, and here is how the war in Ukraine actually began:

We’ll open by describing the planning for the conquest of Russia’s key naval base, in Sevastopol in Crimea. Crimea was inside Ukraine during 1954-2014, but had otherwise been inside Russia, going all the way back to 1783. (During 1954, the Soviet dictator, Khrushchev, arbitrarily transferred Crimea, from Russia to Ukraine, even though the vast majority of Crimeans considered themselves to be Russians, and their native language was Russian — but, after all, the Soviet Union was a dictatorship. Crimeans had no say in the matter.)

The U.S. regime prepared for its planned takeover of Crimea by commissioning Gallup to poll Crimeans in 2013 to find out whether the residents there considered themselves to be Ukrainians (which would make the U.S. regime’s job in Crimea easier), or instead still Russians (which would foretell resistance there); and the findings were that Crimeans overwhelmingly still considered themselves to be Russians, definitely not Ukrainians. Nonetheless, the plan for the takeover went forward — the U.S. team, it is clear, decided that the residents of Crimea could be dealt with, in such ways as is shown here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loKajkXoTBU

Some were clubbed to death, others became permanently disabled from their injuries, but this was a warning to Crimeans, to buckle under, and give up: be ruled from Kiev, by Washington’s regime. It didn’t work. A referendum was quickly held in Crimea about whether they wanted to be ruled by the newly installed Ukrainian government, and the results were in line with Gallup’s findings: Crimeans wanted to be ruled from Moscow, not from Kiev.

The U.S. then hired Gallup to survey Crimeans soon after the referendum. (Perhaps the U.S. regime was hoping to find that a scientific sampling of Crimeans would show a far smaller percentage favoring the breakaway of Crimea from Ukraine than the referendum had reported, which could greatly intensify international skepticism about the legitimacy of Russia’s takeover of Crimea. But, if that was the purpose, Gallup’s findings again turned out to be a disappointment.)

Here is what Gallup found in both its 2013 and 2014 polls of Crimeans:

When Gallup did their “Public Opinion Survey Residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea May 16-30, 2013” (which was called that because even when Crimea was part of Ukraine, it had a special status, as being an “Autonomous Republic” — not a province), only 15% (slide 8) of Crimeans viewed themselves as “Ukrainian,” but 40% said “Russian,” and 24% said “Crimean.” 53% (slide 14) wanted Crimeans to be part of the “Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan,” but only 17% wanted Crimeans to be part of “The European Union.” 68% (slide 15) said their feelings toward “Russia” were “warm,” but only 6% said their feelings toward “USA” were “warm.

When Gallup in April 2014 (right after the referendum) polled Crimeans again (slide 25), 76.2% had a “negative” view of the United States, and 2.8% had a “positive” view of it; 71.3% had a positive view of Russia, and 8.8% had a negative view of it. Asked whether (slide 28) “The results of the referendum on Crimea’s status likely reflect the views of most people there/here,” 82.8% said yes; 6.7% said no. 89.3% in the poll expressed an opinion on this matter, and 93% of those who expressed an opinion said that the referendum “likely did reflect the views” of Crimeans. That was almost exactly the same percentage as those who in the referendum had voted to rejoin Russia. It couldn’t have been stronger verification of the referendum-results, than that. The Gallup poll findings (like its predecessor) were hidden from the public — not broadcast to the public by the regime’s propaganda-media. After all: the U.S. Government is a regime — it’s not a democracy. All of the formalities, now, are just for show. Both of its political parties are imperialists (“neoconservative”). Only their style differs.

So: the U.S. regime knew that it wasn’t, at all, wanted nor welcomed by Crimeans, but that Russia very much was. The U.S. regime thus moved forward on the basis that the government of Ukraine owned that land; the residents who lived there did not, and should have no say about what government owned it and would rule them. The idea was that, if the people there didn’t like it, they should emigrate to Russia (and, according to a Russian source, “4.4 million went to Russia” — removed themselves from Ukraine — after the coup).

The U.S. regime, clearly, wanted the land, not  the people who were living on it. The expectation, as soon as Ukraine was under U.S. control from the coup, had been that America would get the entirety of Ukraine, including Crimea; but, then, Russia’s Vladimir Putin stepped in and protected Crimeans who were clamoring to hold a referendum in order to express their collective will on this matter; and this referendum was held, on 16 March 2014, and it produced over 90% voting for Crimea to be a part of Russia, such as Crimea had been before Khrushchev transferred it to Ukraine.

So: the U.S. regime failed to get the naval base that it had expected to get in Sevastopol in Crimea. That was a crucial failure for Obama.

Those events — the coup and, three weeks later, the Crimean referendum — occurred in 2014, but the planning for the coup had already been going on for years, and it wasn’t being called off once Gallup reported in 2013 that most Crimeans loathed the U.S. The active operation to take over Ukraine had started actually on 1 March 2013 inside the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, which was almost 9 months before Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, on 20 November 2013, rejected the EU’s demand that Ukraine must bear the full $160 billion cost of abandoning its existing trading relationships with Russia and its allies, in order to join the EU. Wikipedia says that the overthrow of Yanukovych started on 21 November 2013 when he said no to the EU, but actually it started on 1 March 2013; and the planning for it had started by no later than June 2011. And it may be said to have begun even prior to that, when, near the very start of Obama’s Presidency, Obama called the then-Ukrainian-Presidential-candidate Yanukovych to Washington in order to sound him out on — if Yanukovych would become the winner — getting Ukraine into NATO, America’s anti-Russian military alliance. Getting Ukraine into the EU was really just to be a steppingstone to getting it into NATO so that U.S. nuclear missiles could be placed there against Moscow. This is what everything was really about. On 7 January 2010, the Kiev Post bannered “Yanukovych: Ukraine will remain a neutral state” and this is what actually sealed his fate. Yanukovych, with that now in his platform, won the Presidential election on 7 February 2010. So: he was in Obama’s gunsight even at the very moment when he won the Presidency.

There was no question as to whether Ukrainians wanted to be in NATO: they did not. During 2003-2009, only around 20% of Ukranians wanted NATO membership, while around 55% opposed it. In 2010, Gallup found that whereas 17% of Ukrainians considered NATO to mean “protection of your country,” 40% said it’s “a threat to your country.” Ukrainians predominantly saw NATO as an enemy, not a friend. But after Obama’s February 2014 Ukrainian coup, “Ukraine’s NATO membership would get 53.4% of the votes, one third of Ukrainians (33.6%) would oppose it.” The coup turned what remained of Ukraine sharply against Russia. NATO is the key; the EU is more like an excuse for Ukraine to be admitted into NATO.

In June 2013 (well before the ‘democratic revolution’ in Ukraine started), NAVFAC, the U.S. Naval Facililities Engineering Command, published on its website, a “Project Description” for “Renovation of School#5, Sevastopol, Ukraine,” under the euphemistic title “EUCOM Humanitarian Assistance Program”. EUCOM is the U.S. European Command — it is purely military, not “humanitarian,” at all. The 124-page request for proposals (RFP) showed extensive photos of the existing school, and also of the toilets, floor-boards, and other U.S.-made products, that the U.S. regime was requiring to be used in the renovation (by some American corporation, yet to be determined) of that then-Ukrainian school in Crimea, which at that time was a Ukrainian Government property, not at all American-owned or operated. So: why were U.S. taxpayers supposed to fund this ‘humanitarian’ operation, by the U.S. military?

A remarkably full description, of what that extraordinary RFP was about, was provided on 24 April 2014 by a “Lada Ray,” under the headline “Breaking! US Planned to Turn #Crimea into Military Base Against Russia”, and here is its opening:

—

Breaking! US Planned to Turn #Crimea into Military Base Against Russia

24 April 2014, Lada Ray

A couple of weeks ago Crimea and Sevastopol almost unanimously voted to re-join Russia. The Crimeans said: we had been unappreciated guests, now we are returning home after a long voyage. More about that in my articles:

Why is Crimea Overwhelmingly Pro RE-Unification With Russia? https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/why-is-crimea-overwhelmingly-pro-re-unification-with-russia/

Prediction: Crimea Independence Vote https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/prediction-crimea-independence-vote/

The information coming to the surface now shows that if Crimea stayed as part of Ukraine, it would have become a huge NATO/US military base. I seriously doubt that the people of the Crimea would have stood for that, but if such a thing did happen, it would have meant WWIII as Russia would never allow it. From this perspective it’s especially clear why NATO, USA and EU were so shocked that Russia decisively accepted Crimea back. They already considered it theirs.

The city of Sevastopol is the prized possession. This is one of the best harbors in the world. But the entire Crimea is of huge strategic importance – first and foremost, if you want to attack Russia. In addition, Crimea is important for the control over other countries, including Iran and Turkey. As they say, he who controls Crimea, controls the Black Sea.

At least one hospital in Crimea’s capital Simferopol and at least one school in Sevastopol were targeted by the US/NATO just recently. They were planning on turning the hospital into a base for their troops after a massive renovation. One of the high schools (a gymnasium) in Sevastopol the Kiev authorities were about to sell to the US to be repurposed as a school for spies, targeting Russia. It was planned that the kids going to that school would be learning languages and spying techniques since an early age.

It appears Americans wanted to turn the Crimea into a massive military/navy/intelligence complex. The famous, one-of-a-kind Soviet underground submarine base in Balaklava, which is now the Museum of the Cold War, was visited in the past several years by at least 25 delegations from the Pentagon, US Navy, NATO, and Western political circles. Kiev gave them access to super-secret Russian/Soviet sectors of the base, which were supposed to be off limits. They studied with great interest the secret documentation and technology.

In Sevastopol, called “the city of the Russian glory” and the “hero city,” the NATO and US navy ships and military have been present for years. The population greeted them with constant protests, which prevented some of the planned joint military exercises between NATO and Kiev. Sometimes, the NATO ships had to leave because of the population’s resistance (protest footage on video below at 1:54). US/NATO ships in the Sevastopol harbor tried many times to “park” right in front of the Russian ships stationed there just out of spite. As we know, for 23 years, since the breakup of the USSR in 1991. Russia has been leasing its own base on its historic land for $100mln a year from Kiev.

Sevastopol had been the important base of the Russian Fleet since 1776. Sevastopol is a large and beautiful city populated with ethnic Russians, many of whom are retired navy officers and their families. These people dreamed for 23 years of going home – and by home they always meant Russia. Add to that that Kiev constantly attacked Russian language, little by little taking away the right of the Russian-speakers to speak their native language.

In Crimea, the US financed very generously various media, NGOs, and politicians, who would essentially become their agents. Of course, much of that was styled as support for democracy.

People of the Crimea felt deeply insulted by such attitude by the bought-and-paid-for Kiev and such disrespect of their heritage and wishes by the US/NATO.

—

You didn’t see that information in the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Telegraph, Guardian, or any other U.S.-regime propaganda-organ; and, so, the facts that are told there might be surprising (or even shocking) to readers under the U.S. regime; but they are true, and the propaganda isn’t. 

Then, Ukraine’s far eastern Donbass region, which had voted over 90% for the democratically elected President of Ukraine whom Obama had overthrown, also broke away. Here is how that happened:

Ukraine started its war against resisters by drafting everyone they could grab, and sending them in tanks into the south and east, in order to prevent any more secessions than Crimea had already done. The draftees were terrified, and didn’t want to kill. On 16 April 2014, the Kiev Post bannered “A day of humiliation, as Ukrainian military offensive stalls, six armored vehicles seized”. It opened: “On April 15, Ukraine’s military began an anti-terrorist operation against Kremlin-backed insurgents who have taken over numerous government buildings and police headquarters in several cities of Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine’s most populous region where 10 percent of the nation’s 45 million people live.” The residents in Donbass were now officially (by gther Obama-installed government) called “terrorists,” and Ukraine called its war to exterminate them the “Anti-Terrorist Operation” or ATO. Its objective was to eliminate as many of Yanukovych’s voters as possible (and Donbass having voted over 90% for Yanukovych meant that all of it was now a free-fire zone for Ukraine’s soldiers and bombers), so that the new regime would be able to win future elections (by eliminating the government’s opponents).

On 2 May 2014, thugs who were organized by the newly installed American regime in Kiev burned to death an uncounted number, perhaps over a hundred, individuals inside the Odessa Trade Unions Building, who had been distributing flyers against the coup-regime. Some of the massacre’s key organizers had friends inside the Obama White House. That event set off a panic throughout the eastern and southern half of Ukraine, where Yanukovych had overwhelmingly won the Presidency. The secession movement in the areas where Yanukovych had won (southern and eastern Ukraine), formed, and during 4-9 May 2014 took over some government buildings. Donbass, where Yanukovych had won by over 90%, seceded. The bombings and cannonades against Donbass — and sometimes even firebombings against them— took over.

That’s how the war started.

The U.S. regime and its supporters imposed severe sanctions against Russia for responding.

The accounts that have been given about the Ukrainian war by U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media have been boldly blatant lies.

BBC missed this! Due to $-thieve (since 1971) US push for more religion* against Chinese Atheism, Peter Klevius offers an existencecentrism** tutorial on the meaninglessness of "god" and the concept "meaning of life".

* The absolute majority of men and more than half of women are Atheists although they hesitate to use this word loaded as it is by US anti China Yellow Peril demonization spiced with US Red Scare propaganda.

** Do note that words like anthropocentrism, humanocentrism etc. don't cover the meaning of existencecentrism (P. Klevius 1992:21-22), because they still separate humans from "something else". According to existencecentrism, words like "nature" etc. are locked to human existencecentrism - as is any moral discussion about them.

 How climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa.  

 How craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

According to Peter Klevius (1992), the observable world is forever contained in our existencecentrism, while words are contained in language, with no access to the unobservable, i.e. no words can slip out from our existencecentrism - not even the word 'out'.

 Whereas other living things have direct contact with their surroundings, human language makes it possible to lose it. Based on its cultural experience of humans, an animal can imagine there's a human behind an obstacle, no matter it's there or not. However, an animal can never imaging there's a ghost. And a human may similarly think there's an animal behind an obstacle. But a human may also think there's a ghost, although lacking any experience of it. Well, if you didn't get this so please comment and ask and Peter Klevius will utilize your comment for his answer, to make it easier for you.
 

White represents the unreachable*

Black represents our surroundings, origo represents the individual, and the totality of black represents humankind**

* According to Peter Klevius (1992), the observable world is forever contained in our existencecentrism, while the words are contained in our language, with no access to the unobservable, i.e. no words can slip out from our existencecentrism. This has severe but important implications for cosmology and metaphysics (P. Klevius 1992:21-22).

** The origo is shaped by its surrounings, i.e. individuals, events and impressions that occupy its consciousness (P. Klevius 1992:27).

Words are cultural artifacts and lack meaning without culture. And although a pencil is able to produce any word in the world, it can't produce a single word outside the world.

A word stops being a word without a framework of culture because the meaning of words and numbers is only operational - withou operation, no word.

This has severe but important implications for cosmology and metaphysics (P. Klevius 1992:21).

The origo is shaped by its surroundings, i.e. individuals, events and impressions that occupy its consciousness (P. Klevius 1992:27).

In Peter Klevius book Resursbegär - in the Nordic creole language called English (after the Nordic Anglo Saxons) it would be translated as Resource Beggar, modernized as Demand for Resources (Klevius 1992, ISBN 9173288411) - on page 22 he notes that the only thing we can know about universe is that it's "infinite" - meaning "nothing" doesn't exist other than as a meaningless word similar to "god" etc. "Infinite" is a (troublesome) local word and can therefore not be meaningfully applied as a "border" of universe. Moreover, as we do understand that our observable universe is constantly changing, and that we therefore may assume something beyond it, this all, including any expectation, always resides within our existencecentrism. For many, the fallacy seems to be the use of language which seemingly can cross any border - except existencecentrism.

The living* part of the products of evolution, including human, is distinguished above all by the eternal (in a relative sense) heredity carried forward like the thread of a necklace and protected by the pearls, i.e., the collective life cycles of individuals. The individual starts his life by neutralizing the body's needs (food, heat, etc.). These neutralization efforts leave traces in the data bank we call brain. Experience can later be retrieved in different combinations. We think. Calculating with experience gives foresight. The experiences also give us our relationship with future surroundings. The part of our relationship with our surroundins that is directed at other individuals is called social (P. Klevius 1992). Sorry about self-citations, but they are necessary to prove that these thoughts were oublished long ago and not just here on the blog - so to give the reader a more fair view of Peter Klevius. And as Google and the "academic world" seem to dislike what Peter Klevius writes, it's also beneficial for overall science to repeat his name as much as possible on those few windows of opportunity he can still speak through on before the authoritarian censorship of the now desperate $-freeloader (since 1971) US - which (thanks to its stolen dollar hegemony) controls Western media landscape - closes even the last tiny windows. This btw used to be called fascism. However, it's all about US fear of losing its stolen and extremely dangerous for the world, aggressive militant dictatorship, because of modern meritocratic and high tech China's success. Moreover, it's in this light one needs to see US racist anti-China smearcampaign and demonization. And when China tries to defend itself, then US calls it "autocratic", "dictattorship" etc. - and eagerly followed and parroted by other Western leadership.

* There's no possible definition of what is life or when life starts. Moreover, our most central life machine is our gut microbiome which continues to live after we die. In fact, "we" are just workers for the gut microbiome, and when we stop feeding it, it will ear us instead.

Each individual's relational network is characterized by what we may call its immediate, observable surroundings, i.e. the individuals, events and impressions that occupy consciousness. In the case of humans (and many other animal species), learning/tradition is added. The impact of cultural heritage, heredity and the local surroundings determines our social profile and the two-way communication with the cultural heritage, i.e. what we will take into account from the cultural heritage for our own way of life, and how this in turn (albeit usually on a small scale) affects the overall cultural heritage.

When people stupidly (or deliberately misleading) are asked if they believe in a "god" beyond the world, then the question itself is pushing towards a wanted answer, because "god" in the question is just a word, and as such trapped and confined in cultural settings inside existencecentrism.

And when asked 'Are you an Atheist or a "believer", then many actual Atheists - due to the cultural ballast in the words - often say 'there must be something else', or point to the need of a "meaning of life". The first option deletes itself by the words 'there' and 'else', because there can't be any "there" or 'else' outside existencentrism because that would make the words meaningless when they senselessly bounce back to the origo. And the second option, i.e. "meaning of life" answers itself because the uncertainty it reveals not only resides firmly anchored within existencecentrism, but without that uncertainty there would be no life and therefore no meaning of life. Only an almighty "god" could logically reside in the dead end of entropy (P. Klevius 1981) while still ultimately trapped in our existencentrism. Moreover, even the picture of "allmightyness" would signal 100% bordeom. A bored "god" parasiting on our volatile existencecentrism.

Implications for cosmology and metaphysics

Cosmology is forever trapped in its "observable universe" i.e. existencecentrism, in which you may choose between "beliefs" and logic. If you believe in ghosts you may even research them with the concept 'ghost' as your axiomatic starting point. However, if you choose logic your axiomatic starting point is your entire existencecentrism - meaning your logic is protected from senselessness by others. The concept of existencecentrism hence eliminates metaphysics, which is just a sloppy and arbitrary made up category with endless sub-categories (not to be confused with Aristotle's) beginning with the meaningless "distinction" between 'abstract' and 'concrete'.  

Chinese existencecentrism

Does Wikipedia try to "adapt" Chinese Atheism to fit "monotheist" stupidity? It could have made it much easier for people to understand the enormous difference between logical Taoism and senseless* "monotheisms", instead of blurring it.

* Dear reader, Peter Klevius has all respect for the good part of traditions, no matter if they are embedded in "religion" or Atheism. However, whereas Atheism is risk free, "monotheist" religions pose a security risk against basic (negative) Human Rights (UDHR). Also consider that the most powerful "monotheist" theocracy, i.e. dollar embezzler (since 1971) US theocratic Supreme Court has long since abandoned UDHR "when it's not in US interest".

China is officially an Atheist state and as the world's oldest civilization it has always been - every society has been Atheist until the weird "monotheism" parenthesis came about as tool for keeping women sex segregated and reproducing "infidel" hating children. Taoism is Atheism* of Chinese origin and emphasizes living in harmony with the Tao (Chinese: 道; pinyin: Dào; lit. 'Way', 'Thoroughfare'); the Tao is defined as the source of everything and the ultimate principle underlying reality.

* As opposed to ridiculous, illogical, dysfunctional and pompously assertive and aggressive "monotheisms". Most Chinese people are Atheists and practice a combination of Buddhism and Taoism with a Confucian worldview. Wikipedia tries its utmost to squeeze in the word 'religion' on Atheist philosophies or worldviews, so to blur and "justify" "monotheisms" as not the only "religion". And etymologically one could argue that "monotheisms" are no religtions at all because religion means ancestor warship, i.e. re-, legare, meaning 'back connection'.

Do understand that the unity before Yin and Yang is precisely what Peter Klevius (1992:21-22) calls the primordial "lifeless" (Taiji in Chinese cosmology) substance of which the world is made - not a "god" outside the world. This simple fact, i.e. creation from something already existing in the world by dividing it in two, has all cultures in one form or another understood - except "monotheisms" which introduced an almighty male who first created the world and then manipulated it from his safe position outside the world!

Wikipedia: Yin and yang (English: /jɪn/, /jæŋ/), also yinyang or yin-yang, is a concept that originated in Chinese philosophy, describing an opposite but interconnected, self-perpetuating cycle. Yin and yang can be thought of as complementary (rather than opposing) forces that interact to form a dynamic system in which the whole is greater than the assembled parts. The technology of yin and yang is the foundation of critical and deductive reasoning for effective differential diagnosis of disease and illnesses within Confucian influenced traditional Chinese medicine.

In Chinese cosmology, the universe creates itself out of a primary chaos of material energy, organized into the cycles of yin and yang and formed into objects and lives. 'Yin' is retractive, passive and receptive while 'yang' is active, repelling and expansive; in principle, this dichotomy in some form, is seen in all things—patterns of change and difference, such as seasonal cycles, evolution of the landscape over days, weeks, and eons (with the original meaning of the words being the north-facing shade and the south-facing brightness of a hill), sex (female and male), as well as the formation of the character of individuals and the grand arc of sociopolitical history in disorder and order.

Taiji is a Chinese cosmological term for the "Supreme Ultimate" state of undifferentiated absolute and infinite potential, the oneness before duality, from which yin and yang originate. It can be contrasted with the older wuji (無極; 'without pole'). In the cosmology pertaining to yin and yang, the material energy which this universe was created from is known as qi. It is believed that the organization of qi in this cosmology of yin and yang has formed everything including humans. Many natural dualities (such as light and dark, fire and water, expanding and contracting) are thought of as physical manifestations of the duality symbolized by yin and yang. This duality, as an unity of opposites, lies at the origins of many branches of classical Chinese science and philosophy, as well as being a primary guideline of traditional Chinese medicine, and a central principle of different forms of Chinese martial arts and exercise, such as baguazhang, tai chi, and qigong, as well as appearing in the pages of the I Ching.

Peter Klevius: Taiji is the primordial state (P. Klevius 1992:21) while Yin and Yang represent our observable world with its dynamics that blesses us with uncertainty while harmonizing it in a totality. Do note again that even the primordial state is conyained in our existencecentrism although it also implies the borders of it.  
As Peter Kleviuus wrote in an article published 1981: The basic element in existence is change, which enriches our surroundings with uncertainty in our bubble of existencecentrism, hence producing what is in itself the "meaning of life" - instead of trying to use language to in vain push it out from our existencecentrism.

Peter Klevius tries to balance BBC's misinfo - for free! Finland's former PM Sanna Marin committed high treason and became Europe's most dangerous woman by opening up - against the will of her party - for nuke F-35s, Nato, and DCA occupation in Finland and Sweden.

Sanna Marin's actions, which destroyed Finland's and Sweden's neutrality, happened long before Russia invaded Ukraine.

And Stubb wouldn't have become president were it not for Sanna  Marin's senseless and corrupt (criminal warmongering $-thieve US as editor) actions.

Peter Klevius wrote:

Peter Klevius obituary over Finland's lost independence on "Independence Day" 2023. Why did PM Sanna Marin commit treason and sell out Finland's neutrality and Åland's demilitarization?!

December 06, 2023

 Following the tradition of his mother who served in the Finnish army and chased the Nazi "allies" out of Finland, Peter Klevius, who was born long after, now defends Finland against a desperate* and therefore extremely dangerous and misery bringing dollar freeloader loser US invasion* and occupation* of Finland.

* Modern China has applied a "guarded capitalism" and an anti-corruption meritocracy stance that easily trumps US so called "democracy", but more importantly China's super high tech acceleration is completely out of reach for US - who knows it and therefore behaves accordingly criminally instead of honestly facing the consequences of its dollar theft 1971, when US like a dictator violated the Bretton Woods agreement, which meant that instead of connecting the dollar to gold as a stable world currency, it became connected to US trade and loan deficits (US is the only countre that can prosper despite enormous trade deficit). The world dollar became separated in a US dollar steered by US, and a rest-of-the-world dollar, also steered by US.  

Finnish army proof of assignment to collect information about German Nazi soldiers in northern Finland 1945

After WW2 Kirsti moved to Sweden and, while working full time, founded a lively society for helping and entertaining Finns who immigrated to Sweden from the poor and war torn Finland. Kirsti also founded Tukholman Sanomat (Stockholm Newspaper).

 

As a PM Sanna Marin committed treason by betraying not only her party but, more importantly, her country, and invited the most dangerous occupier, the embezzler and counterfeiter (1971-)  US which is about to lose its stolen dollar hegemony because of China's success - making it now a cunning global desperado!

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa.
 

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory från 1992-94 100% correct.

Although Sanna Marin did it together with president Sauli Niinistö, everyone knew his position from long ago. So the disastrous Nato decision was a creime committed by Sanna Marin! Without her it would never have been possible. And do recall that her decision was made long before the Russian invasion against Ukraine's genocide against an ethnic group of its own population.

 

Finland is in practice a non-meritocratic one party state with little say by the people, and where the omly possible presidential candidates are situated in the very center of the political value spectrum - especially when it comes to more important issues like for example neutrality and independence. So before the Ukraine war, only a small minority of the Finns wanted to join NATO and thereby losing its hard fought neutrality.

But politicians like then PM Sanna Marin and the politically dumb and over the top anglophilic warmonger and previous PM Alexander Stubb (popular on BBC and in the US military complex) decided (long before the Ukraine war) not to listen to the people but to buy US nuke carrying F35 and to join US foreign attack organization called NATO. We can only speculate how (not if) US "arranged it in the dark. So now Finland gets either a Green party or a right wing liberal party member as president - because they both share exactly the same unfortunate values that the Finns used to reject.

US desperate policy of containing of China from US puppet "allies" will hurt Finland's development - and risk war!

In PISA ranking* half of the top ten are from East Asia, and four from Europe of which  two are Uralic speaking countries.

* It seems that dollar-freeloader (1971-) US also has tried to remove China from the PISA ranking precisely because China always scores the best while US is in free fall in comparison.

Peter Klevius wrote:

Finland signs a deal with the Devil - choosing militarism and disaster instead of peace and prosperity?!

March 24, 2023

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa.
 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

 

The Finnish "mongol complex" Peter Klevius wrote about 20 years ago is now taking Finland down the wrong path!

 
The Finnish licking of the criminal US ass has a long background in Finland's history in the shadow of Russia and Finland's disastrous alliance with the Nazis, but also because of the racist "mongol complex" which started after US' 1917 hate laws against Chinese (the Yellow Peril), and the import of poor Chinese slave workers from Stalin's Soviet to Finland. These poor Chinese prisoners situation was even worse than the poor slaves in the US because the Chinese were even robbed of their family and kinship ties. However, the Chinese slaves also looked different than the average Finns - but did resemble the much hated Sami people. The US former slaves at least had same looking wealthy people as well in the same country.

US' dollar theft 1971- has made US a dangerous rouge state - especially now because of China's rise. It means disaster (even without any war) for Finlad to let itself be lured by US into a position exactly opposite to what would be goog for Finland. The only right thing to do would have been opening up for trading with the capitalist modern China which has a successful political system based on meritocracy which democratically (i.e. measured by the will of the people) outperforms every country inside US' Western hegemony. Moreover, because of China's accelerating R&D lead it will soon be very obvious for people that befriending a criminal loser only hurts in the not so long run.

When US on the brink of bankruptcy in 1971 started stealing feom the rest of the world by instead og paying its debts, US started robbing the world with a dollar hegemony - i.e. by disconnecting the dollar from all other currencies and having a non-democratic institution (Fed) printing dollar with impunity. In other words, US became the only country in the world that could survive with a massive debt and constant trade deficit - because the deficit wasn't paid by US but instead spread all over the rest of the world via the dollar hegemony to pay for US criminal wellbeing!

To like the U.S. Congress without the slightest evidence against China's leadership but only because it dislikes China's success, "suspecting" the leadership of modern capitalist and meritocratic China of doing anything with Tik Tok that even comes close to what the U.S. is now doing with U.S.-based platforms worldwide, is not only the height of hypocrisy but incredibly dangerous given how the dollar thief U.S. (1971-) is currently manipulating the entire West. No, there is no good U.S. anymore just because of 1971 - but there are lots of good U.S. people, albeit not as many as good Chinese people proportionally, precisely because of 1971.

England and the United States are now also sending nuclear weapons to Ukraine. Depleted uranium in projectiles is nuclear weapons because the definition of nuclear weapons is that the purpose of the nuclear matter is not contamination but instead the extra force that is achieved compared to conventional projectiles. In other words,

Peter Klevius wouldn't at all be surprised if the Ukraine civil war which was originally meddled, instigated and incited by US' support for the genocide against Russians in Ukraine from 2013 and on, would end with Ukraine opening up for China and thereby prospering ahead of Finland in the near future!

Shouldn't the ICC puppet clowns instead take a good look at US criminal behavior as well as against those politicians who lured the Finns into the Devil's mouth!

Peter Klevius wrote:

This year Peter Klevius cannot congratulate Finland on its traditional Independence Day because it's not neutral and independent any more.

December 06, 2022

And as US/CIA raped Finland with militaristic NATO (i.e. US) and US nukes (F-35 with s.c. mini-nukes), so does Finland rape the demilitarized Åland.

Finland's PM Sanna Marin warns (on order from US?!) countries to not trade with China – New Zealand’s largest trading partner. “We will see in the future that technologies and the digital environment will only be more in our societies than now, and we have to make sure that we don't have that kind of dependencies that becomes vulnerabilities and risks that will come to realise.

Peter Klevisu: Right! Stop your dependancy of the financial- and war-criminal US!

Peter Klevius to Sanna Marin: Are you dumb or corrupt?! If the former then you may benefit from these facts:

1. Everything that - since China surpassed US in economy and technology - now comes out from Uncle Sam's rottening mouth is the wording of a desperado who doesn't see any way out of its own criminal dollar counterfeiting (since 1971) other than trying to harm the challenger by using US financial and militaristic global hegemony and monopoly - and stupid poiticians of its "allies"/puppets!

2. According to several US made research the leadership in modern China has by far the best approval rating from its people compared to other technologically advanced countries. And it has nothing in common with North Korea but everyting with US' "ally" Vietnam (which is tiny and much less technologically advanced than China) when it comes to politics and government.

3. Chinese leadership has been by far the most successful when it comes to lifting people out of poverty and improving infra-structure, both at home and worldwide.

4. China has a privacy law that is equal to that of EU but makes US look like a Medieval dictatorship in comparison.

5. Islam's biggest and most important global organization OIC carefully inspected the alleged "Human Rights violations" and "genocide" against Uyghur muslims, and not only declared them totally unfounded but also credited the Chinese leadership for its treatment of muslims in China.

6. China has been most successful in handling Covid by offering (not commanding) a real vaccine to its people, and especially to those elderly who are vulnerable. That many elderly have been reluctant to take it has to do with Chinese traditions and suspicions due to the vaccine scandals in the West. And the reason the Chinese leadership didn't enforce vaccination was precisely because of the old Confucian tradition of respect for the elderly - which we in the West seem to have abandoned. The rigid Chinese lockdown was the will of Chinese people - not the "Communist dictatorship" as US/CIA steered media want us to believe. Against this background it's pathetic that Finland kicks out Confucian institutes because US ordered it to do so, but has no problem with islamist mosques and institutes paid by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family. And to top it all, now China, as the first country in the world, has developed a recombinant human monoclonal antibody vaccine that fully protects against all variants; uses own human antibody cells; has no side-effects; is cheaper then Western vaccines; and can be taken as a nasal spray - i.e. directed precisely to the first barrier of defense, which then goes farther and kills the virus already in the lungs.

7. China, according to US research, is now by far the world leader when it comes to R&D. Abandoning ties with China will inevitably lead any country incl. Finland into backwardness in the near future.

8. The only way for US to stop China from developing even further and faster is to start a war. That's why US makes every effort to subvert Taiwan-China and mainland-China ties, by supporting the the anti-China party against the pro-China party in Taiwan, as well as militarizing Taiwan itself and the whole of the East Asian territory, and even pushing for NATO extension against China. Do you Snna Marin want to support Uncle Sam's own criminal interests and starting one more war initiated by US?!

9. So dear Sanna, why did you choose Uncle Sam's nukes while abandoning China?!

 And the alleged "authoritarian censorship" in China pales in comparison with the West, and should also be seen against the background of US/CIA's continuous efforts to subvert and destabilize China. Moreover, see how US and its puppets brutally faked and distorted information about the opthomologist doctor in Wuhan who wrongly put on the Chinese social media Weibu that Covid-19 was the much more dangerous original SARS virus. After an hour he realized his mistake, and according to the law (as in all Western countries) spreading such possibly dangerous rumors made it necessary for the hospital to report it to authorities. However, after a couple of days the police just asked him to explain and then told him not to do it again. And after that he could in peace continue his work at the hospital without any kind of sentence or fine etc. So how does this fact as well as the fact that he could say whatever he liked on Weibu fit an "authoritarian dictatorship"?! But in the West he was "a suppressed whisteblower silenced by the Communist dictaorship". Similarly, when the unhealthy and dement former Chinese leader Hu Jintao got worse during the long lasting congress and was helped out, the Western media and especially BBC, desperately tried to make readers and listeners belive the poor man was "silenced" by the "dictator" Xi. Same story with the mentally ill "whistleblower" woman, and the "batwoman" etc. etc. the list could go on.

Peter Klevius wrote:

Tuesday, November 01, 2022

Finnish politicians and "experts" lie about US' NATO nukes straight in the face of the Finnish people.

 When Newsweek rightly pointed out that 'Finland May* Allow NATO to Place Nuclear Weapons on Border With Russia' it just repeated what Peter Klevius warned for almost a year ago when Finnish politicians made the disastrous NATO decision without asking the Finns.

* In fact it's inevitable that if Finland really goes through with this, then the road for US nukes is wide open, no matter if the nukes are physically there before a conflict or not.
 

Peter Klevius translation: American (sic) magazine reported about Finland and nukes - Aaltola and Stubb snarled: 'Humbug' (this was in regard of Newsweek's article - which isn't "American" but a U.S. magazine).
 

At the heart of US' aggressive nuke policy is the B61-12 Life Extension Program with s.c. low-yield (Hiroshima+ size) ground penetrating nuclear warheads, tailored for stealth attacks with F-35b departing from countries close to Russian or Chinese borders.

According to the Helsinki-based newspaper Iltalehti, the bill regarding potential NATO membership the Finnish government will put before parliament doesn't include any opt-outs for nuclear weapons.

Speaking to the paper, defense sources said Finland's foreign and defense ministers, Pekka Haavisto and Antti Kaikkonen, gave a "commitment" to NATO in July that they wouldn't seek "restrictions or national reservations" if Helsinki's application is accepted.

However, now the same Iltalehti has the nerve to call this information a "fake", and pretends to excuse the move by writing that 'Finland hasn't asked for nukes'. Well, if you sign with the Devil which clearly wants to utilize your position as a border against Russia, and which has produced more than 600 "mininukes" tailored for exactly those 64 F-35 you were cheated to buy instead of the Swedish ones that had for long been the plan, then only a fool or a deliberate lier/cheater would argue as Iltalehti does.

Here's Iltalehti's nutty "defense" translated by Peter Klevius:

Iltalehti's article doesn't argue that NATO plans to bring nukes to Finland. The article deals with information according which the government's bill doesn't explicitly prohibit this.  

'Iltalehden artikkelissa ei väitetä Naton suunnittelevan ydinaseiden tuomista Suomeen. Artikkeli käsittelee tietoja, joiden mukaan hallituksen lakiesitys ei erikseen kiellä tätä.'

Peter Klevius: I rest my case! Rest in US nukes, Finland!

 

Peter Klevius wrote:

Friday, February 25, 2022

Why did Finland suddenly jump for F35 instead of (as planned) Swedish Gripen? Because Gripen can't carry US new mini nukes!

 How stupid and dangerous can Finnish politicians be who try to push Finland into US extended nuke army (i.e. NATO)!

 US is 100% to blame for the Ukraine disaster as well.

STOP US (+ its Anglospheric puppets), the worst threat to the world right now!
This monstrous rogue state $-freeloading U.S.:
1. Is adding more than 600 nukes to its already more than 6,000.
Because of smaller size, better transportability, higher accuracy,
and US first strike policy (unlike e.g. Russia, China etc.)
the risk of use of nukes by US has dramatically increased
- especially considering the end of $-hegemony because of China
outperforming it in tech and healthy development.
2. US can at any time read and silence your free speech, or stop your
transaction - wherever you are in the world (except in China).
3. UK/AUKUS bought US mini nukes (e.g. for Trident) and NATO+Finland bought
F35 which can carry them.

 

 Peter Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, May 18, 2022

Shame on you Finland! Why risk yourself and others by defending a criminal* loser** like $-freeloader US (unless US causes a nuke war) against a certain winner like China?!

* 1971 USA robbed the world by cheating on its promise to keep the dollar connected to gold in exchange for the dollar being the world currency. In other words, all other currencies dropped compared to the dollar which now became a "schizophrenic" currency with an A-dollar in US and a B-dollar in all other countries. And although every country may print as much own currency they like, it comes with a cost it has to carry itself while the US dollar printing is paid for by the rest of the world. Only inflation is a risk for US - but not as much as outside US (except China).

** US has already lost its position as the largest economy to China, and is also fast losing in every high tech branch and science - while China is on its way up. This is why US so desperately tries to contain China and force other countries under US rule against China. However, ask youself which is better: Belt and road or nukes?

F-35A + B61-12 + NATO makes Finland a U.S. base for nuke threat/attacks against Russia - and ultimately China!

 The Finns are now lured into NATO when the West is collapsing. A combination of US influence and a longlasting Finnish mongoloid complex that they weren't Western enough. Finnish Russophobia started with the grim Finnish civil war 2018 influenced by the US led Red Scare campaign which is the promotion of a widespread fear of a potential rise of communism, anarchism or other leftist ideologies by a society or state. It is often characterized as political propaganda. The term is most often used to refer to two periods in the history of the United States which are referred to by this name. The First Red Scare, which occurred immediately after World War I, revolved around a perceived threat from the American labor movement, anarchist revolution, and political radicalism. The Second Red Scare, which occurred immediately after World War II, was preoccupied with the perception that national or foreign communists were infiltrating or subverting U.S. society and the federal government.

 

North Atlantic Aliance is turning into  US' South and East China Sea Sinophobia alliance.

How many Finns were aware of US true motives for pushing Finland into US militarism and nuke sphere for the ultimate aim to act as one tiny and helpless piece in US strategic and tactical containment of and attack on China? And how US uses its influence to corrupt politicians to betray their country and democracy.

Finland's young PM Sanna Marin rose to power thanks to US led/influenced World Economic Forum's "Young leaders" program.

A former Finnish PM Alexander Stubb celebrates that his long time wish for a Finnish NATO membership now comes true thanks to Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Peter Klevius wonders whether this was exactly what the US administartion also wanted - and even planned for. 

Finns are thoroughly brainwashed with US narrative while completely locked out from alternative narratives.

It looks like US has been mostly interested in arms race and miltary, financial etc. evil meddling in Europe while Russia's main interest has been to sell cheap gas to Europe.

A Norwegian intelligence report points to three reasons why Russia feels threatened, making the country’s nuclear deterrence more important.

Firstly, Russia claims NATO has changed patterns from normal patrols and intelligence gatherings to simulated attacks on Russian targets, including with strategic bombers. Part of the Russian narrative is that NATO is coming closer to its borders.

Secondly, Moscow accuses NATO of introducing new areas of warfare, like the use of digital operations and militarization of the space, potentially being used to attack Russian ballistic missiles before launch.

Thirdly, Russia blames the United States for undermining the global security balance and arms control treaties, by that pushing the world towards a new nuclear arms race.


After all, US isn't interested in "defending" Europe. US' main and only goal is to (again) attack and eliminste China becaus US dollar scum is coming home to roost any day now because of China's succes. US managed to keep a stagnating Japan at bay with the help of EU in the 1990s. However, China is some ten times bigger and growing.   

Chinese slave workers were brought to Finland from Russia some 100 years ago. They became part of the Finnish mongolid/russophobia racist complex.
 

Chinese slave workers brought to Finland via Russia.

Peter Klevius wrote 2003:

The Finnish/Swedish/European Mongoloid-complex
http://klevius.info/mongol.html?1076242540617

In 1952, only seven years after the end of Finland's disastrous connection with Germany in the World War 2, apart from having its first Olympics the nation celebrated the 17-year old Armi Kuusela's victory in the Miss Universe "beauty" contest, thus finally releasing the Finns from what was considered a traumatic connection with the East and its Russian/mongoloid inhabitants.

Interestingly enough it seems that the Finns express the most mongolic genetic profile of the Europeans. On the other hand especially eastern Finns tend to be more blond, more blue-eyed and to have the lightest skin color of all! Could that very fact be an effect of precisely that blend/traits from northern mongoloid people? I.e. that the most admired of "Nordic" features were inherited from the most unwanted direction? That the genetic blend happened to be especially sensitive to poor light conditions/folic acid intake etc., i.e. as an extra addition to the general impact of farming.

Also check out the Finnish "TAT"-controversy!

The Sami population inhabits an area (in Russia, Finland, Sweden and Norway) that is approximately the size of the entire Sweden (within Sweden about half the size of the country).

When the Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson in 2004 held a conference on genocide, the only media that reported about the Sami protests against the decision not to include the native Swedes, seems to have been the Sami News.

Soft Genocide in Sweden (apart from the soft genocide executed by the Swedish legislator and the social authorities etc in matters of children).

 

 

Finland-Swedish Peter Klevius exhibits the art of the Finland-Swedish artist Hugo Simberg, calling it The Rape of Finland and Åland

April 30, 2023

Peter Klevius feels that Hugo Simberg would have 100% approved of this 2023 art exhibition on the web as a follow up to his 1903 exhibition of the 'Wounded Angel' at Ateneum (Helsingfors) - where Peter Klevius would have no access today

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa.

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.  

Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

More than a century after Hugo Simberg painted the The Wounded Angel, it was voted Finland's "national painting" in 2006.

The Garden of Death by Hugo Simberg - updated by Peter Klevius.

The main problem for Finland (and other US puppets) is that US is now a dangerous losing criminal due to its dollar theft 1971- coming home to roost thanks to Cina's success, and that China surpasses US in all tech categories - which means that hanging on to US hegemony inevitably means retarding in technology, wealth, and security.

To understand the civil war in Ukraine you need to understand how US managed to reintroduce fascism in Europe, and how this has made it possible for US controlled media to support what it previously used to attack, and to attack what it previously used to support. What would normally be called neo-fascism, neo-nazism and genocide is now called "heroic", and liberation from state terror and oppression is now called crime of aggression.

A reaal genocide in Ukraine backed by US is dismissed while China's treatment of muslims is applauded by OIC (muslims' world organization) but declared "genocide" by US and its puppets!

 

 

 

 

The Neo-Nazi Question in Ukraine
The real problem is actually the administration's over-engagement in this case -- as in meddling in the affairs of another state and trying to rearrange its domestic political machinery to suit Washington's agenda.
By Michael Hughes, Contributor
Foreign Policy Analyst
Mar 11, 2014, 12:44 AM EDT
|
Updated May 11, 2014
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

The Obama administration has vehemently denied charges that Ukraine's nascent regime is stock full of neo-fascists despite clear evidence suggesting otherwise. Such categorical repudiations lend credence to the notion the U.S. facilitated the anti-Russian cabal's rise to power as part of a broader strategy to draw Ukraine into the West's sphere of influence. Even more disturbing are apologists, from the American left and right, who seem willing accomplices in this obfuscation of reality, when just a cursory glance at the profiles of Ukraine's new leaders should give pause to the most zealous of Russophobes.

In a State Department "fact sheet" released last week the U.S. accused Putin of lying about the Ukrainian government being under the sway of extremist elements. The report stated that right wing ultranationalist groups "are not represented in the Rada (Ukraine's parliament)," and that "there is no indication the government would pursue discriminatory policies."

It isn't too surprising that conservative outlets like FOX News would downplay Russian allegations but the so-called "liberal" press has also contributed to the American disinformation campaign. Celestine Bohlen from The New York Times considers harsh epithets, like the word "neo-Nazi," which Putin has hurled at the demonstrators in Kiev as part of a Russian propaganda effort to tarnish Ukraine's revolutionary struggle against authoritarianism.

Yet after simply Googling the terms "Ukraine" and "Neo-Nazi," the official position of the United States government along with the stance taken by many in the American media both now seem quite dubious, if not downright ridiculous, especially considering that one would be hard-pressed to machinate the lineup that now dominates Ukraine's ministry posts.

For starters, Andriy Parubiy, the new secretary of Ukraine's security council, was a co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU), otherwise known as Svoboda. And his deputy, Dmytro Yarosh, is the leader of a party called the Right Sector which, according to historian Timothy Stanley, "flies the old flag of the Ukrainian Nazi collaborators at its rallies."

The highest-ranking right-wing extremist is Deputy Prime Minister Oleksandr Sych, also a member of Svoboda, who believes that women should "lead the kind of lifestyle to avoid the risk of rape, including refraining from drinking alcohol and being in controversial company." This is the philosophy underlying one of his "legal initiatives," according to the Kyiv Post, "to ban all abortions, even for pregnancies that occurred during rape."

The Svoboda party has tapped into Nazi symbolism including the "wolf's angel" rune, which resembles a swastika and was worn by members of the Waffen-SS, a panzer division that was declared a criminal organization at Nuremberg. A report from Tel-Aviv University describes the Svoboda party as "an extremist, right-wing, nationalist organization which emphasizes its identification with the ideology of German National Socialism."

According to this BBC news clip two Svoboda parliamentarians in recent weeks posed for photos while "brandishing well-known far right numerology," including the numbers 88 -- the eighth letter of the alphabet -- signifying "HH," as in "Heil Hitler." This all makes Hillary Clinton's recent comments comparing Putin to Hitler appear patently absurd, as Stanley adeptly points out: "After all, in the eyes of many ethnic Russians, it is the Ukrainian nationalists -- not Putin -- who are the Nazis."

Last week Per Anders Rudling from Lund University in Sweden, an expert on Ukrainian extremists, told Britain's Channel 4 News: "A neo-fascist party like Svoboda getting the deputy prime minister position is news in its own right." Well, except in the U.S.

Even more disconcerting has been the emergence of phone intercepts between high-ranking U.S. and Ukrainian officials which make it look as if the U.S. was basically, in the words of Princeton's Stephen Cohen, "plotting a coup d'état against the elected president of Ukraine." In other words, the U.S., in addition to providing moral support, may have paved the way for extremists to seize power in Kiev. Such a development would counter the American right's condemnation of Obama for not "engaging" in the world. The real problem is actually the administration's over-engagement in this case -- as in meddling in the affairs of another state and trying to rearrange its domestic political machinery to suit Washington's agenda.

This gambit has backfired in a number of ways. Not only has a neo-fascist-laden regime secured power in Kiev but it may have played the U.S. and its allies for fools by insinuating it would become part of the Western sphere when it really had no such designs. As Svoboda political council member Yury Noyevy baldly admitted: "The participation of Ukrainian nationalism and Svoboda in the process of EU [European Union] integration is a means to break our ties with Russia."

Be they radical mujahideen or neo-fascists, Washington certainly has a penchant for bolstering shadowy forces, usually labeling them with risible euphemisms like "freedom fighters," in order to satiate short-term geopolitical needs, despite said factions being inimical to America's true long-term interests.

 

It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war
This article is more than 9 years old
Seumas Milne
The attempt to lever Kiev into the western camp by ousting an elected leader made conflict certain. It could be a threat to us all
Wed 30 Apr 2014 21.01 BST

The threat of war in Ukraine is growing. As the unelected government in Kiev declares itself unable to control the rebellion in the country's east, John Kerry brands Russia a rogue state. The US and the European Union step up sanctions against the Kremlin, accusing it of destabilising Ukraine. The White House is reported to be set on a new cold war policy with the aim of turning Russia into a "pariah state".

That might be more explicable if what is going on in eastern Ukraine now were not the mirror image of what took place in Kiev a couple of months ago. Then, it was armed protesters in Maidan Square seizing government buildings and demanding a change of government and constitution. US and European leaders championed the "masked militants" and denounced the elected government for its crackdown, just as they now back the unelected government's use of force against rebels occupying police stations and town halls in cities such as Slavyansk and Donetsk.

"America is with you," Senator John McCain told demonstrators then, standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of the far-right Svoboda party as the US ambassador haggled with the state department over who would make up the new Ukrainian government.

When the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration, in an entirely unconstitutional takeover, politicians such as William Hague brazenly misled parliament about the legality of what had taken place: the imposition of a pro-western government on Russia's most neuralgic and politically divided neighbour.

Putin bit back, taking a leaf out of the US street-protest playbook – even though, as in Kiev, the protests that spread from Crimea to eastern Ukraine evidently have mass support. But what had been a glorious cry for freedom in Kiev became infiltration and insatiable aggression in Sevastopol and Luhansk.

After Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, the bulk of the western media abandoned any hint of even-handed coverage. So Putin is now routinely compared to Hitler, while the role of the fascistic right on the streets and in the new Ukrainian regime has been airbrushed out of most reporting as Putinist propaganda.

So you don't hear much about the Ukrainian government's veneration of wartime Nazi collaborators and pogromists, or the arson attacks on the homes and offices of elected communist leaders, or the integration of the extreme Right Sector into the national guard, while the anti-semitism and white supremacism of the government's ultra-nationalists is assiduously played down, and false identifications of Russian special forces are relayed as fact.

The reality is that, after two decades of eastward Nato expansion, this crisis was triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into its orbit and defence structure, via an explicitly anti-Moscow EU association agreement. Its rejection led to the Maidan protests and the installation of an anti-Russian administration – rejected by half the country – that went on to sign the EU and International Monetary Fund agreements regardless.

No Russian government could have acquiesced in such a threat from territory that was at the heart of both Russia and the Soviet Union. Putin's absorption of Crimea and support for the rebellion in eastern Ukraine is clearly defensive, and the red line now drawn: the east of Ukraine, at least, is not going to be swallowed up by Nato or the EU.

But the dangers are also multiplying. Ukraine has shown itself to be barely a functioning state: the former government was unable to clear Maidan, and the western-backed regime is "helpless" against the protests in the Soviet-nostalgic industrial east. For all the talk about the paramilitary "green men" (who turn out to be overwhelmingly Ukrainian), the rebellion also has strong social and democratic demands: who would argue against a referendum on autonomy and elected governors?

Meanwhile, the US and its European allies impose sanctions and dictate terms to Russia and its proteges in Kiev, encouraging the military crackdown on protesters after visits from Joe Biden and the CIA director, John Brennan. But by what right is the US involved at all, incorporating under its strategic umbrella a state that has never been a member of Nato, and whose last elected government came to power on a platform of explicit neutrality? It has none, of course – which is why the Ukraine crisis is seen in such a different light across most of the world. There may be few global takers for Putin's oligarchic conservatism and nationalism, but Russia's counterweight to US imperial expansion is welcomed, from China to Brazil.

In fact, one outcome of the crisis is likely to be a closer alliance between China and Russia, as the US continues its anti-Chinese "pivot" to Asia. And despite growing violence, the cost in lives of Russia's arms-length involvement in Ukraine has so far been minimal compared with any significant western intervention you care to think of for decades.

The risk of civil war is nevertheless growing, and with it the chances of outside powers being drawn into the conflict. Barack Obama has already sent token forces to eastern Europe and is under pressure, both from Republicans and Nato hawks such as Poland, to send many more. Both US and British troops are due to take part in Nato military exercises in Ukraine this summer.

The US and EU have already overplayed their hand in Ukraine. Neither Russia nor the western powers may want to intervene directly, and the Ukrainian prime minister's conjuring up of a third world war presumably isn't authorised by his Washington sponsors. But a century after 1914, the risk of unintended consequences should be obvious enough – as the threat of a return of big-power conflict grows. Pressure for a negotiated end to the crisis is essential.










Zach Dorfman·National Security Correspondent
January 13, 2022·7 min read

The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials.

The CIA-trained forces could soon play a critical role on Ukraine’s eastern border, where Russian troops have massed in what many fear is preparation for an invasion. The U.S. and Russia started security talks earlier this week in Geneva but have failed thus far to reach any concrete agreement.
Ukrainian Military Forces servicemen walk on a trench on the frontline with Russia-backed separatists near to Avdiivka, Donetsk, southeastern Ukraine.
Ukrainian troops walk in a trench on the frontline with Russia-backed separatists near Avdiivka, Donetsk, southeastern Ukraine, on Jan. 8. (Anatolii Stepanov/AFP via Getty Images)

While the covert program, run by paramilitaries working for the CIA’s Ground Branch — now officially known as Ground Department — was established by the Obama administration after Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014, and expanded under the Trump administration, the Biden administration has further augmented it, said a former senior intelligence official in touch with colleagues in government.

By 2015, as part of this expanded anti-Russia effort, CIA Ground Branch paramilitaries also started traveling to the front in eastern Ukraine to advise their counterparts there, according to a half-dozen former officials.

The multiweek, U.S.-based CIA program has included training in firearms, camouflage techniques, land navigation, tactics like “cover and move,” intelligence and other areas, according to former officials.

How to characterize the program is a matter of dispute. The U.S. over three presidents has debated whether to provide military assistance to Ukraine, and how much, with discussions often focusing on whether that help is offensive or defensive in character.

U.S. officials deny that the CIA training program is, or was ever, offensively oriented. “The purpose of the training, and the training that was delivered, was to assist in the collection of intelligence,” said a current senior intelligence official.

But just what intelligence support entails, in the paramilitary context, can be ambiguous. And how this training will be applied by the Ukrainians may change rapidly with facts on the ground.
Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces, the military reserve of the Ukrainian Armes Forces, take part in a military exercise near Kiev on December 25, 2021. (Sergei Supinsky/AFP via Getty Images)
Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces, the military reserve of the Ukrainian Armes Forces, take part in a military exercise near Kiev on December 25, 2021. (Sergei Supinsky/AFP via Getty Images)

The program has involved “very specific training on skills that would enhance” the Ukrainians’ “ability to push back against the Russians,” said the former senior intelligence official.

The training, which has included “tactical stuff,” is “going to start looking pretty offensive if Russians invade Ukraine,” said the former official.

One person familiar with the program put it more bluntly. “The United States is training an insurgency,” said a former CIA official, adding that the program has taught the Ukrainians how “to kill Russians.”

The program, which does not appear to have ever been formally aimed at preparing for an insurgency, did include training that could be used for that purpose. Another former agency official described technical aspects of the program, like showing Ukrainians how to maintain secure communications behind enemy lines or in a “hostile intelligence environment” as potential “stay-behind force training.”

The current senior intelligence official strongly denied that the program was designed in any way “to assist in an insurgency.”

“Suggestions that we have trained an armed insurgency in Ukraine are simply false,” said Tammy Thorp, a CIA spokesperson.

Going back decades, the CIA has provided limited training to Ukrainian intelligence units to try and shore up an independent Kyiv and prevent Russian subversion, but cooperation “ramped up” after the Crimea invasion, said a former CIA executive.
Militants of the self-proclaimed Luhansk People's Republic walk at a fighting position on the line of separation from the Ukrainian armed forces near the settlement of Frunze in Luhansk Region, Ukraine December 24, 2021. REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko
Militants of the self-proclaimed Luhansk People's Republic walk at a fighting position on the line of separation from the Ukrainian armed forces near the settlement of Frunze in Luhansk Region, Ukraine Dec. 24, 2021. (Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters)

The CIA paramilitaries in Ukraine have “a very small footprint,” said the former agency executive, and are helping train Ukrainian forces in “potential critical nodes the Russians may focus on” if Moscow seeks to push farther into the country.

Though the agency’s paramilitary resources have been otherwise stretched thin in Afghanistan and on other counterterrorism missions, the U.S.-based training program has been a “high priority” for the CIA since its Obama-era inception, said the former senior intelligence official.

The program did not require, or receive, a new presidential finding, which is used to authorize covert action, and has been run under previously existing authorities, according to former officials.

The Trump administration — partially at the urging of Congress — later expanded funding for the initiative, increasing the number of Ukrainian cohorts brought over yearly to the U.S., according to former officials.

Training forces that could take part in an insurgency is not the same as actively supporting an insurgency if one takes place following a Russian invasion. The Biden administration has reportedly assembled a task force to determine how the CIA and other U.S. agencies could support a Ukrainian insurgency, should Russia launch a large-scale incursion.

“If the Russians invade, those [graduates of the CIA programs] are going to be your militia, your insurgent leaders,” said the former senior intelligence official. “We’ve been training these guys now for eight years. They’re really good fighters. That’s where the agency’s program could have a serious impact.”

Over the years, the CIA training programs have been “very effective,” said the former CIA executive.

It has helped “turn the tide,” said the first former CIA official, who said he or she was briefed that “gains were being made on the battlefield” as a “direct result” of the program.
Snipers in camouflage suits during The celebrations on the occasion of the 5th anniversary of the National Guard of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine. (Maxym Marusenko/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Snipers in camouflage suits during The celebrations on the occasion of the 5th anniversary of the National Guard of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine. (Maxym Marusenko/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Both U.S. and Ukrainian officials believe that Ukrainian forces will not be able to withstand a large-scale Russian incursion, according to former U.S. officials. But representatives from both countries also believe that Russia won’t be able to hold on to new territory indefinitely because of stiff resistance from Ukrainian insurgents, according to former officials.

Working so closely with the Ukrainians has presented unique challenges, according to former officials. For years, U.S. officials have believed that, because of Russia’s web of spies within Ukraine’s intelligence services, the program has very likely been compromised by Moscow.

Senior Trump administration officials discussed worries about Russian penetration of the program with their Ukrainian counterparts, according to a former national security official. The Ukrainians, well aware of the issue, have tried to vet the U.S.-bound trainees to weed out moles, according to former officials.

Still, Trump-era National Security Council officials established a rule not to tell the Ukrainians anything they weren’t comfortable with the Russians subsequently learning about, recalled the former national security official.

A small number of trainees in the earlier U.S.-based cohorts were sent back to Ukraine for breaking security rules, like possessing unauthorized electronic devices, according to the first former CIA official.

CIA officials also believed their trainees were being targeted by the Russians once they returned to Ukraine. “Russians and traitorous Russian loyalists within the Ukrainian security services were seeking out graduates of those classes to assassinate,” said the former CIA official.
Forensic police experts and military intelligence examine the wreckage of a car in Kyiv. The commander of Ukraine's military intelligence special ops unit colonel Maksym Shapoval was killed by a bomb attached to the bottom of his vehicle in central Kyiv. (Sergii Kharchenko/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Forensic police experts and military intelligence examine the wreckage of a car in Kyiv. The commander of Ukraine's military intelligence special ops unit colonel Maksym Shapoval was killed by a bomb attached to the bottom of his vehicle in central Kyiv. (Sergii Kharchenko/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Russian penetration of Ukrainian intelligence has been a long-standing problem for the CIA, according to former intelligence officials. For decades, the agency has tried to work only with special select Ukrainian units — some created at the agency’s insistence — that have been isolated from the rest of the country’s intelligence services in order to prevent Russian compromise, according to former officials.

Even though the CIA assumes some Russian compromise when working with the Ukrainians, the agency still believes the training program has been, on balance, highly valuable, according to former officials.

If the Russians launch a new invasion, “there’s going to be people who make their life miserable,” said the former senior intelligence official. The CIA-trained paramilitaries “will organize the resistance” using the specialized training they’ve received.

“All that stuff that happened to us in Afghanistan,” said the former senior intelligence official, “they can expect to see that in spades with these guys.”