Ukrainian civilians kidnapped, tortured and murdered by “pro-Russian activists.”
1,037 words
Colin Liddell has been generally sympathetic to the Ukrainian revolution, but in a recent article, he was sad to note that it had taken a “dishonorable” turn due to the deaths of pro-Russian fighters in Odessa.
An honest and consistent White Nationalist should be guided by three main factors in his treatment of the Ukrainian crisis (and any other event in the world, for that matter): firstly and most importantly what is in the best interests of the white race, then on whose side is justice, and finally, which side acts more honorably.
The issue of white interests in relation to the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine has been previously discussed here and here. The issue of justice has been discussed here. What has been absent up to now is the discussion of the third component – i.e., honor.
As difficult as it may be to discuss honor in objective terms, with rational argumentation, nevertheless, different members of a racially homogeneous group guided by the same basic premises are highly likely to share a similar understanding of honor and therefore most probably will reach similar conclusions with regards to which act is more honorable and which is not when presented with bare portrayal of events. Therefore, what follows is a portrayal of recent events taking place in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine in the hope that White Nationalists can form their own sober judgment and reach to sensible conclusions with regards to which side in the conflict acts more honorably.
Firstly, let us discuss the fire in the Trades Union Office in Odessa mentioned in Colin’s latest article. Sadly, in spite of the author’s good intentions, the version of events alluded to in the above-mentioned article is blatant misinformation, highly likely stemming from Russian sources, which — in the old Soviet tradition — are very skillful in spreading lies to Western public. Therefore, before this misinformation becomes common knowledge in White Nationalist circles, its spread has to be thwarted and the situation has to be clarified.
What happened in reality is quite different from what is alleged in that article. Russian separatists forcefully occupied the building and began looting, firing, and throwing Molotov cocktails from the roof and the windows at pro-Maidan activists and civilians on the street below. It was later conclusively established by the police that it was not the pro-Maidan activists who caused the fire in the building. The fire indeed began on the upper floors, most likely due to careless handling of Molotov cocktails by some pro-Russian fighters located inside. Moreover, none of the pro-Russian fighters suffered any gunshot wounds, and most of them died either of suffocation or from burning. It was also established that pro-Maidan fighters did not enter the building, and, most importantly, did not throw any explosives that could have theoretically caused such a fire. Most glaringly, the pro-Maidan activists were later rescuing people trapped inside the burning building, among them Russian separatists who were firing at them shortly before! This observation alone is enough to demonstrate which side in the conflict acts with honor.
In addition, on the same day the fans of the football teams from Odessa and Kharkiv joined together before the match and were marching for united Ukraine. Many other ordinary citizens joined them as well. Later, the peaceful procession was unexpectedly and viciously attacked by pro-Russian fighters. The latter firstly threw stones at the peaceful demonstrators and later fired gunshots. The Ukrainians managed to retaliate with the help of the police and local-defense forces.
What the Western public should find most blatant however is the observation that pro-Russian activists are acting in the ways nowadays typically associated with Muslim terrorists, resorting to kidnapping and murder, banditry and marauding, and using women and children as human shields. Here are some examples.
Pro-Russian activists recently kidnapped and killed a Gorlov city council member from the party All-Ukrainian Union “Fatherland,” Vladimir Rybak, and a student at Kyiv Polytechnic University, Yuriy Popravko. Their corpses were found on the 19th of April in a river near Slavyansk. Their stomachs were ripped open, and the investigation established that they were drowned in water while still alive. Later another corpse was found around the same area with similar traces of torture. He was a 25-year-old civilian from Lviv, Yuriy Dyakovskiy.
In addition, SkyNews and CBS crews, and an American journalist Mike Giglio with his translator Elena Glazunova were also kidnapped by Russian separatists. They were released later, however. Of course, one should rightly condemn the mainstream Western media for their leading role in destroying the white race, and those journalists are in all likelihood no friends of White Nationalism. Quite the contrary. But it in no way means that kidnapping them is an honorable act worthy of a decent person. Moreover, Russian separatists certainly did not kidnap the journalists for being alleged enemies of the white race, but rather for being representatives of the “evil West” which according to them is the main enemy of the Russian nation and should be destroyed.
Russian separatists who were, and in some places still are, in control of certain eastern and southern regions allegedly for defending the “oppressed” Russian population are also involved in banditry and marauding. They are seizing heavy vehicles (e.g., those carrying foodstuffs to the region) at gunpoint and stealing their cargoes. For example, according to the report of the branch of Ukrainian Ministry of Interior in the Lugansk Region, two trucks have been seized by armed Russian separatists in Sverdlovsk. In addition, there were at least two reported attempts of Russian saboteurs to subvert trains carrying civilians.
Finally, although the Russian government hypocritically continues to deny its involvement in recent escalations in Ukraine, it is already clear that many thousands of Russian saboteurs, most of whom are trained soldiers and paratroopers, continue to infiltrate Ukrainian territory not only from Russia but also from Transnistria and recently annexed Crimea, and are involved in the destabilization of the situation and likely also in the criminal activities mentioned above. Moreover, it is also clear that the pro-Russian separatists are equipped with newest guns and other machinery obtained from Russia.
20 comments
Yes, thank you. I suspected as much about the Odessa affair. Later, my suspicion was confirmed and now you have too.
You have excelled yourself Mr Durand, but a link to the CBS or Sky news websites or any neoconservative website would have sufficed. No need to write a whole article to tell us that the Russians activists in Odessa more or less burnt themselves to death while the pro-Kiev activists were trying to save them….
The thing is that to fully accept the russian version of the Odessa affair is naive, but to accept the CNN/pro-Maidan version of the events is equally ludicrous.
It is clear that the hate between the Ukrainians and the Russians of the Ukraine is so strong that it is impossible for them to co-exist. The country should split up or a population exchange should take place.
It’s not clear to me what happened in Odessa. However, I have seen video of at least one man throwing a Molotov cocktail into the Trade Unions building and another man firing a pistol into the same building. Also, it does seem that at least some of the initial pro-Russian separatists were beaten as they fled the burning building.
I think it’s fair to say that both sides in this have done, and will continue to do, things which are questionable. But, hey, that’s war.
Thank you Mr. Durand for those additional insights I still support the Ukrainian revolution, although there seems to be an increasing danger of it being used as a tool of Western geopolitics.
In the case of the Odessa fire, it is difficult for us to be forensic and precise about causes, guilt, etc., as there is now enough “evidence” out there to dress whichever view one feels pre-inclined to take. Any attempt to be absolutely objective at this level would now mean several years of strenuous effort to separate fact from fiction.
In such cases where a microempirical approach won’t work or is too costly in terms of time and attention, I tend to switch to a macroempirical approach, by which I mean I look at the main obvious general and uncontested facts and draw conclusions from these. This leaves out a lot of detail, but that is the point as details can easily be fabricated or over-emphasized to support agendas.
From a macroempirical perspective, it is clear that there was a “show of force/ peaceful demonstration” by Ukrainians that was “attacked/ ambushed” by pro-Russians. The pro-Ukrainians then got the upper hand. The pro-Ukraininans then destroyed a pro-Russian tent encampment establishing their dominance over the public spaces. This is all well and good and in accord with normal street-fighting “etiquette.”
What happened next of course was the battle at the Trade Unions Building and the fire. Microempirically a lot can be said here, but in essence a group of pro-Russians were chased into the building with fighting continuing and then a fire started and a large number of pro-Russians died in a burning building surrounded by a mob whose character can beset be described as hostile. From such macroempirical data two conclusions are possible: (1) Shit happens, boo hoo, too bad, or (2) the pro-Russians were killed by a pro-Ukrainian mob pushing its advantage too much when its enemy had already been defeated.
As someone sympathetic to both sides and desiring a resolution of this conflict between brothers, I have no wish to accept the first conclusion, and at this point the important fact that the dead were all pro-Russians engages my sympathies. In these kinds of cases, where “facts” and “data” have been weaponized by both sides, we are reduced to counting the bodies to arrive at the truth.
Hi Colin,
I am a reader of your insightful articles both here and at Alt Right. I am aware of the position you have taken on the whole Russia vs. Ukraine-EU-USA conflict. I have been following this conflict via other news / op outlets too. I have a few things to put to you for your views.
Are you aware of Peter Hitchens’s very strong and well-explained position on this conflict? He has come out pro-Russia, critical of Ukraine and absolutely castigating of EU-US position and their poisoning of the atmosphere (Nuland / Ashton). He has written his views out in detail and there are You Tube videos of his debates etc on this painful issue. I am supportive of Peter’s stance. Its very historical in its sweep, its well argued and it takes great cognizance of the vile designs of US/EU. What do you have to say to that?
Furthermore, as this conflict stretches into time, I am sure, both sides are going to err ethically. It is in the nature of armed, bitter conflicts. One should always be sympathetic to such victims and every political step should be taken to minimise that. But that should not make us lose the over-arching view. Who makes this conflict inevitable? Who makes this conflict bloodier? Who is really being expansionist? Who is making Ukraine a political pawn? Who is fighting a defensive battle?
I think a big challenge will be to maintain clarity and perspective through the fog of war.
Thanks for your kind comments, Brahmin. Yes, I loosely aware of Hitchens’ views. They seem pretty sensible. He does tend to be a bit of contrarian in the British commentariat, a sensible tactic that guarantees him something edgy to say and a sizable audience, but perhaps he also believes in those ideas.
The problem with the Ukraine is the “neighbour effect” by which the countries and peoples end up seeing those who are in fact the most like them as the enemy. It is common all over Europe. Pan-European nationalism will have to work very hard to counter this.
NY Times reported the Kiev side started the fire, then sang the national anthem.
OT:
Requesting a review by Ted Sallis.
http://www.amazon.com/Troublesome-Inheritance-Genes-Human-History/dp/1594204462/ref=la_B001H6WF40_1_1/183-1767671-3620453?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1399765418&sr=1-1
Your argument might be more persuasive to me if you would include sources to verify your claims.
Here is the news related to the killing of the two civilians mentioned in the article: http://mvs.gov.ua/mvs/control/main/ru/publish/article/1032449. And this is regarding the third civilian kidnapped and killed by Russians: http://grani.ru/Politics/World/Europe/Ukraine/m.228411.html. Here is the report with his photo: http://grani.ru/Politics/World/Europe/Ukraine/m.228746.html#f-1480278
Here are the sources regarding the causes of the fire in Odessa: http://grani.ru/Politics/World/Europe/Ukraine/m.228746.html#f-1480278 and http://news.liga.net/news/politics/1596532-mvd_ozvuchilo_predvaritelnuyu_prichinu_pozhara_v_dome_profsoyuzov.htm.
Here are detailed eyewitness accounts regarding the heinous attack of “pro-Russian acitivsts” on a peaceful procession for united Ukraine: http://grani.ru/Politics/World/Europe/Ukraine/m.228601.html
This is the source related to the banditry and marauding activities performed by Russian separatists: http://mvs.gov.ua/mvs/control/luhansk/ru/publish/article/153090. This is regarding their attempts to subvert trains: http://www.unian.net/politics/913940-v-slavyanske-terroristyi-paralizovali-dvijenie-poezdov.html.
And here is the arrest of 36 Russian infiltrators that were heading towards Odessa from Crimea: http://www.unian.net/politics/914550-v-hersone-snyali-s-poezda-separatistov-kotoryie-ehali-v-odessu.html
Evidence of pro-Russian shooting to Ukrainian in the previous riots, sometimes protected by the Police:
http://napaki.livejournal.com/100072.html
http://napaki.livejournal.com/99442.html
Evidence of pro-Russian shooting and throwing molotov cocktails from the building:
http://youtu.be/IVXm9nnY-AQ
4:03 Shoot from the building
5:32, 5:39, 6.13 Molotov cocktail from the window
Cuts from this video has been used by Putin propaganda to criminalize Ukrainian nationalists. The complete video explains why the Ukraninian man with the bulletproof vest is shooting to the building.
Evidence of Ukrainian helping pro-Russian to escape from the fire:
http://www.unian.ua/politics/914475-u-mereji-zyavilosya-video-yak-pid-chas-pojeji-v-odesi-proukrajinski-aktivisti-ryatuyut-separatistiv.html
This shows that Ukrainian nationalist have honour. Russian propaganda doesn’t seem to have it.
This is simply white on white crime.
One of the premises of radical organization is that a movement can exploit divisions among ruling elites. Regardless of who is “right” in the Putin-Ukraine conflict, it is evident that there is a divide between Moscow and the Brussels-Beltway Axis. This has some implications:
* If Russia is not playing ball with globalization, then globalization has some major league cracks developing in the facade. Putin’s Russia has a solid geopolitical base, Eurasian heartland and all that sort of thing. It’s not a small Balkan or Middle Eastern country which can be rolled over by massive application of hi-tech weaponry. And Russia does have all that energy which is useful for economic leverage as well as in sustaining a military machine.
* Obama (I should say his stringpuller team) has been unable to deal with the Ukraine crisis other than some ineffective sanctions. This was foreshadowed with Obama’s inability to rally support for airstrikes against Syria. Is the New World Order little more than a paper tiger?
* There are nationalists in Ukrainian streets, fighting. As long as they fight, they represent what anarchists call temporary autonomous zones. i.e., areas carved out in which nationalist ideas and power bases are free to develop.
* Paramilitary forces in the Ukraine (on both sides) appear to be militarily effective, often more so than poorly disciplined and poorly motivated regular troops/police. There’s the element of their being political soldiers, combining fighting with in-the-streets agitprop.
* The Internet has added another dimension to the struggle. It makes it possible to organize and act globally, countering the macro-forces of globalization (transnational economy, military alliances, liberal media, etc.) with micro-forces of technology — websites, viral videos, stealth funding, etc.
* There is growing alienation in NATO homelands, evidenced in the rise of nationalist or quasi-nationalist political parties in Europe, and the well publicized increase in the numbers of Americans buying guns and ammunition, among other things. Clearly, many people are fed up. And they are perhaps looking for leadership.
The question becomes: how does a true nationalist movement exploit these factors?
This internal civil war in Ukraine could be compared to the war between Serbia and Croatia in the 199os. Most of these “Ukrainian nationalists” are Greek Catholic Uniate or Pagan, while most pro-Russian fighters are strong Orthodox Christians. The Serbian Nationalist Monarchist movement called the Chetniks fought the Croatian Neo-Nazis called the Ustashe in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia in the 199os. Many Serb guys still feel hatred toward Croats, and Serb guys hate Croats more than Blacks or Arabs. There is no “White nationalism” in the Eastern Europe, go try telling a Serb, an Albanian and a Croat that they all belong to the “White race”. They would basically tell you to screw yourself. Even Serbian kids in America that I know tell me of one day going back to Croatia and killing a Croat. Some Croats think the same of Serbs. Russian nationalism has nothing to do with Nazism or Racism, it is more like Serbian Chetniks or Bulgarian nationalism, it revolves around Orthodox Christian Church, Monarchism and Russian language.
Proof that petty nationalism and Christianity are anti-white mental viruses that need to be cured by White Nationalism.
What about the creation of the white nations Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Argentina. Not to mention that there would not even be whites in North America were it not colonized by europeans. I am sorry but I fail to see how this or for that matter the russian expansion into Siberia were harmful to the ethnic european interests. On the contrary they increased the land and wealth held by Europeans and reduced population pressures. They certainly weren’t in the interests of the relevant aborigines but thats is not to say that all of the peoples interest were harmed, rather only those who were dispossessed instead of doing the dispossessing
Attacking Imperialism is sheer stupidity by the author. All powerful and respectable European countries all managed huge European empires. France and Britain were proud imperialists. Britain ruled India, much of the Carribean, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Kenya, Rhodesia, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Egypt, Nigeria, Ghana. France ruled Lebanon, Syria, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Guinea. Netherlands ruled Indonesia. Non-European peoples such as Arabs and Turks possessed gigantic empires such as Rashidun Caliphate, Mamluk Sultanate or Ottoman Empire. And Arabs and Turks dream of new empires again. Imperialism is a fact of life. Neocons in USA are esctatic about creating their own global hegemonic empire. Imperialism is the “White Man’s Burden” and non only his burden.
Imperialism is destructive of the ethnic and genetic interests of all peoples involved in it. But obviously you have a different system of values and priorities.
As a Russian, I am blue eyed and brown haired, and yet I must admit, as an Orthodox Christian, I see the Syrian Christian or the Ethiopian or the Armenian or the Serb or the Bulgarian as a brother than any German. It should be remembered that the Eastern Roman Empire or the Byzantine Empire was a mostly White, Orthodox Christian Empire, and yet that empire was attacked and assaulted by Western European barbarians during the Fourth Crusade in 1204. Tensions between Orthodox and Catholic existed for a long time. Russians are racially White, but we are Orthodox Christians, religious differences count and we would always be different from any Western European.
Yes, this is why Christianity is an anti-white mental virus.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.