In his tired, rambling, repetitive screed for the EU to apparently save Ukraine from itself – or, more accurately, as one realizes reading between the lines of Soros’s latest intervention in The Guardian, to help it provoke a continent-wide war with Russia, which Soros for some reason believes would be a good thing — among many of the fictions he’s attempting to pass off as reality, George Soros tells us this, too:
The principles that Ukraine is defending – the very principles on which the EU is based
Since Soros omits to expound what he might mean by this, let’s see if we can unpack that phrase for him here. What principles would that be exactly?
Would they include the extreme nationalism we find espoused by Kiev and Lvov, according to which everybody speaking the “wrong” language is deemed inferior and required to either leave Ukraine (so far, ATO has managed to displace between one and two million people in an ethnic cleansing campaign the size of which Europe hasn’t seen since the World War II) or to submit to ridicule, mockery, dispossession, and even outright violence, all of which have been meted out to Ukraine’s Russian-speaking minority of some 6-7 million people.
Would such common values include the notion that violence is a perfectly good way to deal with differences and political disagreements in a society? Would they also have space for the use of political repression, as has been going on all over Ukraine for the past 14 months?
Does this common Ukrainian-EU ethos Soros sees mean the sort of widespread corruption and thievery that are now rampant in Ukraine at every social and political level? Does it espouse the carving up of the economic and political sphere of a country among a dozen or so robber-barons, a.k.a. oligarchs, each with his or her own militias and enforcement gangs? Does it include the suppression of dissent in any form, with the brutalization of the public sphere, with fist fights in the parliament and thuggery in courthouses as well as in media editorial offices?
Does the EU political and cultural ethos also tolerate the use of Nazi symbols and does it accommodate open proclamation and celebration of Nazi values?
Which of these practices, common to Ukraine today, was the EU founded on? Which of them does it stand for – and which does it reject as incompatible with the elementary principles of democracy and the universalism of human rights?
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
Walter Hallstein, an infamous Nazi lawyer, was the first president of the EU. See, he was the best candidate for the job, since Hitler had already mandated him to create the New Europe to tie up the European nations under the Reich. And Walter Hallstein was the official man of Hitler in the negotiations with Mussolini in Italy. The New Europe of Hitler would have no border so as to favor trade. Walter Hallstein was the man who prepared all this for Hitler and became the expert on the matter. He was a highly praised Nazi official. He cosigned the treaty of Rome. He is also on the official photo. He was then the first president of the EU commission. At the time, the EU Commission had a different name: the Hallstein commission.
The saying “the Nazis didn’t lose the war, they just had to move” is not just memorable, it’s entirely true.
It’s even more shockingly true than we like to think.
It’s business as usual for Soros, the financial terrorist, the Kleptocrat’s Kleptocrat. It’s telling that the Graun thinks a supreme oligarch, such as he, would have anything useful to say about Ukraine, given that we are led to believe the Maidan was some kind of popular revolution. Clearly the Graun’s mask is slipping when we are expected to believe Ukraine is a battle for freedom and democracy.
Perhaps, at last, this evil POS has made a terminal mistake that he cannot get out of … well one can always hope and hope to see an end to his criminal, psychopathic manipulations.