Honestly, after you said that I did go back to the site and double check in case I somehow missed that it was affiliated with Russia (I post from progressive sites but generally avoid RT). There is absolutely no link other than in your mind.

The UE is a US union and they are the ones that made the statements that were reported.

There were 46 deaths caused that day. RT took a couple of days to convert all of those deaths to purely pro-Russian deaths at the hands of purely Pravsek actors.

Most died at the profsoyuz building, under circumstances that are still unclear in the details (some of which are important). Some, all or mostly pro-unity, died at the march when pro-Russian group attacked the march as planned in advance. No attack, executed as planned, no consequences. Doesn't make what happened right, by any means; but it does start to blur how responsibility should be assigned for the day's events.

The OP is ultimately sourced to news outlets that covered up the start of the conflict and arrogated all deaths to its side (thus making themselves more the victim than otherwise, and denying victimhood to their foe and any hint of wrongdoing by their allies). It's not just starkly black-and-white, it's upped the contrast level on the picture so much that many of the finer portions that were in black are washed out by the blinding white of confirmation bias.

but it is beyond interesting to watch so called pro-Union folks support the slaughter of people in a Union building.

A sad, tragic event no doubt, but one that has been exploited, distorted and propagandized for maximum political effect.

It was two-sided mob violence from both the pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian sides. In the lead up to the fire at the trade union building, those on the pro-Russian sides were shooting from the rooftop and killing people on the pro-Ukrainian side. I saw this happen over a livestream of events with my own two eyes. And yet no one--no one--from the pro-Russian side ever talks about this. No one. Because it destroys their narrative.

the videos are out there and some just ignore the fact that it happened as it does not fit the narrative.

The only videos that show shooting at the trade union building are Ultras shooting at people when they attempted to leave escape from windows.

You have been corrected multiple times and yet you still spread this lie. Can you not make a case without falsehoods?

Do you really think that shooting at people and beating them when they fall is simple "riot" actions? Our own justice system would distinguish these kinds of things. I would feel quite awkward to take

If the pro-unity marchers were not attacked and fired on from rooftops they would not have later marched on the tents of the pro-separatists in an act of revenge for the initial attack. The pro-separatist people moved into the building for cover. If the initial attack had not happened, I do not think the union building would have been attacked. Even though what happened at the union building by the mob is inexcusable, everyone also fails to mention many pro-unity marchers also helped rescue people as the fire spread by moving scaffolding up to the building.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27275383

Would be good to know that. Were you watching it locally from Ukraine or from a TV live stream feed in another country.

That was a mob of almost all men (on the "pro-russia" site).

While the "revenge" action was later in the day and was against many older men, women, and children. It is tragic that you are spreading disinformation the events.

In the US we would not see something like this in the way that you are describing. In a just system *both* the ones in the initial conflict, and the ones in the revenge activity, would be brought in and jailed. But amazingly that did not happen. The police captain, who was seen huddling multiple times with the small group who started everything was interestingly allowed to flee.

One (the rooftop shootings) precipitated the other (the trade union building fire).

It was your classic mob violence incident. Both sides share the blame. Including those the pro-Ukrainian side. But most definitely also those on the pro-Russian side.

Without the deadly shootings at the protest scene, I'm almost certain there would have never have been the trade union fire. I'm not excusing the reaction, but it is crucial to keep things in proper context. Russian state-media and those who have parroted it have failed to do so.

The UE statement, while apparently legitimate, reads like a carbon copy of Russian state media propaganda. Looks like at least one of the UE officers drank the proverbial Kool Aid and saw fit to drag an otherwise respectable organization through the mud where it shouldn't belong.

and they have the wests propaganda machine at their disposal.

Do you even recognize that the moderate voices in maidan have been overwhelmed by the far right groups? Gee, there was a nice little video put out by maidan recently about how right sector were just ordinary nice people. How the heck did that happen? Maybe because the voice of maidan is now significantly integrated with far right groups....

They were in fact huge, they were very diverse, and they were not dominated or overwhelmed by far-right parties.

For several days I followed the Maidan protests live as they happened. They actually had a stage with dozens of speakers speaking throughout the day. And to my recollection, none of them went on rants that could be described as fascist or neo-Nazi or anti-semetic or supportive of Hitler. And if there had been any such talk, you would be damn sure the Russian state media would have exploited it for all that it is worth, just like they did over Odessa.

But it just wasn't there. Svoboda and Right Sector were just a small part of the people protesting, just like they were a small percentage of the vote in recent elections. It's the pro-Russian folks who want to make mountains out of molehills, and they've done their all to do so. Not sure who constitutes "the west's propaganda machine" here, but whoever they might be they pale in comparision to the con job the Russian state media (and the useful idiots who repeat their bullshit) have done.

is BS.

I agree that there were many others involved as well, and from what I have read, including posts from local college students that were involved, even those others at maidan have been concerned about Svoboda and Right Sector having hijacked things (I posted a story from a liberal college group that was very involved that was having to arm themselves and create watches because of fear of the groups)

You can argue all you want that there is little effect of these groups, but if that were the case they would not be in such important jobs in the administration. That just blows a huge hole in your attempt to downplay it.

At this point it is going to be very difficult to quiet things down without removing them from the administration. And even if the new Pres. is successful at doing so there will have to be some serious national dialog and transparency. The new admin will have to convince the general public that it has fully removed their influence.

It has everything to do with armed militants who seized government buildings by force and then engaged in campaigns of kidnapping and even murdering people they deemed as threats (including journalists). Contrary to the will of most of the people in that region, they demanded those regions secede and be absorbed into Russia. The Ukrainian government was actually more than gracious in the amount of time it gave the militants to walk away peacefully. They refused to do so, so what has happened afterwards rests on their shoulders.

Calling it a coup government is incorrect.

like the current administration.

But it is naive to think that this was a flawless and unproblematic election. However, my understanding of the country (which is far more than most here, having been there not just once) is that most will accept the new president if:

1. He calms things by actually accepting the issues in the East. That does not mean allowing seperation, I believe most of the population are in a reaction mode, but would simply calm with appropriate protections and enough autonomy (like in US states).

2. He **MUST** remove the extremists and racist Svoboda and Right Sector leaders that are in charge of State Security, Defense, and the Attorney general. The media has not recognized that is a HUGE part of what is agitating the population. Having such people in those positions deligitimizes the government, and sends serious signals to the population that the administration will not be just and equitable.

3. The current parliament are claiming a full 5 year term. The sacked and replaced the countries' supreme court so that it would not be contested. There MUST be a parliamentary election sooner than later to legitimize the parliament. A presidential election is not a full election and the presidents powers have been reduced significantly.

Those seem reasonable things would you not agree?

I suspect if these things are not done, especially #2, that things will continue to be unstable.

you sound just like a tv pundit, they always have an opinion and are experts at everything without actually having credentials or experience
oh...

did what was required of them apparently, and what the people want, isn't important in any of this, as is obvious. Firing the SC is even more creative than what we do here when we want laws enacted, or upheld, we simply have Congress add amendments to old laws, retroactively making legal what was illegal at the time the crimes are committed by our most wealthy citizens.

But certainly they have no legitimacy after taking such actions.

They didn't allow for the presidential elections, what makes you think they would allow parliamentary?

east actually voted in the presidential election but you are correct in that parliamentary elections will be harder as it is more localized and one side is using guns and intimidation to stop any free vote. Even some from Crimea were able to vote, but they had to leave the peninsula and come over to the Ukrainian mainland to exercise that right as a Ukrainian citizen in occupied territory.

80% were prevented from voting going by turnout. It was a pure reign of terror.

prevent a free and fair vote.

Students in Crimea refuse to sing the Russian national anthem and instead sing the Ukrainian national anthem

In Greece, the Neo Nazi's (Golden Dawn) over played their hand and the rest of the Greek government moved quickly to bring them down after they proved to be creating an unstable environment of violence. Failure of the Ukrainian government to remove the fascists from the police and security forces will prove to be catastrophic. They must act quick like the Greeks did.

wonder the protesters from the Egyptian revolution made it clear they did not want US democracy, pointing to Iraq, another great democracy we created and Afghanistan. Same thing with protesters against our 'allies' in Bahrain.

Half the country didn't participate in that phony election conducted by a coup government. We are becoming the laughing stock of the world. Meantime the rest of the world is moving forward from our militaristic oppressive style 'democracy', making deals amongst themselves, growing their economic power as we spend most of our money on weapons. It's happened before in history, when a country becomes an Empire, all their money is wasted on wars.

Happened to the Soviet Union also. Seems they've learned, and are now moving towards economic power, signing agreements they were hesitant to sign until now. Nice going neocons, pushing Russia towards China, and the forming of an Eastern Eurasian alliance, leaving us with the same old former Imperial powers the world has grown weary of.

You can't force people to vote with tanks and guns and bombs. But what would we expect from the old PNACers, see Nuland eg.

Link please. Or we can conclude you made this up.

That area of the country had a vote to declare themselves "independent" from the rest of Ukraine and then expects to vote in an election for president of a country for which they've declared themselves "independent". So which was the legitimate vote? That is the other question that should be asked when people like that make ridiculous claims. The answer is those in control of the "independent" areas chose not to let people participate. Wow, that is just a minor detail they left out.

Which, ordinarily would be "tough luck" in a truly democratic situation.

But this is not a democratic situation on the whole, media heavily controlled, opposition parties compromised (all of the threatening, burning of party buildings, etc), candidates threatened and beaten, and not enough time to reorganize.

So while it may be the best they could do at the moment, it is really up to Kiev to prove that they will act responsible and representative of the entire country, to legitimize the flawed election.

That means removing the neo-nazi's in executive positions.

I have no idea why, on a supposedly progressive site, that would fail to be seen as a legitimate problem. Power of state/media propaganda maybe?

A person made an accusation that the elections were held at gun point. I still see no proof of this. You are essentially making the same accusation without showing an ounce of proof.

The election was going to be flawed no matter what. Given that the "leaders" of large parts of the eastern half of the country chose not to allow people to vote. My guess is a large number of the Russians in the eastern half of the country weren't going to bother because they thought that Putin was going to come rescue them.

I support removing anyone from positions who are acting in a way that is contrary to the needs of the country.

Now Poroshenko doesn't take office for another week. Poroshenko appears to have quite a bit of government experience and knows what he's getting himself into. The way I see it at that point a legitimate government is in place.

So far from what I can see he has promised:

-To visit Donbas

-To bring an end to the military operations

-To negotiate with Russia

By the way regarding your little snark about state/media propaganda, I don't (can't) watch any of the major networks (except for CNN when I'm at my home) given I'm actually overseas. The networks are literally blocked from watching anything online given my IP is not in the US. Even when I am home I rarely turn on the TV has I've been busy as hell for the last 3 months working and writing a dissertation.

And so far nothing but dissembling.

Ukraine and that is the why the country is now on the brink of a civil war. If you don't want to accept the facts, that is not my problem, I am happy to be in the company of a majority of the people who know what a coup is as opposed to a democratically elected government.

not a coup except RT and Russia. Same about Crimea, No one recognizes that illegal annexation except Russia, You know the ones that broke the Budapest agreement they had signed and invaded with Russian troops.

I've posted the facts surrounding Yanukovych's departure in February 2014 over and over again.

The facts simply do not support the definition of the word "coup".

Simply saying that there was a "coup" over and over again does not mean that there was actually a coup.

Again, if you have any facts to support an actual coup that took place in Ukraine in 2014, especially a western sponsored one, show it, by all means.

But you haven't done so.

Last edited Sun Jun 1, 2014, 05:38 PM - Edit history (1)

It is legal because they were elected? That is precisely the same argument that is constantly made about Kyiv.

The constitution in Ukraine (neither the existing nor 2004) did not allow the proceedings as they occurred. So as often as people might want to use the argument, because they basically feel that the current kyiv government is the "right" government, does not make it constitutional. That propaganda is simply a lie.

Also, by making such simplified claims it really shows a lack of respect for half the population there. Ukrainians are not as dull as some would make them out to be. They reacted completely reasonably to a minority coup.

It's also the fact that Yanukovych lackadaisically packed up his belongings and flew away under his own free will in his own fleet of helicopters, without any evidence of him being forced to do so. Read the definition of coup and think about it again.

I'm not the one demonstrating a lack of respect for the opinions of Ukrainians. It's the people who insist that the West was somehow manufacturing the regime change and that the huge Madian protests by ordinary Ukrainians meant absolutely nothing.

Three whole countries called it a coup and suddenly it's the "whole world."

It will never happen

then the east where some guys just appointed themselves in charge. Lets look at the facts.

one side had elections open to all and international observers in place to certify it was free and fair, even people in the east voted in many areas
One side used guns and threats to obstruct, intimidate and close polls
One side had ballots that were controlled, used voters lists.

Now for the sham referendum. Ballots printed by anyone with a printer and no controls at all. No international observers allowed. Evidence of multiple voting, non-residence people voting. When are they having an election for the guys that just "APPOINTED THEMSELVES" in charge? They just took over and overthrew the elected and appointed government officials. But that was not a coup?

Appears the east just had a change after the thugs that decided to take were found out to be just thieves.

I wonder what people here would call it if violent rioters drove our president out of office??

Had an election taken place before the unelected government sent in the military to attack its own people, none of this would be happening. The people in the East WOULD have voted and a whole lot of people would be alive today.

But coups always result in MORE violence, as was predicted, and few who are not in denial about this, are surprised at the rising violence against civilians, nor by the Kiev Government's military attacks on their own people.

as there was not a coup and the President took days to pack his loot to leave peacefully in the middle of the night. He was then voted out of power by his own party after he left and abdicated his position.

none of this would have happened. So your question is irrelevant without acknowledging the CAUSE. No one would have died, no one would have voted for autonomy, Crimea would still be a part of Ukraine and the country would not be on the brink of a civil war, had there been no coup. But someone was in a real hurry to remove the elected president, right after he decided not to accept the IMF/World Bank enslavement of Ukraine. So they couldn't wait for an election, and they could 'trust' the people to choose the puppet they wanted.

you will not change my mind and I will not change yours

Have a great day

And you choose to ignore the video evidence to the contrary right in front of your face.

If you are going to say that everything that happened after the "coup" is also a travesty that is the fault of.....I have no idea, since that's not been made clear either....but you can't actually show the "coup" took place, guess what?

Your whole argument falls apart.

Parliamentary elections are not due until 2017. By then outcomes may be biased by the experiences of austerity measures imposed by the IMF and EU.

Doubtless their electorate will let their feelings be known next time around.

off topic - do know why Russia's Duma voted 100% , bar one who abstained , to Federalise the anti propaganda law last July? It was due to each member knowing that if they voted against passing the law they would lose their seat come next elections.

are the self appointed leaders in the east legitimate? If so why, explain.

that the thugs that used weapons and force to take over legitimate government controlled buildings and appointed themselves as leaders were not elected and therefore are not legitimate. That also means the referendum that they had is also not legitimate.

came to power legally? Or are you determined to have a "partisan" viewpoint?

Parliament voted the previous president out of office (to include his own parities representatives), no I would not agree. The interim government called for new elections and they have been now held even though two of the larger towns in the were prevented from voting due to intimidation and the taking over polling stations at gunpoint and destroying ballot boxes.

You are a partisan. Impossible to argue when someone digs in like that. Like with RW relatives, they will refuse to engage outside of the spectrum of propaganda. As would paid operatives on this site.

I just offered the nuance (as I have often, things in Ukraine truly are not black and white) that you and others claim is not visible from those you disagree with.

So if the Republicans make a vote in Congress and pass a law impeaching President Obama without normal constitutional conventions.. Hey, they were voted in right? Don't claim democratic reasoning because you left that train already. Just say it like you believe it.. "Might" makes right!

I hope you are not calling me "right wing" or a "paid operative" I know things are not black and white and I also know the government is not all fascist killers like some keep trying to push. We can disagree and that does not mean I "right wing" or a "paid operative"

Ford was Nixon's VP, appointed by Nixon after Agnew was forced to resign as VP. Are you aware of how the process works when a President dies, or for other reasons, resigns, as Nixon did?

Not to mention there were no armed rioters in the streets backed by foreign 'interests' as far as I know.

Such as non-elected leaders being "illegitimate".

Or assuming any type of regime change that you don't particular care for constitutes a "coup", and most likely a western-led one at that.

He was also still in the country when they took power and he had a conference before the vote stating he was not abandoning his position.

You can wordsmith it in any way you want. But if you are intellectually honest just say you prefer it this way, because there was no constitutional basis for the minority that came into power.

At this point though it is less important, than it is that they recognize the very serious rift that was created and the consequences for what they are. The junta is extremely unpopular at this point and they are not going to maintain power. The only question is will they get enough pressure that they do not send the country further into the abyss before some semblance of representative and more moderate government can come into place.

Was reported a few hours ago along with news today that Crimea adopted the Ruble as of June 1st.

Not sure whether or not elections earlier than 2017 , when next due , are covered by their constitution - they do seem to make up stuff to suit over there.

Article 77[edit]
Regular elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine take place on the last Sunday of the last month of the fifth year of the term of authority of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

Special elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine are designated by the President of Ukraine and are held within sixty days from the day of the publication of the decision on the pre-term termination of authority of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

Link: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ukraine,_2004

According to Wikipedia, the 2004 Constitution was reinstated, so that's why it's from that one. Either way, far as I know (being American, admittedly not first hand knowledge) parliamentary systems do generally allow for early elections do they not? Not an unknown thing in the UK, from what I remember in the news, certainly, and don't see any reason why it would be any different in another country's parliamentary system.

The substitution of the constitution of 2004 for the current one, without any vote of amendment, is the reason it was a coup; so quoting that constitution hardly provides an argument.

First of all, the fascist fellow-travellers are in Moscow, not Kiev. I have posted, repeatedly, the FACT that Moscow finances Jobbik in Hungary, the neo-Nazi party there. I have posted the FACT that Marine Le Pen was wished well in the European Parliamentary elections by the United Russia party; this was reported by the Voice of Russia, no less. I have posted the FACT that in the European Parliament a session on sympathizing with Russia was organized by the Northern League of Italy and the Freedom Party of Austria, neither of which are exactly left wing.
So tell it to some uninformed person who believes that crap. I ain't that person.
The Constitution was obviously substituted by the only people who could do it; the duly elected representatives of the people in their Parliament.

After the ouster of Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine's previous pro-Russia president, following months long protests, he and his closest allies fled the country. But many remnants of the Yanukovych regime stayed behind.

Yanukovych's chief of staff remains in Kiev, along with some of his top security officials during the crisis - when more than 100 people were killed by gunfire in downtown Kiev. The Party of Regions, which backed Yanukovych, has more seats than any other party in parliament and every incentive to stall parliamentary elections until it can regroup from the revolution.

Despite much talk of prosecutions against corrupt Yanukovych-era officials, no charges have been filed against any of those who stayed in Ukraine.

Soon after his election, Poroshenko announced that his first priority would be to clean up parliament, where many legislators are holdovers from the Yanukovych era. While elections aren't due until 2017, Poroshenko, who needs a cooperative parliament to push through direly needed economic reforms demanded by the International Monetary Fund in return for loans, has said he hopes to push that date up to later this year.

>

For Poroshenko, who has little authority in parliament, bringing key players in the legislature fully into his camp may be an uphill struggle. Ukraine's parliament is a notably unruly body, where fistfights aren't uncommon.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_UKRAINE_POROSHENKOS_CHALLENGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-06-03-16-44-24

I'm sure the pro-Russians would rather that not happen. They are still begging for Putin to invade and save them. If early parliamentary elections were held, it would provide a path (but not a guarantee) for stability. No election and they can brand him a liar and scream that he was part of another coup.

The government in power is still the one created by the coup.

a fully constitutional and democratically elected President and you will recognize that fact if what you say is true?

Simply repeating blatant Russian state media propaganda that a) what happened on February 22nd was a "coup" and b) what happened on May 2nd was a one sided "massacre" of "peaceful, unarmed anti-government protesters".

Honestly, where was the UE's head in any of this? There are so many legitimate, labor related issues here stateside that repeating heavily compromised accounts of what is going on in Ukraine seems so unnecessary. Unless they truly thought that people who died in the May 2nd mob riots (and that's what they were) were actually union members (which they most definitely weren't).

Someone's been reading too much Robert Parry. Sigh.

Classic mob violence, blame can be assigned to both parties. But the pro-Russian folks have desperately painted it as a one-sided massacre.

With two different groups of people.

The shooting occurred with an all male group of protesters in the center of Odessa. It was well after that exchange, that the Ultras regrouped and enlarged and headed to the Union building, where many old men, women, and some children, that **had not been** in the center were.

Please, if you don't know the full events it is really nasty to propagate untruths.

Your assertions are not much different than saying a woman deserves to be raped because of the clothes or friends she keeps. It is repugnant and you and others here should stop it!

The fire would have never happened but for the shootings that happened earlier in the day.

Even if everything happened as you claim, and the pro-Ukrainian side was 100% to blame for everything that happened at the trade union building (which I don't believe to be the case) and the victims were all elderly and women and children (I'm surprised you didn't throw puppies into the mix), you cannot claim that the pro-Ukrainian crowd came there unprovoked or that they just wanted to re-enact an old pogrom.

Attacking a peaceful protest gets people angry and upset. Shooting into a crowd and killing people gets them even angrier and more upset. And people who are angry and upset do angry and upset things.

No one deserved to die that day--on either side. But there has to be a proper context of why things happened the way they did. Not to excuse, but to explain.

Unfortunately, those on the pro-Russian side continue to pretend that nothing happened before the Trade Union fire, and that simply isn't the case.

I mean that is some kind of arm. Was one of the Manning brothers out there?

The facts of the trade union itself aren't quite clear who all is to blame. I strongly suspect both parties share the blame there.

But it shouldn't be ignored that in all likelihood the trade union fire would have never even happened but for the violence against pro-Ukrainian demonstrators earlier in the day. That's not excusing any further actions, but it is putting them in the proper context.

Which means what affects labor in Ukraine, affects workers in the US and indeed, ALL of the world.

The pro-Russian side had used the trade union building as its headquarters, but that's about it.

Incidentally, the Maidan protesters also used a trade union building as its headquarters in Kyiv.

the burning beaten and killed by Right Sector thugs under control of the western oligarchs?

In this case it seems pretty obvious that ONE of the reasons for this statement was because of the building that was burned, i.e., a trade union building.

Of course, from what I understand, there were labor offices, Communist Party HQ, and other socialist organizations' offices trashed by the counterrevolutionaries in the west too. It's highly ironic that this "popular" revolution in the western part of Ukraine wound up destroying or trashing FIRST, all of the symbols of working class power that the fascists ALWAYS go after first when they take power.

the government portfolios held BY THOSE SAME FASCIST PARTIES, no matter what their showing in that "election". Those portfolios are arguably the most important ones for control of the internal population. Law (Attorney General), Military and internal law enforcement.

And the fascist influence over the Keiw interim government might be laughable to you, but it's not laughable to the Ukrainians in the south and east of the country apparently. Or to the working class in those same areas. Otherwise, the Kiev government wouldn't be having so much trouble reestablishing control in those sectors.

As to the election, I've never said that Ukrainians favor those fascists parties. What I've said is that the western oligarchs who stood to lose the most profits when Yanukovych decided to take Russia's deal rather than the EU deal, favored and favor the fascist parties. At least until they've regained total control over the country. Then they expect to be able to releash those fascist attack dogs.

In spite of any popular will of Ukrainians in ALL areas of Ukraine, the fascists have a VERY large influence over and actually IN the interim government in Kiev. I'd be more inclined to believe your version of events when and IF those fascists WHO ARE ACTUALLY IN THE GOVERNMENT are thrown out.

The League for a Fifth International has had people in Ukraine working with the working class trade organization Barotba. And neither the League nor Barotba are Putin supporters, but neither are they supporters of the regime in Kiev. I'll believe them before I believe the oligarchs attempting to rule Ukraine for their own and for international capitalism's profit.

It is so tragic to see ordinary people DYING in Ukraine when an election could have been held and the people could have chosen who they wanted, not who foreign interventionists chose after the coup.

I guess the didn't trust the people's choice as they were a big hurry to oust the elected president WITHOUT an election.

The good news is that despite a few old cold warriors (or are they working for the government?) who try to drown information on Ukraine, they are not representative and the actions and propaganda attempted in Ukraine has been laid bare.

I think that is one of the reasons that there have been quite ugly activities and words around these events, because TBTB are feeling like they are losing some control and they are blaming everyone around them for the fact that their insane and violent policies are not yielding what they want and they are getting resistance from those they thought they had control of.

We have not yet left the era of Project for a New American Century and the chickenhawks that think they can change the world through war and do it all in "6 months easy (Rumsfeld pontificating on the Wolfowitz doctrine and the "quick win" in Iraq)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine

A deputy prime minister (of which there are multiple), the ministry of ecology and natural resources, and the ministry of agriculture. The ministry of defense is no longer held by a Svoboda member.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Ukraine

Maidan was not a fascist movement, period. It represented a very wide swath of ideologies, language speakers and religious affiliations, all of whom were upset both at Yanukovych's obvious corruption and his decision to embrace Russia, which like it or not, is a very thorny issue for most Ukrainians. And as I've pointed out over and over and over again, what happened in Maidan was not a coup. The evidence very clearly shows that Yanukovych left the country under his own free willpower (and quite casually, may I add) after the Maidan protests did not let up. Perhaps that is a revolution, but it certainly isn't a coup as such a word is defined.

You are creating a narrative of the situation that just isn't held up by the actual facts.

It is the attempts to make this all sound "normal" that is the propaganda.

Sid