The Propaganda War

[LiveFromUkraine]

LivefromUkraine's translation: "I search for evidence that  Yanukovych was impeached illegally but BillyB is right, Yanukovych was relieved from office because he failed to perform his duties, not impeached over misconduct. The illegal impeachment of Yanukovych I'm upset about was never an impeachment at all. I don't want to embarrass myself admitting I'm wrong in front of the forum so I'll make fun of BillyB instead.

More BillyB Translation:


"I'm going to continue to make stuff up like Yanu was relieved from office even though there is no law stating he can be relieved from office.  Yanu can only resign, die or be impeached to be relieved from office.  Since LiveFromUkraine is correct on the impeachment laws, I will make up a story that he can be relieved for not performing his duties.   If I continue to make stuff up someone will believe me."

Ukraine’s parliament voted to impeach the president, Viktor Yanukovych, and strip him of his powers after three months of street protests. Yanukovych fled Kiev and said he would battle to stay in power. “They are trying to scare me. I have no intention of leaving the country. I am not going to resign, I’m the legitimately elected president,” he said in a television interview

]http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/ukraine-crisis-yanukovych-tymoshenko-live-updates

Billy, you should write to the site I linked too and let them know they got it all wrong.  I look forward to your next "Story". 

[Muzh]

Ukraine’s parliament voted to impeach the president, Viktor Yanukovych, and strip him of his powers after three months of street protests. Yanukovych fled Kiev and said he would battle to stay in power. “They are trying to scare me. I have no intention of leaving the country. I am not going to resign, I’m the legitimately elected president,” he said in a television interview

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/ukraine-crisis-yanukovych-tymoshenko-live-updates

Billy, you should write to the site I linked too and let them know they got it all wrong.  I look forward to your next "Story". 

First of all, you two sound so childish with "he said, he said."
 
Also, how do you battle staying in power? By stealing all the gold fixtures from the toilets and bathroom sinks that were on his stolen property? BTW, where are all the expensive cars he was amassing as president? No, not the Soviet POS relics he left behind.
 
This is how you fight to stay in power?
 
Damn! I want some power too!!

[LiveFromUkraine]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/ukraine-crisis-yanukovych-tymoshenko-live-updates

Billy, you should write to the site I linked too and let them know they got it all wrong.  I look forward to your next "Story". 


 
First of all, you two sound so childish with "he said, he said."
 
Also, how do you battle staying in power? By stealing all the gold fixtures from the toilets and bathroom sinks that were on his stolen property? BTW, where are all the expensive cars he was amassing as president? No, not the Soviet POS relics he left behind.
 
This is how you fight to stay in power?
 
Damn! I want some power too!!

Ah, the expert in being childish does speaketh. 


What is your point dude?  That he stole stuff?  Duh, he was just like all of them and the next one will be the same. 


Cmon, make your point or are you just jealous of his golden bathroom throne?

[Muzh]

Ah, the expert in being childish. 


What is your point dude?  That he stole stuff?  Duh, he was just like all of them and the next one will be the same. 


Cmon, make your point.

 
Just for you since you like to bob and weave.
 
 

[LiveFromUkraine]

 
Just for you since you like to bob and weave.
 
 

Must suck getting old and not able to bob and weave.  Try some yoga. 

[Muzh]

Must suck getting old and not able to bob and weave.  Try some yoga. 

Sorry loverboy, I'll leave the flexibility to you, you young stud.
 
Now, BOHICA.

[LiveFromUkraine]

 
Now, BOHICA.

Ah, it all makes sense now.  You are batting for the other team.  You're just one of the gals... no wonder you white knight.

[Muzh]

And so it starts, they are starting to isolate themselves...
 
Shades of Dr. Goebbels

[Muzh]

Ah, it all makes sense now.  You are batting for the other team.  You're just one of the gals... no wonder you white knight.

LMFAO
 
Oh dear. Are you so sure of your manhood? Really?
 
One more
 
 
 
 
 
 

[LiveFromUkraine]

LMFAO
 
Oh dear. Are you so sure of your manhood? Really?
 
One more
 
 
 
 

Men don't go around telling other men to bend over where I am from if that is what you mean.  Thanks for the flowers but this dialog has nothing to do with this thread topic.  Maybe try Craigslist or whatever site you guys meet each other.   

[Muzh]

Men don't go around telling other men to bend over where I am from if that is what you mean.  Thanks for the flowers but this dialog has nothing to do with this thread topic.  Maybe try Craigslist or whatever site you guys meet each other.   

Where men are men and the sheep run scared?
 

 
Okay, okay
 
The fragility of it all. 

[LiveFromUkraine]

Where men are men and the sheep run scared?
 

The fragility of it all. 

No, I'm not from New Zealand and AnotherKiwi won't appreciate your humor.   


I asked you for your point and you decided to tell me to bend over.       I take it you didn't have a point and were just doing the usual Muzh thing.

[Muzh]

No, I'm not from New Zealand and AnotherKiwi won't appreciate your humor.   


I asked you for your point and you decided to tell me to bend over.       I take it you didn't have a point and were just doing the usual Muzh thing.

Now who's having old age issues? You are not that old, I've seen you. So it must be something else.
 
Just to refresh your memory:
 
http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=17542.msg365892#msg365892
 
Where did I say to bend over?
 
Actually, who started the ad hominem?
 
Come on, I'm pretty sure that if you think long and hard you'll remember.
 
There you go, now that we agree you started the ad hominem I'll try to explain the term. It is meant for toadies, not festive people. I'm pretty sure festive people will also agree the term is for toadies.
 
You are showing some insecurities there, sweetheart. 
 
And it is not nice to insult New Zelanders for no reason.
 
Tsk Tsk
 
You have to control those ad hominems. They might come back and bite you in the ass. If you know what I mean.

[GQBlues]

 

 


LMAO!!! Where the heck do you guys get these graphics from?

[BillyB]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/ukraine-crisis-yanukovych-tymoshenko-live-updates

Billy, you should write to the site I linked too and let them know they got it all wrong.  I look forward to your next "Story". 

Yes, that site got it wrong. Lots of journalists and news organizations never read what Yanukovych was ousted for, they just reported "impeached" right after the vote and some people like you and Russia ran with the story talking about Ukraine's constitution was violated because there was not enough votes.


Go find out for yourself what the parliament voted on in the ousting of Yanukovych. He was removed because he could not fulfill the duties of his job. That was the issue that was voted on, not a vote on Yanukovych's misconduct. Impeachment would mean he was found guilty of misconduct or crimes. Yanukovych hasn't been put on trial for that yet. Maybe Yanukovych's Wiki biography page can help you? You will learn he has never been impeached in his life so it's best you and a few others stop debating something that's never happened.


My guess is you're still upset Yanukovych was ousted, in massive denial, and will still run with the impeachment story. Before Putin found value in Yanukovych, he said it himself that Yanukovych has no political future in Ukraine after getting ousted. Parliament voted in Ukraine's interim government with 371 votes. It's time to move on and let Yanukovych go. They did.


You avoided my question earlier and anybody can answer it, especially since the Ukraine Constitution is important to some people. Article 73 says matters that split Ukraine's territory up must be decided by all of Ukraine. That means Crimea's split and east Ukraine's soon to be split is illegal. You guys and Putin can't pick and choose what you think is important, either respect all of Ukraine's Constitution or none of it.

[calmissile]

Our hero journalist that has been providing news feeds from Ukraine has been detained by Pro-Russians in Ukraine.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/osce-calls-for-release-of-american-journalist-ostrovsky-others-in-eastern-ukraine-344665.html

[Larry1]

And so it starts, they are starting to isolate themselves...
 
Shades of Dr. Goebbels

And here too:

Navalny's conviction in Russia a chilling message

MOSCOW (AP) — A Moscow justice of the peace did not just fine Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny $8,400 on Tuesday for slandering a lawmaker, she left the door open to locking up the Kremlin's most vocal critic in prison for years.

The move was also a warning shot at all those who dare to challenge President Vladimir Putin.

Navalny was nearly jailed last summer, when he was running a high-profile mayoral campaign in Moscow, but the Kremlin figured then he would be more useful if allowed to run. But now Putin, emboldened by an 80 percent approval rating and national euphoria over the annexation of Crimea, appears no longer willing to tolerate any criticism.

http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20140422/API/304229796?Title=Navalny-s-conviction-in-Russia-a-chilling-message

[LiveFromUkraine]

Yes, that site got it wrong. Lots of journalists and news organizations never read what Yanukovych was ousted for, they just reported "impeached" right after the vote and some people like you and Russia ran with the story talking about Ukraine's constitution was violated because there was not enough votes.


Go find out for yourself what the parliament voted on in the ousting of Yanukovych. He was removed because he could not fulfill the duties of his job. That was the issue that was voted on, not a vote on Yanukovych's misconduct. Impeachment would mean he was found guilty of misconduct or crimes. Yanukovych hasn't been put on trial for that yet. Maybe Yanukovych's Wiki biography page can help you? You will learn he has never been impeached in his life so it's best you and a few others stop debating something that's never happened.

You mean the same wiki that has this quote?

The Ukrainian parliament voted on 22 February to remove him from his post on the grounds that he was unable to fulfill his duties although the legislative removal lacked the required votes according to the constitution in effect at the time

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

    I do appreciate you backing up what I have been saying.  He was illegally removed!


 As far as why he was ousted, I don't care what you or any website says.  I want to see the law that says he can be put out for nonperformance of duties and what the process for doing so is. 


You can't seem to do it.  All you have is a wiki link which anyone can edit. 

[BillyB]

I do appreciate you backing up what I have been saying. 

Wiki didn't agree with you that he was impeached. Here's what I said in another thread. "Yanukovych was relieved because he wasn't fulfilling his duties, not because he's impeached over misconduct or crimes. Article 111 in the Ukrainian constitution requires 3/4 votes for impeachment. Not fulfilling duties doesn't fall under the impeachment process of Article 111."

As far as why he was ousted, I don't care what you or any website says.

You're not lying and it's part of the problem that allows you spread misinformation without educating yourself

I want to see the law that says he can be put out for nonperformance of duties and what the process for doing so is. 

The Ukrainian constitution has been linked on the forum and elsewhere on the internet.


Article 108

The President of Ukraine exercises his or her powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.

The powers of the President of Ukraine terminate prior to the expiration of term in cases of:
1.resignation;
2.inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3.removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4.death.


Yanukovych did give a verbal resignation but his official ousting IMO falls in line with #2 since his mind and body isn't available to perform the duties of the president. Your and other people's mistake is taking article 111 and it's impeachment procedures and applying those rules to each and every way a president is to lose his job. Does death require a 3/4 vote too to oust a president too?  Those impeachment procedures and 3/4 majority vote requirement is only needed in cases of impeachment.


Somebody may not accept my #2 reason for ousting Yanukovych. One may claim failure to perform duties after not showing up for work is not listed in the constitution and there is no instructions given to parliament to take. Then it's even more reason the parliament didn't do anything illegal against the constitution when they ousted Yanukovych.

He was illegally removed!

Yep, keep spreading misinformation when all the facts are in front of you.

[GQBlues]

LIU-

Why bother arguing with a clod? He's got information in front of him yet he still have difficulties understanding what he reads. He can't even get past 'non-binding'.

[LiveFromUkraine]

LIU-

Why bother arguing with a clod? He's got information in front of him yet he still have difficulties understanding what he reads. He can't even get past 'non-binding'.

I don't know, I get a sense of enjoyment when he actually does cite a source and it backs up what you and I have been saying.  I can see now why he doesn't post more links.  haha  He totally tried to ignore his own source stating there wasn't enough votes.  A thing of beauty.


BillyB,


It's kind of strange some members of parliament introduced a new impeachment bill right at the same time.  Coincidence?  Doubtful.


http://rt.com/news/president-impeachment-bill-parliament-174/



Kyiv Post also considers it an impeachment


http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv/euromaidan-rallies-in-ukraine-feb-21-live-updates-337287.html



So does Aljazeera
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html

Verbal resignations mean nothing.  If it was in writing there wouldn't be any confusion.


A coup can be detrimental to your health but his health is fine.  Our President would have been taken to a safe place if the same thing occurred here.  Next you will try to say he was removed because he stubbed his toe or got a splinter in his finger.

He is still alive according to his television performances.


You agree he wasn't legally impeached so that can't be it.

You're trying to stretch it beyond belief now and you say I and some others are the ones who are not dealing with reality.  Unlike you, I am not married to my argument which is why I have been asking for proof he was legally removed.  So far, you have just proved he was indeed illegally remove regardless if you believe it was an impeachment or not.

[fathertime]

Fathertime, are you by chance a Rand Paul fan? Some people know him as an isolationist and conservative. Some conservatives have criticized Rand for changing his stance on Ukraine. Some of the things Rand Paul have been saying lately shows he's willing to take action on Ukraine and portray himself as a tough, Ronald Reagan, kind of guy. I think Rand Paul is open to changing his views on foreign policy since Putin's action has opened his eyes on what leaders can do and the way they want to shape the world. Below is a quote from Rand Paul:


" I think that sometimes want to stand up and say hey, look at me, I’m the next Ronald Reagan. Well, almost all of us in the party are big fans of Ronald Reagan,” Paul said.

“I’ve always been a big fan of peace through strength. I think America should and has a responsibility around the world and really, virtually all of the opinions that have been coming from Republicans are somewhat the same on this – that Putin should be condemned, he should be isolated. I favor sanctions on Putin. So, for people to characterize that as somehow not being the Reagan position, I think they need to have a re-reading of Reagan, frankly,”

Hey Billyb....I will go and look up Rand Paul's entire stance on this issue when i get a chance....I did like Ron Paul's philosophy towards aid and foreign intervention...but I will have to see where Rand differs.


Fathertime! 

[BillyB]

Why bother arguing with a clod?

Why do people resort to name calling when they lose a debate? I'll take that comment as your official surrender.

http://rt.com/news/president-impeachment-bill-parliament-174/


http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv/euromaidan-rallies-in-ukraine-feb-21-live-updates-337287.html


http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html

Notice the dates those articles were written? Notice how although the media reported a vote, they mislabeled what the vote was about? Notice some of the articles talk about an impeachment bill that was introduced by a lawmaker but it doesn't talk about whether or not it was voted on? Is it possible a bill that is introduced on the floor won't be entertained by other lawmakers thus never voted on?


Here is a timeline of events. You can Google it since you don't trust me and are in massive denial.


On 20 February, Minister of Internal Affairs Vitaliy Zakharchenko announced he had signed a decree authorising the use of live ammunition against protesters.[47] Central Kiev saw the worst violence yet, and the death toll in 48 hours of clashes rose to at least 77.[48] In response, the next day Chairman of the Ukrainian parliament Volodymyr Rybak announced he had signed a parliamentary decree, condemning the use of force and urging all institutions (Ministry of Internal Affairs, Cabinet of Ministers, etc.) to cease immediately all military actions against protesters.[49] The Ukrainian parliament also suspended Zakharchenko from his duties. Yanukovich's cabinet members aren't so nice but I suspect the order came from Yanukovych himself. People now are really pissed.


On 21 February, President Yanukovych signed a compromise deal with opposition leaders which would implement constitutional changes to hand powers back to parliament and early elections, to be held by December. Yay! Parliament has more power to do things and they go back to using the 2004 constitution for guidance. Parliament has the right to initiate early elections which will happen May 25. Like it or not, Yanukovych will be legally replaced May 25 so stop crying over his ousting.


On 21 February an impeachment bill was introduced in Ukrainian parliament,[52] but no details were provided and the Ukrainian parliament did not vote to impeach Yanukovich according to the legal procedure.[53] On 21 February Yanukovich left for Kharkov to attend a summit of south-eastern regions, according to media reports. Notice media reported this impeachment bill introduced on Feb 21? Introduced doesn't mean it was voted on. LivefromUkraine, nice trick with the selective news media articles but you're not going to fool me to believe the impeachment bill introduced was the one that was voted on. You and GQ should join Putin's propaganda team since you both work hard at fooling the readers here. Not only that, you truly believe what you're saying and those people are the best people to deliver propaganda.


On 22 February, Parliament voted to declare that the chair of the President is vacant due to the fact that Yanukovich left Ukraine and no longer exercise his duties. Aha! There it is! The vote was on Feb 22, not Feb 21 when the impeachment bill was introduced based on your selective news links. Now you understand what parliament actually voted on? Parliament chose to vote on Yanukovych's inability to perform his duties, not the impeachment bill which was rejected. Since Yanukovych wasn't impeached, you guys have been wasted massive amounts of time trying to convince people here that proper impeachment procedures and 3/4 majority vote are necessary in the ousting of Yanukovych. Nowhere in Ukraine's constitution say a 3/4 vote and impeachment procedures are necessary to relieve a president if he doesn't perform his duties. Don't take my word for it, Google some of these cut and paste words I've used and get yourself educated.

Unlike you, I am not married to my argument
.

My wife being Ukrainian has nothing to do about the way I think pertaining to world affairs. The power of the bush has little influence on me and I don't need to be a "yes" man to get into a woman's pants. I've told my wife the same things I've told you guys here. She likes it when I criticize Obama for being weak because she thinks of the Obama the same way. She doesn't like to hear my opinion that I respect Putin taking care of his country's interest.

Hey Billyb....I will go and look up Rand Paul's entire stance on this issue when i get a chance....I did like Ron Paul's philosophy towards aid and foreign intervention...but I will have to see where Rand differs.


Fathertime! 

Google some of the words I quoted Rand Paul on and you'll find his opinions pertaining to the current crisis in Ukraine. I was actually surprised he seems to want to react to Russia's actions. If he changes his opinion on foreign policy, I wouldn't hold it against him. Being a congressman, he has access to more intelligence on issues and their consequences than we, the common people.

[LiveFromUkraine]

My wife being Ukrainian has nothing to do about the way I think pertaining to world affairs. The power of the bush has little influence on me and I don't need to be a "yes" man to get into a woman's pants. I've told my wife the same things I've told you guys here. She likes it when I criticize Obama for being weak because she thinks of the Obama the same way. She doesn't like to hear my opinion that I respect Putin taking care of his country's interest.

That wasn't what I meant.

[GQBlues]

That wasn't what I meant.

 

See what I mean? A clod.