Last night, December 11th, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously as the U.S. House had previously voted 98%: to join Ukraine's war against Russia and against Ukraine's own ethnic Russians in Ukraine's southeastern districts, in order to eliminate those resistant Ukrainians and their families.
The U.S. is now throwing down the gauntlet to Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, and daring him to defend openly the ethnic Russians that the U.S.-installed Ukrainian Government is now trying to exterminate in the eastern districts, the places where the present Ukrainian Government is rejected by almost all of the residents.
Those are the districts that had voted about 90% for the Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, whom the U.S. overthrew on February 22nd in a violent coup, in which the U.S. paid Ukrainian nazis, or racist-fascists of Ukraine's Right Sector Party, who masked themselves and dressed themselves as Ukrainian security forces and shot from high places into the "Maidan" crowd of anti-corruption demonstrators, for which shootings the U.S. Government blamed the then-President Yanukovych, since the snipers had dressed as if they were from his security-forces. A special session of Ukraine's parliament or "Rada" was promptly called to appoint a new leader for the country, and they appointed "Yaz" Arseniy Yatsenyuk, whom the U.S. State Department's Victoria Nuland had, on February 4th, instructed the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, to get installed as the country's leader after the coup. Some Rada members were physically threatened by Right Sector gunmen to vote for this change, which then passed overwhelmingly, especially because most of the parliamentarians didn't even know that the bloodshed had actually been operated by the U.S. However, the EU's Foreign Affairs Minister, Catherine Ashton, sent an investigator in to determine how the overthrow had occurred, and the investigator, Urmas Paet, informed Ashton on February 26th that "behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new coalition." In other words: it was someone from the group who wanted to remove and replace Yanukovych. Paet said furthermore, that, "it's really disturbing that now the new coalition that they don't want to investigate what exactly happened." And so there was no investigation, other than Paet's own. He went on, in very broken English (he's Estonian) to tell Ashton: "So that it was in this instance disturbing that if it's us now to live its own life very powerfully, then it already discreditates from the very beginning also this new coalition." Ashton ignored his comment, and just said that, "what we've got to be very careful of as well, [is] that they need to demand great change, but they've got to let the Rada [Parliament] function. If the Rada doesn't function, then we'll have complete chaos." In other words: we're just going to let those sleeping dogs lie. And they did.
Anyway, she knew. The top foreign-affairs official at the EU knew that the overthrow of Yanukovych, and the replacement of him by this new pro-EU Ukrainian Government, had been hired by someone from the West. She knew that she hadn't ordered it. She almost certainly understood right away, that America's White House did.
And so, too, unquestionably, did Petro Poroshenko, who in elections that were then held on May 25th in Ukraine's northwest -- the regions where the new Obama-installed regime was accepted by the public -- won the Presidency of Ukraine to replace Yanukovych. He, too, knew that, as Paet had put it, "behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new coalition." We know that he knows this because Paet also told Ashton at the same time that, "what was quite disturbing, the same oligarch [Poroshenko] told that well, all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers, from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides." In other words: this was murdering people at random by firing into a crowd, all the while pretending to be security forces of the Ukrainian Government that the crowd is demonstrating against. That's Obama's way of "regime change," instead of sending in the U.S. armed forces, like George W. Bush did to Iraq. However, virtually all of the U.S. Congress have now voted to donate U.S. weapons to this Ukrainian Government.
The EU is in on the secret, and the President who replaced Yanukovych is, too.
But what about the 98% of the U.S. House of Representatives, and the 100% of the U.S. Senate, who have now voted for the U.S. to donate lethal weapons to this Ukrainian Government. Do they know? Who paid 'our' Congress-people for this vote? Was it Lockheed Martin? Was it Boeing? Was it Raytheon? Was it all of them and others, all of whose stocks have been soaring since Obama's overthrow of Yanukovych?
The U.S. public were asked in a 4 April 2014 Pew poll, whether they backed "sending arms/military supplies, to Ukraine govt." 30% said yes. 62% said no. 8% were undecided. The ratio of those who had an opinion, 62%/92%, was 67% against, 33% for.
Both the House and Senate bills are for not just "arms/military supplies," but specifically include "lethal weapons." And they aren't just to "send," but to donate them, because the Ukrainian Government is bankrupt and can carry on its extermination campaign only by additional borrowings from the IMF, the U.S., and EU. All of the new 'loans' will go to the back of the line and never be paid. So, at least 67% of Americans are opposed to what virtually 100% of Americans' 'representatives' in Congress have voted for, and it's war against Russia.
This is the U.S. 'democracy' that installed the 'democracy' in Ukraine, which on February 22nd overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian President.
Barack Obama hasn't been as successful at engineering 'democratic consent' for war as was George W. Bush, but 'our' Government is doing it anyway, and the nuclear weapons are being readied for it.
Furthermore, the entire replacement of Yanukovych was illegally done. The American public is overwhelmingly on the side of the law here, while the American President and Congress are almost uniformly against the law here, but they write the laws; it's the latter who possesses power in the United States, and the American public don't actually exist to them, except to be fooled into voting for them, by the billionaires who control companies such as JPMorgan/Chase, and Lockheed Martin and finance political campaigns.
And here is a graphic (from the National Priorities project) that shows how influential those people are in the United States: