About the Holodomor 1933 of the Year and the 2014 Genocide of the Year
21.11. Chairman of the SBU Valentin Nalyvaichenko, speaking before the cadets of the National Academy of the SBU, said that the Security Service would propose criminalizing the denial of the 1932-1933 Holodomor as a genocide against the Ukrainian people. The idea is not new. To imprison for denying the Holodomor, as genocide was wanted even under Yushchenko. The law of Ukraine on 28.11.2006 recognizes the Holodomor as genocide, but if someone does not agree with this, then he is not threatened with responsibility. Neither administrative nor criminal.Nalyvaychenko wants to finish what did not work for Yushchenko. You do not recognize the Holodomor as genocide - behind bars.
What was the Holodomor?
This is a universal, apocalyptic catastrophe, which took away the lives of millions of people who have pulled out the last piece of food. But in no case can the Holodomor be considered a genocide of the Ukrainian people. The political circumstances of that time were determined by the fact that the Soviet authorities were resolving the main issue: the power in the countryside. For this, it was necessary to destroy everyone who could manage their own lives on their own, to provide for themselves. The blocking of agricultural areas in Ukraine took place everywhere in the villages where people who were economically independent of Soviet power lived.
All this does not detract from the Holodomor hypertragic. It really was a terrible massacre. But killed not by ethnic principles. According to the class.
Yes, during the Holodomor, most Ukrainians died in the ethnic dimension. And it is natural, because the Ukrainians constituted the majority of the population of our country. But does this mean that the purpose of the Holodomor was to kill just ethnic Ukrainians? What was ethnic cleansing? No, does not mean.
Without paying any attention to the nationality, the NKVD food detachments killed all independent peasants. To understand this is elementary. You do not want in collective farms, you do not like the Soviet government? Harvest surrender!
Therefore, the barriers were first blocked, and then the Czechs, for example, compactly living in the villages of Bohemka and Novoselovka of the Nikolaev region, were completely extinct from hunger. There were many Czech villages extinct from the Holodomor on the territory of the Zhytomyr region.
Famine killed the Poles - for example, in the villages of the village Sharovechka, Matskovtsy, Grechanyaya, Zazheche Khmelnitsky region. And, of course, let's not forget about the Russians, who lived on the territories of the East of Ukraine, and died in the Holodomor.
What Yushchenko and Poroshenko are trying to present the Holodomor?
The genocide of the Ukrainian people. Destruction of the ethnic group.
Why do they do that?
This is part of state propaganda, designed to zombie: ethnic Ukrainians wanted to kill and kill. This propaganda is built on a cynical and deceitful premise - the tragedy of the Holodomor, supposedly, should unite ethnic Ukrainians.
So I am against it. Against building unity on a lie. For the recognition of the ethnic character of the Holodomor - a terrible tragedy - is a crime against historical memory.
On a national basis, they are trying to divide the dead, and the dead, who will not protect themselves. I believe that they were killed not by ethnic, but by class principle.
The legal aspect of why the Holodomor is not genocide
The UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of December 9 of 1948 states: In this Convention, genocide means the following acts committed with the intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such :
a) killing members of such a group;
b) causing serious bodily harm or mental impairment to members of such a group;
c) the deliberate creation for any group of such living conditions, which are designed for its full or partial physical destruction.
In other words, if the Holodomor 1932-1933 were defined not as a genocide of the Ukrainian people, only on the grounds that there were a majority of ethnic Ukrainians among the dead, but as a genocide of the peoples living in Ukraine, it would be much harder for me to object.
But the problem is much more complicated. Once again I will quote the definition of the UN Convention: “Genocide means the following actions committed with the intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such”.
In other words, it is necessary to prove the intention of Stalin and his people to organize the Holodomor in Ukraine according to the ethnic principle. That is, on the basis of closed archives, it is legally documented to establish that Stalin deliberately set and achieved the goal of killing not just people who are independent from the authorities in Ukraine, but ethnic Ukrainians.
I perfectly understand the small chances that such evidence can be found in the archives. Maybe they are not, or they were destroyed. But as long as Stalin’s intention to destroy the ethnic Ukrainians by the Holodomor has not been documented legally, the term genocide should be abandoned. Or - to demand a change in the UN Convention, deleting the word "intention" from there.
In two other cases, there is legally reliable evidence of the genocide.
Adolf Hitler's Work
20 January 1942 on Fr. Wannsee near Berlin at Am Großen Wannsee, d. 56-58, an official meeting of representatives of ministries and branches of power of Nazi Germany was held. Following this meeting, the official and legitimate authorities of the country adopted a legally impeccable, binding document: the final protocol.
He envisaged a final solution to the Jewish question, including the eviction of Jews and hard labor. This document is preserved. A copy of Luther, SS brigadeführer and participant of the Wannsee Conference was found in 1947 in the archive of the German Foreign Ministry.
So, there was a legally impeccable decision about the mass murder of Jews. It was accepted by the lawful authorities of Germany. Preserved the document. This is the proven intention, the proven intent to destroy the Jews on an ethnic basis.
The work of Petro Poroshenko
Poroshenko signed a decree on the decision of the National Security Council from 4.11. "On urgent measures to stabilize the socio-economic situation in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions." This document “instructs the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, together with the Ministry of Justice, to inform the Secretary General of the Council of Europe about the measures taken by Ukraine in certain territories in the area of the ATO that deviate from the country's international obligations in the field of human rights and freedoms, but necessary in connection with the existing danger to the Ukrainian nation”.
Main among the measures "retreating from the country's international obligations in the field of human rights and freedoms" is the deprivation of pensions and social benefits of citizens of Ukraine living in the territories not controlled by Kiev in Donetsk and Lugansk regions. This is provided for by the UN Convention. Not ethnic, but social genocide: premeditated creation for any group of such living conditions that are designed for its full or partial physical destruction;
This is a deliberate creation of life conditions for a group of Donetsk and Lugansk pensioners, which are designed for their full or partial physical destruction. In my opinion, Poroshenko violated the Constitution, which Art. 24 guarantees equality of citizens of Ukraine before the law, as well as Art. 46., Guaranteeing the right to security in old age. All these pensioners are citizens of Ukraine, and the Constitution clearly speaks of their rights.
In my opinion, Poroshenko violated the law “On the protection of human rights and freedoms that were immensely legalized for the number of hours of occupation of the territory of Ukraine”, adopted under Turchinov. Even this extrajudicial act recognizes that “the time of the territory of Ukraine is paid off by the territory of Ukraine, by a part of the territory of Ukraine, the laws of the Constitution are to be expanded”.
It turns out that the laws of Ukraine ceased to apply to pensioners of Donbass. Two publications finally convinced me of the genocidal nature of the actions.
Irina Vedernikova quoted Poroshenko’s words about the residents of Donetsk and Lugansk regions in the Mirror of the Week issue: “we will have work - they don’t, we will have pensions, they don’t, we take care of children, pensioners will –– they don’t “Our children will go to schools and kindergartens — they will be in basements with them.”
Began to understand. It turns out that this is his speech at the Opera Theater in Odessa 23 October 2014. And here I find a publication on Victoria Syumar's website “Stop Fake”
http://www.stopfake.org/lozh-petr-poroshenko-poobeshhal-chto-deti-donbassa-budut-sidet-v-podvalah/
The site is supposedly devoted to the fight against untruthful information about events in Ukraine. In fact - this otmazyvanie words Poroshenko. See how they manipulate doing for the Russian-speaking reader:
“Poroshenko talks about the current situation in the Donbass, and not about a possible situation in the future. Therefore, Channel One not only took the words out of context, but also translated them inaccurately. Poroshenko speaks in Ukrainian “We have Robot bude - they don't have. We will have pensions, they won’t have any” (that is, not now). Therefore, when translated into Russian, it would be incorrect to translate this sentence as “We will have pensions, they will not have them” (in this case, in the Ukrainian version it would be “We will have pensions, they will not have any”), since due to such manipulation it can really create an erroneous impression that the president is talking about the future tense - that the residents of Donbass allegedly will not have pensions in the future.”
Here lies all, from the first to the last word.
“We will have pensions, they don’t have” is not translated, as Syumar suggests, “that is, not now.” There is no "that is." "Not much" means - no, it will not. If Poroshenko would like to say, “we will have pensions, but they don’t have them now,” he would have said in Ukrainian: “we will have pensions - they don’t, ZARAZ”. And about the future Poroshenko does not speak. In Ukrainian, the “future” is “Maybutn.”
You see, the people of Syumar are already beginning to otmzyvat Poroshenko's genocide.
Information