To Stop WW3 Do The People Need To Kill This Batch Of The Worlds So Called Leaders?

To Stop WW3 Do The People Need To Kill This Batch Of The Worlds So Called Leaders?

 

Firstoff, because of my personal Christian beliefs I cannot condone killing anyone unless you, your family, your loved ones or your Country are being attacked with deadly force. So, for anyone to walk up to another person and kill them just because you don’t like them as a person, that would make you a murderer. We are told that we are all to pray for our Leaders, executing them is something that is not in the Scriptures. But one may well say, what about other Countries Leaders, is that allowed? Are those other Countries Leaders at war with you or with your Country? That, might be a more difficult question to answer than it seems.  If we believe that another Countries Leaders are at war with your Country, does that mean that the people of that Country are at war with you also? What about the so-called Leaders of your own Country, are they at war with you and your Country’s Constitutional rights? If you believe that they are and you cannot vote them out of positions of power, is it okay to kill them? I know, so many questions, but are there any correct answers?

 

There are many very evil people who are in positions of power all over the world, and that does include here in the U.S., can we the people ever get rid of all of them? Personally I believe that the answer to that question is no we can’t. Here in the U.S. we have evil people scattered throughout both of our Nation’s major political parties, they are not all on one side. I personally believe that there are many Nations of Earth that would love to conquer and or destroy every inch of ground that we call home, yet the same can be said for every Nation on the planet. I personally believe that President Putin of Russia is a very evil human being, I believe that he is a liar, a thief and a mass murderer and that he would love to bring an end to the United States. But, I do not believe that the vast majority of the Russian people are our enemies, I believe that their own President is their biggest enemy. I believe that Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping would love to blow the U.S. off of the World Map, but I do not believe that the vast majority of their people are our enemies either. Outside of the Nations where Demonic Religious Zealots rule, I do not consider the other people of the world to be each others enemies. Outside of these Zealots, most people of the Earth tend to want the same things, peace, safety, housing, food, good health, electricity and the trash picked up off the streets each week. I believe that it is these ‘Leaders’ that cause all of the people’s ill’s.

 

A simple solution it would seem would be to simply execute these horrible self-serving Leaders and get new ones, better ones installed, but would that really work? Could we simply lock up all of these evil Leaders? Yes, we could, but would that really do us or the World any good? Here in the U.S. if we locked up Donald the Donkey Trump and all of his household except for the First Lady and Barron his 12-year-old son, we would end up having Mike Pence as our President. I have family who lives in his home State of Indiana and I have many readers from Indiana who have told me that in their opinion Pence is even more dangerous than Trump, and that in itself is a rather scary thought. Pence, just like the Republican Party in general have very much proven to be for sale to the highest bidders but do not get me wrong on this issue, I believe just as lowly of the Democratic Party Leadership. Remember in November of 2016 we the people were given the choice of two habitual lying crooks to be our President. One was very smart (Hillary) the other a total idiot (Trump), yet both still very evil. If a Nation replaces their Leaders what are the people going to get in return, more crooks, more liars, more murderers? To me, by my beliefs, all any people of any Nation can do is to pray for worldwide peace and to never ever allow any politicians to ever take away your means of protecting your families. Yet never ever be the aggressor, the murderer, because if you become a murderer, even when it is from murdering an evil Leader, you and the one you murdered will end up in Hell together and that my friend is not winning the battle between good and evil, if you lose your Soul, you lost.

WORLD WAR 3 ALERT: Russia is ‘lining up tanks along our border’

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE EXPRESS NEWS)

 

WORLD WAR 3 ALERT: Russia is ‘lining up tanks along our border’ warns Ukraine

THE Ukranian President has sensationally claimed Russian military tanks are lining up along his country’s border, triggering another World War 3 alert.

Ukraine WILL defend against Russian aggression warns Klimkin

Pause

Unmute

Current Time 1:14
/
Duration 2:03

Loaded: 0%

Progress: 0%

FacebookTwitterShareFullscreen

Petro Poroshenko has shown Sky News images of what are apparently tanks gathering along the border, close to where Russia keeps its ammunition. He told the broadcaster: “This is the tank base just 18km (11 miles) from our border, this was happening in September, October, and now. This is 18km from my border, this is the same warehouse where they have their ammunition, the same where they have multi-rocket launch system, we should be prepared to protect my country.

If the whole world has no reason to trust Putin, Ukraine definitely doesn’t have a reason to go with him

Petro Poroshenko

“If the whole world has no reason to trust Putin, Ukraine definitely doesn’t have a reason to go with him.”

The Ukrainian President also appealed for help from Western leaders as tensions between the two countries threaten to boil over.

Mr Poroshenko said: “There is no red line for Vladimir Putin and this is the very strong reason why we should be together, the whole civilised world.

“Not only the leaders, with whom a very reliable partnership, but the people of UK, of Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, Japan, the whole civilised world would be together and this is very important for global security.”

READ MORE: World War 3: Ukraine digs TRENCHES and readies for Russia CLASH after martial law declared

World War 3 alert Ukraine Russia

World War 3 alert: Ukraine’s President says Russian tanks are linking up along his country’s border (Image: GETTY)

Ukraine's president says that Russia has tanks

Ukraine’s president says that Russia has tanks on the border (Image: GETTY)

This is the latest worrying developent in rising tensions between the two Soviet neighbours.

Last weekend, Russia seized three Ukrainian navy ships and their crew in the Kerch Strait, accusing them of moving into their territory.

Russia has been blocking access to the strait and has so far not released the Ukrainian sailors.

Ukraine has rejected accusations of tresspassing in the Russian waters.

Ukraine's President says Russian tanks

Ukraine’s President says Russian tanks are massing on Ukraine’s border (Image: GETTY)

It added two of its ports are effectively under blockade by their Soviet neighbour in the Azov Sea, something that Moscow has denied.

Mr Poroshenko also accused Russia of “strangling” Ukraine with continuous restrictions.

He said: “They want to hit Ukraine because through Azov Sea, and our sea ports, we export about 40% of our industrial production.

“This is another step for a Russian organised embargo, only buying Ukrainian goods, switching off the natural gas, this is part of the hybrid war that Russia want to attack us.”

Ukrainian soldiers stationed in Mariupol

Ukrainian soldiers stationed in Mariupol (Image: GETTY)

Yesterday, Ukrainian troops started digging trenches after martial law was declared in the country for 30 days.

One Ukrainian soldier, Timokha, explained that due to the declaration of martial law, they were seeing a significant increase in military operations.

He said: “Under martial law, we’re watching the enemy more closely, we’ve put up more observation posts.”

The soldier explained that they were packing emergency rations and ammunition into the trenches “so if something comes up, we can counter an attack by the enemy and move in various directions, not be tied to one place”.

Ukrainian soldiers dig trenches

Ukrainian soldiers dig trenches (Image: GETTY)

Vladimir Putin to ‘pay a price’ for Ukraine aggression says MEP

Play Video

Another soldier, Trotsky, added the soldiers were feeling more threatened from the Sea of Azov following the seizure of the three Ukrainian vessels.

He said: “It’s like we’re boxed in, like we’re surrounded.”

According to Sergiy, a Ukrainian soldier stationed at Mariupol’s port, little has changed for the troops in the area because they have been ready for conflict since Crimea was annexed by Russia.

Sergiy said: “Nothing has changed for us with the introduction of martial law. We’re already into our fifth year of war.”

Additional reporting by Paul Withers.

Michael Cohen pleads guilty to lying to Congress about Trump real estate project in Russia

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE JOURNAL TIMES)

 

Michael Cohen pleads guilty to lying to Congress about Trump real estate project in Russia

  •  0
TRY 1 MONTH FOR 99¢
Trump Lawyer Investigation
FILE – In this Aug. 21, 2018, file photo, Michael Cohen leaves Federal court, in New York. Cohen, President Trump’s ex-lawyer, is making an court appearance before a federal judge in New York on Thursday, Nov. 29. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File)

NEW YORK (AP) — Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about work he did on a Trump real estate deal in Russia.

Cohen made a surprise appearance Thursday in a New York courtroom at around 9 a.m.

He admitted to making false statements in 2017 to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about a plan to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

In August, Cohen pleaded guilty to other federal charges involving his taxi businesses, bank fraud and his campaign work for Trump.

Putin The Habitual Liar: 8 Putin Claims Regarding the Kerch Strait Incident

(THIS INFORMATION IS COURTESY OF THE NEWS ORGANIZATION POLYGRAPH.INFO)

 

Video Fact Check: 8 Putin Claims Regarding the Kerch Strait Incident


RUSSIA -- Russian President Vladimir Putin reacts during a session of the VTB Capital Investment Forum "Russia Calling!" in Moscow, November 28, 2018
RUSSIA — Russian President Vladimir Putin reacts during a session of the VTB Capital Investment Forum “Russia Calling!” in Moscow, November 28, 2018
Vladimir Putin

Vladimir Putin

President of the Russian Federation

Multiple claims are covered, see below.

MULTIPLE CLAIMS (SEE ARTICLE)

There are questions about several of Putin’s claims.

On November 28, Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed Sunday’s incident in the Black Sea. When a Russian coast guard vessel rammed a Ukrainian naval tugboat, Russian vessels fired shots at the tug and two Ukrainian patrol boats near the Kerch Strait. At the VTB Bank Investment Forum in Moscow, Putin answered reporters’ questions – making a number of statements that are either false, unverified, or possibly true but in a misleading way. You can watch what he said and our verdicts in the video here:

No media source currently available

0:002:550:00

Read more about it below:

PUTIN: “In regards to the incident in the Black Sea – that, without a doubt, was a provocation.”

TRUE: This may be true, but if so, it was a Russian provocation, not a Ukrainian one. The Russian ships engaged the Ukrainian boats aggressively, even as the Ukrainian naval boats acted in accordance with a bilateral treaty signed by Putin in 2003.The treaty grants free passage through the Kerch strait to commercial and naval vessels of Ukraine and Russia. The Ukrainian Navy claims their vessel gave notification of its intent to transit the strait.

Alec Luhn

@ASLuhn

Essentially what happened is Ukraine tried to send 3 naval ships into the shared Azov Sea through the Kerch Strait, which is spanned by the Crimean bridge. Russia rammed one and later opened fire on another. It’s closed traffic through the Kerch Strait https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russian-ship-rams-navy-tugboat-off-crimea-azov/29619665.html 

Kyiv Says Russian Ship Rams Ukrainian Navy Tugboat Off Crimea

Ukraine says a Russian coast guard vessel has rammed one of its navy tugboats off the Moscow-annexed Crimean Peninsula in “openly aggressive actions,” resulting in damage to the ship.

rferl.org

404 people are talking about this

PUTIN: “A provocation, organized by the current Ukrainian authorities, I think by the current president ahead of presidential elections in Ukraine in March of the next year.”

FALSE: Putin is implying that the incident was organized by Ukrainian President Poroshenko in order to justify calling off elections scheduled for next year via his decree of martial law. However, the period of martial law will expire on December 26, months before the election, and will only include areas of the country embroiled in conflict.

___________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “Something needed to be done to escalate the situation and create insurmountable obstacles for his contestants, especially those from the opposition.”

UNCLEAR: This is unclear, because it is unverifiable. Although it is true that Putin’s own approval rating has been boosted by military adventures abroad.

_____________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “…in 2014 when Crimea decided to join Russia…”

FALSE: The Crimea didn’t “decide to join Russia.” The Russian military took the peninsula in unmarked uniforms and the part of the region “voted” under Russian occupation.

_____________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “The hard events of a civil war in Ukraine in the south-east in Donetsk and Luhansk regions.”

FALSE: There is no civil war in those regions, but rather a Russian invasion and occupation.

_____________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “So what happened now? They did not respond to requests from our border guard, they entered our territorial waters, the waters that were our territorial even before Crimea has joined the Russian Federation.”

FALSE: Use of the strait is governed by the bilateral treaty between the two countries renewed in 2003.By agreement, the the strait and the sea of Azov are considered internal waters of both Ukraine and Russia, and provides for free passage for vessels of both nations.A maritime expert, and radio intercepts, placed the vessels at the 12 nautical mile point in the Black Sea, where Crimean territorial waters end.

(see original fact check on this topic, linked above)

_____________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “Today authorities in Kyiv successfully sell anti-Russian sentiments; they have nothing else left to sell.”

MISLEADING: Anti-Russian sentiments in Ukraine follow the Russian invasion and occupation of its territory – Crimea in early 2014 and the ongoing Eastern Ukraine conflict, fomented by Russian actors.

_____________________________________________________________

PUTIN: “No matter what they (Ukrainians) do, they get away with it. If they demand today infants for breakfast, they, probably, will be served infants”

FALSE: Ukraine’s leadership is routinely criticized by Western governments and human rights watchdogs on a number of topics from corruption and slow reforms, to failure to uphold human rights and press freedom.

Paul Manafort broke plea agreement, lied to investigators in Russia probe

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE JOURNAL TIMES)

(IF MANAFORT DID DO THIS HE IS EITHER A TOTAL FOOL AS HE WOULD KNOW THAT HE WILL SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN A FEDERAL PRISON, OR PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS GOTTEN A MESSAGE TO HIM THAT HE WILL GIVE HIM A PARDON IF HE SHUTS UP ABOUT THE RUSSIA PROBE. iF THIS IS THE CASE, MANAFORT WOULD BE BETTING HIS FREEDOM ON PRESIDENT TRUMP ACTUALLY TELLING HIM THE TRUTH ABOUT GIVING HIM A PARDON. MY QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU OR HE, BET YOUR LIFE ON TRUMP BEING TRUTHFUL TO YOU, FOR ONCE?)(oldpoet56)

Prosecutors: Paul Manafort broke plea agreement, lied to investigators in Russia probe

  • Updated 
  •  0
TRY 3 MONTHS FOR $3
Paul Manafort
Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort

WASHINGTON (AP) — Special counsel Robert Mueller is accusing former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort of lying to federal investigators in the Russia probe, in breach of his plea agreement.

Prosecutors say in a new court filing that after Manafort agreed to truthfully cooperate with the investigation, he “committed federal crimes” by lying about “a variety of subject matters.” They are now asking a federal judge to set a date to sentence him.

Subscribe to Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Manafort is denying that he lied. His attorneys say in the same filing that he believes he “provided truthful information.”

Manafort had been meeting with the special counsel’s office since he pleaded guilty in September and agreed to cooperate. He remains jailed while awaiting his sentence. He faces multiple years in prison.

Ukraine Considers Martial Law After Russia Seizes Its Ships Near Crimea

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF NPR NEWS)

 

Ukraine Considers Martial Law After Russia Seizes Its Ships Near Crimea

The Nikopol gunboat (left) and the Yany Kapu tugboat of the Ukrainian navy are tugged to the Kerch Seaport.

Sergei Malgavko/TASS via Getty Images

Russian warships seized three Ukrainian naval vessels on Sunday in a narrow waterway that provides access from the Black Sea to the much smaller Sea of Azov near Crimea, ramping up already bitter tensions between the two countries.

On Sunday, Russia dispatched warplanes to patrol the area after the Ukrainian navy tried to send the ships through the Kerch Strait, a waterway with strategic significance for both countries that passes under a newly built Russian bridge.

In May, President Vladimir Putin personally opened the bridge over the Kerch Strait, connecting the Crimea peninsula — which Moscow seized in 2014 — to Russia’s mainland.

The 12-mile-long span has been touted by Russia as a claim to Crimea. Ukraine, along with nearly every other country in the world, refuses to recognize that claim.

Russian vessels rammed one of the Ukrainian boats and opened fire on the other two before seizing all three, along with their crews. Ukrainian officials have said six of its sailors were injured; Russia has said three. The boats were towed to a nearby port.

Video from a Russian ship, including strong language from the bridge crew, shows it ramming a Ukrainian tug boat — one of the three vessels that was reportedly seized.

In response, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called a late-night meeting with top security officials in the capital city of Kiev.

Poroshenko described the incident as open Russian aggression and said he planned to ask parliament to approve the imposition of martial law. Doing so would restrict Ukrainians’ civil liberties and increase state power and give the unpopular president a free hand to postpone elections in March, where he faces an uphill battle to hold onto power.

Russian state media said Poroshenko provoked the maritime incident as a means of delaying the election — and potentially to raise the stakes between President Trump and Putin, who are due to meet later this week.

Trump has not commented on the incident.

Russia accused Ukraine of illegally entering its waters. A spokesman for the FSB, the country’s Federal Security Service — which oversees the coast guard — said the Ukrainian vessels violated territorial waters and had to be stopped.

As Reuters reports:

“The FSB said it had been forced to act because the ships — two small Ukrainian armored artillery vessels and a tug boat — had illegally entered its territorial waters, attempted illegal actions, and ignored warnings to stop while maneuvering dangerously.”

“This is a very dangerous provocation, which requires particular attention and a special investigation,” Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told state media.

The FSB will release evidence proving “Kiev’s plans to carry out a provocation in the Black Sea,” state media said.

Ukraine says its vessels were in operating in accordance with international maritime rules.

The incident sparked an international response and concern mainly for Ukraine over its more powerful nemesis.

The European Union issued a statement “urging all sides to act with utmost restraint.” NATO called for “restraint and deescalation.”

“NATO fully supports Ukraine’s sovereignty and its territorial waters,” NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu said in a statement. “We call on Russia to ensure unhindered access to Ukrainian posts in the Azov Sea, in accordance with international law.”

The United Nations Security Council is expected to hold an emergency meeting on the incident Monday.

Russia blocked off the strait before the incident and reopened it to commercial shipping early Monday.

Relations between the countries have gone steadily downhill since Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimea peninsula. Ukraine continues to wage a low-level war against a pro-Moscow separatist insurgency in the eastern part of the country.

The Kerch Strait and Sea of Azov are shared territorial waters, according to a 2003 treaty. Russia has focused on exerting more control over the waterway since the annexation — with the Kerch bridge being a key move.

Enlarge this image

The Russian embassy is seen covered in smoke during a protest of activists, following an incident in the Black Sea near the Crimea annexed by Russia, in which three Ukrainian naval vessels were seized by a Russian border guard vessels.

/Pavlo Conchar/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Ukranians reacted to the maritime standoff with anger. About 150 reportedly gathered outside the Russian embassy in Kiev, where a car with Russian diplomatic plates was set on fire.

“We gathered here today to protest against Russians over their actions today, over shooting of our military,” protester Oleksiy Ryabov told Reuters. “We are very angry. We should have severed all diplomatic relations with this country a long time ago.”

Far-right protesters reportedly burned tires outside the Russian consulate inthe western Ukrainian city of Lviv, saying Poroshenko is not aggressive enough in his relationship with Russia.

NPR’s Lucian Kim contributed to this report.

PLO Commander: We Support Russia’s Move to Revive Political Process

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE SAUDI NEWS AGENCY ASHARQ AL-AWSAT)

 

PLO Commander: We Support Russia’s Move to Revive Political Process

Sunday, 25 November, 2018 – 09:30
The Palestine Liberation Organization office is seen in Washington, U.S., November 19, 2017. (File Photo: Reuters)
Ramallah- Kifah Zboun
The Palestinian leadership supports any Russian move to revive the political process in order to bring an end to the Israeli occupation, said Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee member Wasel Abu Youssef.

Speaking to Asharq al-Awsat, Abu Youssef stated that the PLO is confident of any role played by Russia and hopes that there will be a serious approach to starting a path leading to ending the occupation.

“We asked its (Russian) officials to join forces with most of the world’s countries in order to block US decisions against the Palestinian people and their rights,” asserted Abu Yusuf.

He described Russia as a “friendly country” of the Palestinians that has always supported the rights of the Palestinian people.

He explained that “basically we were looking forward to an effective Russian role within the mechanism of an international alternative to the path of the previous settlement, which was exclusively sponsored by the United States.”

“We expect Russia, China, the EU to be a major part of the international mechanism. We want an international role in the face of the deal of the century.”

Earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Russia would be ready to host a meeting between Palestinians and Israel and to act as a mediator.

“It is impossible to create stability in the Middle East, including in Libya and Iraq, without a solution to the oldest regional problem, the Palestinian problem,” Lavrov said on his trip to Rome.

“We support the need for a resumption of direct talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. We confirm again our offer from several years ago to host a meeting between the Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Russia without any preconditions,” asserted the Russian Minister.

It is not clear if Lavrov’s statement meant that Russia would play a role in the political process or merely an attempt to bring the views closer and break the deadlock.

A few weeks ago, Russia’s special envoy to the Middle East and Africa, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, confirmed his country’s support for the initiative proposed by the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to hold an “international peace conference.”

Bogdanov praised “Abbas’ wise stances that support stability in the region on the basis of the international legitimacy resolutions.”

The Russian official reiterated his country’s support for the Palestinian people and their right to determine their fate and to establish an independent state on the 1967 border, with Eastern Jerusalem as its capital.

Abbas is seeking to launch an international peace conference, which will result in an international mechanism involving the quartet committee, including the United States, and European and Arab states, consisting of five or seven states under the umbrella of the United Nations, which is at the heart of a political process with the Palestinians and Israelis.

Abbas tried to convince France of his initiative, but French President Emmanuel Macron was not convinced, unlike his predecessor, Francois Hollande, who launched a two-phase conference in 2016 and 2017.

The Palestinian President personally worked to persuade Russian President Vladimir Putin to launch an international peace conference using his influence in the region.

The Palestinian ambassador to Moscow Abed al-Hafeez Nofal said that Russia, and not just the US, now has an effective role in the region due to the great changes that have taken place in the Middle East.

US officials said President Donald Trump wanted to see the plan executed in February, but his advisers would prefer a more cautious approach, given the political crisis that swept through Israel over the past week.

Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said that reaching peace is currently impossible and that Trump should focus his energy elsewhere until the Palestinians are ready to compromise.

“I think, personally, it is a waste of time,” Shaked said.

Abbas has repeatedly declared that he would not even listen to the plan after the US declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the transfer of the US embassy to the city, and other decisions taken by the US administration against the Palestinian Authority.

Israel says Washington is the only country capable of overseeing negotiations.

Finland: Truth, Knowledge, History Of This Ancient North European Nation

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE CIA WORLD FACTBOOK)

 

Finland

Introduction Finland was a province and then a grand duchy under Sweden from the 12th to the 19th centuries, and an autonomous grand duchy of Russia after 1809. It won its complete independence in 1917. During World War II, it was able to successfully defend its freedom and resist invasions by the Soviet Union – albeit with some loss of territory. In the subsequent half century, the Finns made a remarkable transformation from a farm/forest economy to a diversified modern industrial economy; per capita income is now on par with Western Europe. A member of the European Union since 1995, Finland was the only Nordic state to join the euro system at its initiation in January 1999.
History Prehistory

Prehistoric red ochre painted rock art of moose, human figures and boats in Astuvansalmi in Ristiina, the Southern Savonia region from ca. 3800–2200 BCE

According to archaeological evidence, the area now composing Finland was first settled around 8500 BCE during the Stone Age as the ice shield of the last ice age receded. The earliest people were hunter-gatherers, living primarily off what the tundra and sea could offer. Pottery is known from around 5300 BCE (see Comb Ceramic Culture).The arrival of the Battle Axe culture (or Cord-Ceramic Culture) in southern coastal Finland around 3200 BCE may have coincided with the start of agriculture. However, the earliest certain records of agriculture are from the late third millennium BCE. Even with the introduction of agriculture, hunting and fishing continued to be important parts of the subsistence economy, especially in the northern and eastern parts of the country.

The Bronze Age (1500–500 BCE) and Iron Age (500 BCE–1200 CE) were characterised by extensive contacts with other cultures in the Fennoscandian and Baltic regions. There is no consensus on when Finno-Ugric languages and Indo-European languages were first spoken in the area of contemporary Finland.

Swedish era (until 1809)

The sea fortress of Suomenlinna was founded by a discusion of the Swedish Diet in 1747 as a defence works and naval base, to be built on the islands off Helsinki.

Sweden established its official rule of Finland in the 13th century by the crown. Swedish became a dominant language of the nobility, administration and education; Finnish was chiefly a language for the peasantry, clergy and local courts in predominantly Finnish-speaking countries. The Bishop of Turku was usually the most important person in Finland during the Catholic era.

The Middle Ages ended with the Reformation when the Finns gradually converted to Lutheranism. In the 16th century, Mikael Agricola published the first written works in Finnish. The first university in Finland, The Royal Academy of Turku, was established in 1640. In the 18th century, wars between Sweden and Russia led to occupation of Finland twice by Russian forces, known to the Finns as the Greater Wrath (1714–1721) and the Lesser Wrath (1742–1743). By this time “Finland” was the predominant term for the whole area from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Russian border.

Grand Duchy in the Russian Empire (1809–1917)

Main article: Grand Duchy of Finland

On March 29, 1809, after being conquered by the armies of Alexander I of Russia in the Finnish War, Finland became an autonomous Grand Duchy in the Russian Empire until the end of 1917. During the Russian era, the Finnish language started to gain recognition, first probably to sever the cultural and emotional ties with Sweden and thereafter, from the 1860s onwards, as a result of a strong nationalism, known as the Fennoman movement. Milestones included the publication of what would become Finland’s national epic, the Kalevala, in 1835; and the Finnish language achieving equal legal status with Swedish in 1892.

Despite the Finnish famine of 1866-1868 – the last major famine in Europe – in which about 15 percent of the population died, political and economic development was rapid from the 1860s onwards. The disaster of famine led Russian Empire to ease regulation and investment rose in following decades.[7] The GDP per capita was still a half of United States and a third of Great Britain.

In 1906, universal suffrage was adopted in the Grand Duchy of Finland, the second country in the world where this happened. However, the relationship between the Grand Duchy and the Russian Empire soured when the Russian government made moves to restrict Finnish autonomy. For example, the universal suffrage was, in practice, virtually meaningless, since the emperor did not approve any of the laws adopted by the Finnish parliament. Desire for independence gained ground, first among radical nationalists and socialists.

Civil War (1917–1918) and early independence

On December 6, 1917, shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Finland declared its independence, which was approved by Bolshevist Russia.

Contrary to Lenin’s and Finnish socialists’ expectations, the majority of Finns voted non-socialists parties in 1917 general elections. Soon in 1918, the violent wing of social democratic party started a coup, which led a brief but bitter Civil War that affected domestic politics for many decades afterwards. The Civil War was fought between “the Whites”, who were supported by Imperial Germany, and “the Reds”, supported by Bolshevist Russia. Eventually, the Whites overcame the Reds. The deep social and political enmity between the Reds and Whites remained. The civil war and activist expeditions (see Heimosodat) to the Soviet Union strained eastern relations.

After a brief flirtation with monarchy, Finland became a presidential republic, with Kaarlo Juho Ståhlberg elected as its first president in 1919. The Finnish–Russian border was determined by the Treaty of Tartu in 1920, largely following the historic border but granting Pechenga (Finnish: Petsamo) and its Barents Sea harbour to Finland. Finnish democracy didn’t see any more Soviet coup attempts and survived the anti-Communist Lapua Movement. The relationship between Finland and the Soviet Union was tense. Finnish ethnicity was targeted by genocide in the Soviet Union, though little of that was known in Finland. Finland disliked all forms of socialism, leading Germany’s national socialism to deteriorate relations with Germany. Military was trained in France instead and relations to Western Europe and Sweden were strengthened.

In 1917 the population was 3 million. Land reform was enacted after the civil war, increasing the percantage of capital-owning population.[7] About 70% of workers were occupied in agriculture and 10% in industry.[8] The largest export markets were United Kingdom and Germany. Great Depression in the early ’30s was relatively light in Finland.

Finland during World War II

During World War II, Finland fought the Soviet Union twice: in the Winter War of 1939–40 after the Soviet Union had attacked Finland and in the Continuation War of 1941–44, following Operation Barbarossa in which Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Following German losses on the Eastern Front and the subsequent Soviet advance, Finland was forced to make peace with the Soviet Union. This was followed by the Lapland War of 1944–45, when Finland forced the Germans out of northern Finland.

The treaties signed in 1947 and 1948 with the Soviet Union included Finnish obligations, restraints, and reparations as well as further Finnish territorial concessions (cf. the Moscow Peace Treaty of 1940). Finland ceded most of Finnish Karelia, Salla, and Pechenga, which amounted to ten percent of its land area and twenty percent of its industrial capacity. Some 400,000 evacuees, mainly women and children, fled these areas. Establishing trade with the Western powers, such as the United Kingdom, and the reparations to the Soviet Union caused Finland to transform itself from a primarily agrarian economy to an industrialised one. Even after the reparations had been paid off, Finland continued to trade with the Soviet Union in the framework of bilateral trade.

Cold war

In 1950 a half of the workers was occupied in agriculture and a third lived in urban towns.[9] The new jobs in manufacturing, services and trade quickly attracted people towns. The average number of births per woman declined from baby boom peak 3.5 in 1947 to 1.5 in 1973.[9] When baby boomers entered the workforce, the economy didn’t generate jobs fast enough and hundreds of thousands emigrated to the more industrialized Sweden, migration peaking in 1969 and 1970.[9] This mass migration is largely the reason why 4.7 percent of Sweden’s population speak Finnish today.

Officially claiming to be neutral, Finland lay in the grey zone between the Western countries and the Soviet Union. The “YYA Treaty” (Finno-Soviet Pact of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance) gave the Soviet Union some leverage in Finnish domestic politics. This was extensively exploited by President Urho Kekkonen against his opponents. He maintained an effective monopoly on Soviet relations, which gave him a status of “only choice for president”. There was also a tendency of self-censorship regarding Finno-Soviet relations. This phenomenon was given the name “Finlandisation” by the German press (fi. suomettuminen). When Finlandisation was not enough, direct censorship was used, including in 1700 books and many movies, and asylym-seeking defectors were returned to be killed by the Soviet Union. Soviets created and financed anti-Western and pro-Soviet youth movements peaking in 70s, when communist-led Teen Union harassed teachers suspected of bourgeois ideas, and their former members have still a lot power. Soviet intelligence services sometimes used their contacts to install personnel in the administration, mass media, academia, political parties and trade unions. Politicization was widespread and public sector workers were often dependent on having the correct political party membership.

However, Finland maintained a democratic government and a market economy unlike most other countries bordering the Soviet Union. Property rights were strong. While nationalization committees were set up in France and UK, Finland avoided nationalizations. After failed experiments with protectionism, Finland eased restrictions and made a free trade agreement with the European Community in 1973, making its markets more competitive. Local education market expanded and an increasing number of Finns also went to have education in the United States or Western Europe, bringing back advanced skills. There was quite common, but pragmatic-minded, credit and investment cooperation by state and corporations, though it was considered with suspicion. Support for capitalism was widespread.[7] Savings rate hovered among the world’s highest, at around 8% until 80s. In the beginning of the 1970s, Finland’s GDP per capita reached the level of Japan and the UK. Finland’s development shared many aspects with Asian countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan.[7]

Having been targeted by Soviet intelligence and youth propaganda, liberals lost support and socialist-majority generations seized power in 70s and 80s. Corporatism and taxes were increased. The power of social democrats and the almost overnight-grown trade union SAK became hegemonic in politics.[10] In 1991 Finland fell into a Great Depression-magnitude depression caused by combination economic overheating, depressed Western, Soviet and local markets, and disappearance of Soviet barter system. Stock market and housing prices declined by 50%.[11] The growth in the 1980s was based on debt, and when the defaults began rolling in, GDP declined by 15% and unemployment increased from a virtual full employment to one fifth of the workforce. The crisis was amplified by trade unions’ initial opposition to any reforms. Politicians struggled to cut spending and the public debt doubled to around 60% of GDP.[11] After devaluations the depression bottomed out in 1993.

Liberalization and integration with the West

Like other Nordic countries, Finland has liberalized the economy since late 80s. Financial and product market regulation was removed. The market is now one of the most free in Europe. State enterprises were privatized and taxes were cut. However, unlike in Denmark, trade unions blocked job market reforms, causing persistent unemployment and a two-tier job market. Trade unions also blocked social security reform proposals towards basic income or negative income tax. Finland joined the European Union in 1995. The central bank was given an inflation-targeting mandate until Finland joined eurozone.[11] The growth rate has since been one of the highest of OECD countries and Finland has topped many indicators of national performance.

In addition to fast integration with the European Union, safety against Russian leverage has been increased by building fully NATO-compatible military. 1000 troops (a high per-capita amount) are simultaneously committed in NATO operations. Finland has also opposed energy projects that increase dependency on Moscow.[12] At the same time, Finland remains one of the last non-members in Europe and there seems to be not enough support for full membership unless Sweden joins first.[13]

The population is aging with the birth rate at 10.42 births/1,000 population or fertility rate at 1.8.[9] With median age at 41.6 years Finland is one of the oldest countries [14] and a half of voters is estimated to be over 50 years old. Like most European countries, without further reforms or much higher immigration Finland is expected to struggle with demographics, even though macroeconomic projections are healthier than in most other developed countries.

Geography Location: Northern Europe, bordering the Baltic Sea, Gulf of Bothnia, and Gulf of Finland, between Sweden and Russia
Geographic coordinates: 64 00 N, 26 00 E
Map references: Europe
Area: total: 338,145 sq km
land: 304,473 sq km
water: 33,672 sq km
Area – comparative: slightly smaller than Montana
Land boundaries: total: 2,681 km
border countries: Norway 727 km, Sweden 614 km, Russia 1,340 km
Coastline: 1,250 km
Maritime claims: territorial sea: 12 nm (in the Gulf of Finland – 3 nm)
contiguous zone: 24 nm
exclusive fishing zone: 12 nm; extends to continental shelf boundary with Sweden
continental shelf: 200-m depth or to the depth of exploitation
Climate: cold temperate; potentially subarctic but comparatively mild because of moderating influence of the North Atlantic Current, Baltic Sea, and more than 60,000 lakes
Terrain: mostly low, flat to rolling plains interspersed with lakes and low hills
Elevation extremes: lowest point: Baltic Sea 0 m
highest point: Haltiatunturi 1,328 m
Natural resources: timber, iron ore, copper, lead, zinc, chromite, nickel, gold, silver, limestone
Land use: arable land: 6.54%
permanent crops: 0.02%
other: 93.44% (2005)
Irrigated land: 640 sq km (2003)
Total renewable water resources: 110 cu km (2005)
Freshwater withdrawal (domestic/industrial/agricultural): total: 2.33 cu km/yr (14%/84%/3%)
per capita: 444 cu m/yr (1999)
Natural hazards: NA
Environment – current issues: air pollution from manufacturing and power plants contributing to acid rain; water pollution from industrial wastes, agricultural chemicals; habitat loss threatens wildlife populations
Environment – international agreements: party to: Air Pollution, Air Pollution-Nitrogen Oxides, Air Pollution-Persistent Organic Pollutants, Air Pollution-Sulfur 85, Air Pollution-Sulfur 94, Air Pollution-Volatile Organic Compounds, Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic-Marine Living Resources, Antarctic Treaty, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Hazardous Wastes, Law of the Sea, Marine Dumping, Marine Life Conservation, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling
signed, but not ratified: none of the selected agreements
Geography – note: long boundary with Russia; Helsinki is northernmost national capital on European continent; population concentrated on small southwestern coastal plain
Politics Politics of Finland takes place in a framework of a semi-presidential representative democratic republic and of a multi-party system. The President of Finland is the head of state, leads the foreign policy, and is the Commander-in-Chief of the Defense Forces. The Prime Minister of Finland is the head of government; executive power is exercised by the government. Legislative power is vested in the Parliament of Finland, and the government has limited rights to amend or extend legislation. The president has the power of veto over parliamentary decisions although it can be overrun by the parliament.

Judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. The Judiciary consists of two systems, regular courts and administrative courts, headed by the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court, respectively. Administrative courts process cases where official decisions are contested. There is no “Constitutional Court”, i.e. the constitutionality of a law cannot be contested.

Though Finland has a primarily parliamentary system, the president has some notable powers. The foreign policy is led by the president, “in co-operation” with the cabinet, and the same applies to matters concerning national security. The main executive power lies in the cabinet headed by the prime minister. Before the constitutional rewrite, which was completed in 2000, the president enjoyed more power.

Finns enjoy individual and political freedoms, and suffrage is universal at 18; Finland was the first country to give full eligibility to women. The country’s population is ethnically homogeneous with no sizable immigrant population. Few tensions exist between the Finnish-speaking majority and the Swedish-speaking minority, although in certain circles there is an unending debate about the status of the Swedish language. According to Transparency International, Finland has had the lowest level of corruption in all the countries studied in their survey for the last several years.

The labor agreements also pose significant political questions. Bargaining is highly centralized and often the government participates to coordinate fiscal policy. Finland has universal validity of collective labour agreements and often, but not always, the trade unions, employers and the government reach a Comprehensive Income Policy Agreement. Significant trade unions are SAK, STTK, AKAVA and EK.

People Population: 5,238,460 (July 2007 est.)
Age structure: 0-14 years: 16.9% (male 449,548/female 433,253)
15-64 years: 66.7% (male 1,768,996/female 1,727,143)
65 years and over: 16.4% (male 344,798/female 514,722) (2007 est.)
Median age: total: 41.6 years
male: 40 years
female: 43.1 years (2007 est.)
Population growth rate: 0.127% (2007 est.)
Birth rate: 10.42 births/1,000 population (2007 est.)
Death rate: 9.93 deaths/1,000 population (2007 est.)
Net migration rate: 0.78 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2007 est.)
Sex ratio: at birth: 1.04 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.038 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1.024 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.67 male(s)/female
total population: 0.958 male(s)/female (2007 est.)
Infant mortality rate: total: 3.52 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 3.84 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 3.2 deaths/1,000 live births (2007 est.)
Life expectancy at birth: total population: 78.66 years
male: 75.15 years
female: 82.31 years (2007 est.)
Total fertility rate: 1.73 children born/woman

China, Saudi Arabia And The Trump Problem: Yes, The U.S. Is A Saudi Bitch, Sort Of

China, Saudi Arabia And The Trump Problem: Yes, The U.S. Is A Saudi Bitch, Sort Of

 

If you think that I like the truth behind that title then you have been drinking too much Corn Liquor. This is a true statement whether we like it or not, and personally I do not. Now I will explain myself to you before you shoot your computer. I am going to spit out some realities to you, then you decide for yourself if we (the U.S.) are indeed a ‘Saudi Bitch’, or not. Personally when I think of the word bitch I tend to think of a female dog or of a very hateful woman, but there are other meanings. I googled the term ‘being someone’s bitch’ to see what it had to say and here is what I found, I think it fits the definition of todays letter to you quite well. “Someone who gets treated with little respect and has to follow every order (of their master). Humiliating position of servitude.”

 

You may think, well how does this fit the current situation with President Trump, the U.S., Saudi Arabia and their leaders, now I will explain why it does. You may also be wondering about how does China fit into this equation, I will explain this outlier to you in just a moment. First, no country on Earth is self-sufficient as far as their own safety is concerned unless their energy supply is self-contained and all of us know that we are not, nowhere near it. Our Nation could have and should have been self supplying decades ago but because of our politicians and corporate greed we are at the mercy of those we get our energy supplies from, the biggest of these importers to us is Saudi Arabia. The U.S. Government has for many decades aligned ourselves with Saudi Arabia and with other Sunni led Nations like Egypt while Russia has been aligning themselves with Shia Nations like Syria, Iraqi and Iran. As most everyone knows, these two sects of Islam hate each other and they have been fighting a Civil War between them in the Middle-East now for about 1,400 years. Back in the early 1970’s Saudi Arabia agreed to put their oil market on the currency of the American Dollar. Being the Saudi’s had the most known oil in the world the other oil producers of OPEC followed suit. We, the American Government, agreed to supply and train the Saudi military and to protect the Saudi Royal Family in return.

 

Back in the early 1970’s the economies of Nations like China were a small fraction of what they are today so at that time they were not really in the market for massive oil imports, but now they are.  Right now China gets a huge amount of their oil imports from Russia but that could easily change if the Saudis decided to drastically curb or even stop all of their imports to the U.S.. China could easily take up the vacuum if the Saudis cut us off. Think about it, all of the Middle-East being dominated by Russia and China with the U.S. totally shut out of the region. Also is the reality that if the U.S. Government angers the Saudi Royal family enough the Royal family could decide to quit accepting the U.S. Dollar and change the oil market to the Chinese Yuan which as of today is trading at one Dollar equals seven Yuan. What would our economy do if that flipped and it took seven Dollars to equal one Yuan? What would happen if OPEC shut off all oil imports to the U.S.? Back in 2008 our economy suffered about a 2% decline and it threw us into the deepest depression since the 1930’s, if the Saudis decided to change allegiance toward us it would make the 1930’s look like party time. Our economy would totally tank and not just from the loss of jobs in the ‘military industries’. Just the sheer size of China calling in their loans to us would bankrupt our country, today we owe China more than 10 trillion dollars of which we have no way to repay.

 

Folks, our culture here in the U.S. is not the culture of most other Nations and it definitely is not the same as the cultures of the Middle-East or of Asia. I know that the U.S. was founded on Christian morals and ethics even though our Founding Fathers did have a very warped concept of what that was. We here in the U.S. have a Constitution that all of our people and our Leaders are supposed to run our Country by, thanks to our Founding Fathers. Our Constitution may be based on Christian ideals but our Nation, by the Constitution, is not to be a ‘Church’ run Government. What I am trying to get at is that we cannot demand that other Nations obey our laws, our Constitution, or our morals. Donald Trump is a businessman, he has no clue about Christianity, ethics or our Constitution but he does recognise the power and authority of a Dictator and what a Dictator can do to business. President Trump does recognise what the Saudi Royal Crown Prince ‘MBS’ can put to bear on the U.S. businesses including his own. Simply put, the reason President Trump is now and in the future is going to kiss the ass of the Saudi Royal Family is business and business to him and to most people for that matter is more important than our morals. So, what are we as a people, as a nation, going to do? If we insist on our ethics and on our version of morals be followed by all Nations whom we do business with, then our Nation’s economy top to bottom, is going to hit rock bottom, or we can be the bitch of people like the Saudi Crown Prince. We as a Nation can not have it both ways, President Trump has chosen, it was easy for him as he doesn’t have any morals to fall back on. Our Nation’s Leaders have kissed the ass of big business for so long I have no doubt what our spineless Politicians will do now concerning the Saudi Crown Prince. So, have our Politicians over the past 45 plus years turned us into a Saudi Bitch, you decide!

 

 

Trump slanders Khashoggi and betrays American values

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE WASHINGTON POST)

 

Trump slanders Khashoggi and betrays American values


President Trump speaks to the media before leaving the White House in Washington on Nov. 20. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP)

November 20 at 5:03 PM

PRESIDENT TRUMP on Tuesday confirmed what his administration has been signaling all along: It will stand behind Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman even if he ordered the brutal murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. In a crude statement punctuated with exclamation points, Mr. Trump sidestepped a CIA finding that the crown prince was behind the killing; casually slandered Mr. Khashoggi, who was one of the Arab world’s most distinguished journalists; and repeated gross falsehoods and exaggerations about the benefits of the U.S. alliance with the kingdom. Mr. Trump has betrayed American values in service to what already was a bad bet on the 33-year-old prince.
As with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin’s interference in the 2016 election, Mr. Trump is justifying his affinity for a brutal and reckless leader by disregarding the findings of the U.S. intelligence community. The Post reported Friday that the CIA has concluded with “high confidence” — a rating it does not apply lightly — that Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, who while living in self-imposed exile in Virginia, wrote columns for The Post that were moderately critical of the crown prince.
Mr. Trump’s response is to grudgingly acknowledge that “it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event” before adding “maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!” He declares the truth unknowable and thus irrelevant: “We may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder.”
In fact, the truth about Mr. Khashoggi’s death is not only knowable but largely known. Audio recordings in the CIA’s possession record his actual killing as well as phone calls from the hit team to Mohammed bin Salman’s close aides. Five members of the team have been identified as probable members of the crown prince’s personal security team.
While discounting these facts, Mr. Trump bases his continued backing for the regime on false claims, including his thoroughly debunked boast that Saudi Arabia will “spend and invest $450 billion” in the United States. He says the kingdom has “been very responsive to my requests to keeping oil prices at reasonable levels,” though Riyadh is reportedly preparing to cut production to raise prices.
Worst of all, Mr. Trump libels Mr. Khashoggi, saying that “representatives of Saudi Arabia” had called him an “enemy of the state” and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. The crown prince did make those allegations in a phone call to the White House — but the regime itself was so embarrassed when The Post reported on the call that it denied making them. Mr. Khashoggi’s family has confirmed that he was not a member of the Brotherhood.
Mr. Trump concluded his statement by inviting Congress “to go in a different direction.” As in the Russia case, it must do so. Bipartisan legislation mandating sanctions for all those implicated in Mr. Khashoggi’s death is pending in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) last week gave us a statement indicating he wanted to know “what more would be done” by the administration before Congress responded. Now he knows. If Mohammed bin Salman is to be held accountable, as Mr. Corker said he must, the committee must act. The alternative is a world where dictators know they can murder their critics and suffer no consequences.

Jamaica Kitchen

nuh weh nuh nice like yard

terihagh

Enlightenment on how to make the most out of life — from the least quantity of resources available.

Mommy’s blog

POsitive words make peaceful souls

Victor. I Eshameh

Life Coach, Researcher, Creative Writer

TREATING INTERSTITIAL CYSTITIS

Remedies Put to the Test!

%d bloggers like this: