Putin Recognizes Donbass Republics, Sends Russian Military to 'Denazify' Ukraine

Arrest warrant issued for Putin by the ICC



Arrest warrants have been issued by judges at the International Criminal Court for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Commissioner for Children's Rights.

In a statement, the ICC says they are suspected of the war crime of unlawfully deporting children, from Ukraine to Russia.
Click to expand...
It says the crimes were committed in Ukraine from 24 February 2022 - when Russia launched its full-scale invasion.

Russia's commissioner for children's rights, Maria Lvova-Belova, is also wanted by the ICC for same crimes.

Judges had mulled issuing secret warrants but decided that making them public could "contribute to the prevention of the further commission of crimes".
Click to expand...

Toothless piece of distraction and propaganda, basically.

Peskov's statement
The Russian Federation does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and considers its decisions null and void, said Dmitry Peskov, commenting on the issuance by this body of a warrant for the arrest of Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

"We consider the very posing of the question outrageous and unacceptable; Russia, like a number of states, does not recognize the jurisdiction of this court and, accordingly, any decisions of this kind are null and void for the Russian Federation from the point of view of law," the Kremlin spokesman said.
Click to expand...

Expect more of this kind of nonsense as they run out of ideas, while the situation for Ukraine deteriorates rapidly.
 
From Maria Zakharova's briefing: (yesterday before this incident)

Question: Could you comment on the report of The New York Times, which, referring to current and former officials who are not authorized to state this publicly, refers to the intention of the International Criminal Court to initiate two war crimes cases related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and request arrest warrants for several people?

A: Whatever the day, The New York Times has a bunch of versions. I don't know when they have time to refill the cartridges. Please note that it is not a quote, but words attributed to some "current and former officials". This is called "managed leaks." In the UK, information work is built on all this. Now, unfortunately, this is already being done in the United States on a large scale. They didn't allow themselves to do that before. There was an institute of journalism. Now it is increasingly "crushed" by "managed leaks". What's it? "Someone said." Who? Which official? In which department? That's not said. Either current or former. Nothing is known. Why doesn't it say which department "leaked"? Because this agency can be requested officially, asked for an official position. This is all that is needed to keep the topic "afloat" endlessly and not bear any responsibility.

You know American laws. They don't turn in sources, they don't reveal. There have only been a few instances where the source has been uncovered. But to do this, it is necessary to put the entire judicial system on the "hind legs". But it's convenient. "Thrown in", no one is responsible for anything. "Let's move on." The next day they "threw in", they did not have time to deal with the previous one yet, and here is a new one. And so it is with everything. Someone said something. That's the first thing.

Secondly, even if such a decision is indeed being prepared in the "bowels" of the International Criminal Court, it will not have any significance for our country, including from a legal point of view.

Russia is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and has no obligations under it. Russia does not cooperate with this body, and possible "recipes" for arrest emanating from the International Court of Justice will be legally null and void for us.
 
Similar situation in the US. So, the ICC's don't seem to have much value.

The American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA, Title 2 of Pub. L. 107–206 (text) (PDF), H.R. 4775, 116 Stat. 820, enacted August 2, 2002), known informally as the Hague Invasion Act, is a United States federal law described as "a bill to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party."[1] The text of the Act has been codified as subchapter II of chapter 81 of title 22, United States Code.
 
Recent Scott Ritter interview:

The title of this interview is not hyperbole. (50 minutes long) Warning: provocative with foul language, and accusations involving the US leaders. Also, in calmer moments (Xi Jinping coming to Russia is a big deal) (est. 320k Ukraine fallen soldiers + wounded) (how Ukraine may be divided up) (downed drone discussion)

"Scott Ritter Loses It Over Lindsey Graham's Mindless Warmongering"​

​

 
Last edited:
Armagelipsis-matíasmaurán said:
In the second shot these lines disappear and the blades are damaged in a 1:1 pattern, with two apparently without major damage and two bent, that is, the 4 without the yellow lines.
Click to expand...
Another interesting thing that was mentioned by this war analysis Youtube channel, is that in the images you can see landmass. This is significant because the media placed the incident way far from land, which would make Russia look bad, but in reality the drone was pretty close to Crimea, so the Russians were justified in reacting.
 
Adobe said:
Recent Scott Ritter interview:

The title of this interview is not hyperbole. (50 minutes long) Warning: provocative with foul language, and accusations involving the US leaders. Also, in calmer moments (Xi Jinping coming to Russia is a big deal) (est. 320k Ukraine fallen soldiers + wounded) (how Ukraine may be divided up) (downed drone discussion)

"Scott Ritter Loses It Over Lindsey Graham's Mindless Warmongering"​

​

Click to expand...
Holy moly! Ritter is raging! And, not just against Graham.
 
These studies from the Soros, NATO etc founded European Council of Foreign Relations, show some effects of the war in Ukraine that was begun by the West with the Maidan coup in 2014.
It turns out it has been a gain for the US and the EU policy makers:
Fragile unity: Why Europeans are coming together on Ukraine (and what might drive them apart)
[...]
Summary
  • A recent multi-country poll for ECFR suggests that Europeans have come closer together in their support for Ukraine.
  • Europeans now agree that Russia is their adversary or rival.
  • Three factors have supported this remarkable coming together: Ukrainian successes in the first year of the war; the way the war has united the political left and right; and the perceived return of a strong West led by the US.
  • But these factors are fragile and European leaders should be careful in their optimism.
  • European policymakers should take advantage of this unity to equip Ukraine, while doing everything they can to mitigate divisions caused by changing circumstances at home and abroad.
Click to expand...
They write:
The results from this poll also confirm our claim from May last year that – contrary to the journalistic cliché that the war has divided the EU into a hawkish east and a dovish west – at least three different blocks have emerged. Firstly, there are the northern and eastern hawks (Estonia, Poland, Denmark, and Great Britain), where most people strongly support Kyiv’s objectives in the war. Secondly, there is the ambiguous west (France, Germany, Spain, and Portugal), where opinions are divided on how the war should end. And finally, there are the southern weak links (Italy and Romania), where the preference for the war to end as soon as possible has the upper hand.
Click to expand...
Notice the wording, "weak links", that is those that wish the war to end are considered weak!

Earlier in February, there was:
United West, divided from the rest: Global public opinion one year into Russia’s war on Ukraine
Summary
  • A new poll suggests that Russia’s war on Ukraine has consolidated ‘the West;’ European and American citizens hold many views in common about major global questions.
  • Europeans and Americans agree they should help Ukraine to win, that Russia is their avowed adversary, and that the coming global order will most likely be defined by two blocs led respectively by the US and China.
  • In contrast, citizens in China, India, and Turkiye prefer a quick end to the war even if Ukraine has to concede territory.
  • People in these non-Western countries, and in Russia, also consider the emergence of a multipolar world order to be more probable than a bipolar arrangement.
  • Western decision-makers should take into account that the consolidation of the West is taking place in an increasingly divided post-Western world; and that emerging powers such as India and Turkiye will act on their own terms and resist being caught in a battle between America and China.
Click to expand...
For good measure, here are:
European Council of Foreign Relations
The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) is a pan-European think tank with offices in seven European capitals.[2] Launched in October 2007, it conducts research on European foreign and security policy and provides a meeting space for decision-makers, activists and influencers to share ideas. ECFR builds coalitions for change at the European level and promotes informed debate about Europe's role in the world. ECFR has offices in Berlin, London, Madrid, Paris, Rome, Warsaw and Sofia.

ECFR was founded in 2007 by Mark Leonard together with a council of fifty founding members, chaired by Martti Ahtisaari, Joschka Fischer, and Mabel van Oranje, with initial funding from George Soros's Open Society Foundations, the Communitas Foundation, Sigrid Rausing, Unicredit and Fundación Para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Diálogo Exterior (FRIDE).[3]

ECFR's council brings together over 300 Europeans from across Europe. Currently chaired by Carl Bildt, Lykke Friis and Norbert Röttgen, ECFR's strategic community includes serving foreign ministers, former prime ministers, members of national parliaments and European Parliament, EU Commissioners, former NATO secretaries generals, thinkers, journalists and business leaders. The council gathers once a year as a full body for the annual council meeting, hosted in a different European capital each year. The council is the strongest and most visible expression of ECFR's pan-European identity.
Click to expand...
And funding now:
ECFR is a private not-for-profit organization that relies on donations.[14]
[...]
About half of ECFR's funding comes from foundations, one third from governments and the rest from corporations and individuals.[15] Open Society Foundations is the main donor to ECFR, funding with its grants one third (£2,345,566 in 2017) of ECFR's total income (£7,278,122 in 2017).[16] Other donors include major organizations mainly from Europe and the Western world such as the foundation Stiftung Mercator [de] (£710,753 or ~10% total funding in 2017), European and the Japanese governments, NATO, leading corporations such as Daimler AG and Microsoft as well as wealthy individuals.[17][18]
Click to expand...
 
thorbiorn said:
These studies from the Soros, NATO etc founded European Council of Foreign Relations, show some effects of the war in Ukraine that was begun by the West with the Maidan coup in 2014.
It turns out it has been a gain for the US and the EU policy makers:

They write:

Notice the wording, "weak links", that is those that wish the war to end are considered weak!

Earlier in February, there was:

For good measure, here are:
European Council of Foreign Relations

And funding now:
Click to expand...
And the blue unicorns are prettier than rainbow unicorns.

Above sentence contains more truth and substance than what Soroses wrote in those texts . . .
 
Moscow. March 19 INTERFAX.RU - Russian President Vladimir Putin made a working trip to Mariupol, where he inspected a number of city facilities and also talked with local residents, the Kremlin press service reported. :wow:

The head of state flew to Mariupol by helicopter. He traveled around several areas of the city while driving a car, making stops. During the trip, Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin reported in detail to the President on the progress of construction and restoration work in the city and its environs.

"In particular, it was about the construction of new residential neighborhoods, social and educational facilities, housing and communal services infrastructure, medical institutions," the press service said.

In the Nevsky microdistrict, Putin spoke with the residents of the city. At the invitation of one of the families, the Russian president went to their home, the press service said.

"The head of state also examined the coastline of Mariupol in the area of the yacht club, the theater building, memorable places of the city," the press service added.

www.interfax.ru

Путин совершил рабочую поездку в Мариуполь

Президент России Владимир Путин совершил рабочую поездку в Мариуполь, где осмотрел ряд объектов города, а также пообщался с местными жителями, сообщила пресс-служба Кремля.
www.interfax.ru www.interfax.ru

You can find videos in telegram channels.

t.me

Мрія

«Уже полностью занимаются, в апреле готовы даже поставить спектакль». Путину показали в Мариуполе восстановленный университет. Сайт Мрiя| YouTube |Телеграм
t.me t.me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom