Instead of setting the record straight about Nazified Ukraine’s responsibility for repeatedly shelling the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant — as directed by its Pentagon and CIA handlers — NYT and other MSM fake news continue to falsely blame Russia, ignoring its all-out efforts to protect the NPP.
The Times cited Kiev’s so-called nuclear energy agency, Energoatom — falsely accusing Russia of shelling the plant (sic), adding:
Ahead of an IAEA mission to the NPP, the US-controlled Kiev regime falsely accused Russian forces of pressuring plant staff “to prevent them from disclosing evidence about crimes of the occupiers (sic) at the plant and its use as a military base (sic).”
And this Times pro-Nazified Ukraine/anti-Russia propaganda:
“Russia is waging a scorched-earth campaign to bring Ukraine to its knees (sic), and Ukraine is fighting for its survival (sic).”
Fact: Russia is combating the scourge of US/Western created Nazified tyranny in Europe’s heartland — what the Times and other MSM support.
Fact: Russian forces are protecting the Zaporozhye NPP and staff — none held involuntarily at “gunpoint” as the Times falsely claimed.
And this Times trash — falsely accusing Russia of using the plant as a “nuclear shield (sic).”
And this Times Russia bashing by turning truth on its head, its standard practice:
“In an act of unsurprising chutzpah (sic), Russia called for a (Security Council) meeting this week to broadcast its claims (sic), which prompted (Kiev’s so-called UN envoy) to deplore wasting ‘more than an hour to listen to (indisputable truth-telling it falsely called) fictitious sound bites (sic).’ ”
And this Times trash:
“It is all but impossible to determine who is doing the shooting (sic).”
It’s indisputable who bears responsibility for what’s going on and the regime’s patrons.
No heavy Russian weapons are at or around the plant, as Times fake news claimed.
The obvious way to prevent the risk of a nuclear disaster is for the empire of lies and forever wars to order its Kiev vassal to cease shelling the plant.
It hasn’t happened because the Pentagon and CIA are directing the shelling with intent to release and spread deadly radiation across much of central Europe — Russia, of course, to be falsely blamed for Kiev’s war crime.
And this Times perversion of reality:
Kremlin-appointed local officials in occupied territories (sic) are preparing to hold tightly controlled referendums (sic) in which the outcome of the vote is preordained to justify annexing those regions as part of the Russian Federation (sic).”
If independent monitors observe upcoming referendums in areas liberated from Nazified rule, they’ll affirm their legitimacy.
Local officials intend to hold what observers will surely call an open, free and fair process where they’re held — areas residents on their own deciding if they want to form independent republics, join Russia or return to Kiev control.
There’s no ambiguity about their overwhelming rejection of Nazified tyranny they want no part of.
Since its liberating SMO began, Russia helped around 1.5 million Ukrainians leave harm’s way for safety and security in its territory.
None were forcibly deported from Ukraine as Kiev, the Times and other MSM falsely claimed.
And this Times Russia bashing bald-faced Big Lie:
“Russia blocked the adoption of a joint statement to close out a UN conference on an ongoing nuclear arms treaty, Western officials (falsely) said, a diplomatic broadside that underscored the global ramifications of the war in Ukraine (sic).
Fact: One thing had nothing to do with the other. They’re separate issues entirely.
Fact: Deputy head of Russia’s delegation to the 10th NPT Review Conference, Andrei Belousov, set the record straight as follows, explaining:
“For four weeks, our delegation actively participated in the conference in the spirit of cooperation.”
“We worked openly, honestly and with the utmost respect for the positions of other delegations.”
“(O)ur collective efforts, for various reasons, have not led to the desired result.”
No conference participants were satisfied with the final draft voted on.
The document produced was “weak in content.”
Delegations “collectively…prioritize…three (NPT) pillars — disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.”
The final document voted on failed to include “priorities or reflect the specific positions of states…”
Nor did it include “areas for improving the treaty regime (or) specif(y) issues that require searching for ways to resolve them.”
“(E)ntry into force of the CTBT, establishment of a (WMD and delivery system-free) Middle East, and avoidance of unjustified restrictions on cooperation on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.”
As a result, “it was not possible to adopt a substantive report.”
Key sticking points include:
“(F)irst and foremost (was) the enormous distance (among) positions of” conference participants.
“(C)onsensus for consensus-sake is unreasonable.”
Second was “the weak willingness of states with opposing positions to take into account opinions of their opponents.”
The goal of agreement on a world free from nuclear weapons — prohibiting their existence and total elimination of stockpiles worldwide — is opposed by hegemon USA, its nuclear armed Western vassals and apartheid Israel.
Third was the raising of new issues by participating states.
“They need to be considered and discussed more thoroughly, which requires more time than the four weeks of the Review Conference,” Russia stressed.
When various delegations “tried to (present) propos(ed) additional paragraphs, (US-dominated Western regimes) strongly objected under the (phony) pretext that these proposals were not consensual in nature.”
Last “and perhaps most important (was) the (unacceptable) behavior of” US/Western regimes.
They “came to the conference to (push what serves their interests exclusively) no matter what.”
“Their declared concern for strengthening the NPT (was head-fake-cover) for that.”
“(T)hroughout the conference, there was a one-sided game.”
“By subjugating the process of (document preparation, US/Western regimes) took a privileged position, placing other countries in a discriminatory one.”
“Such a situation is unacceptable and will not further enhance the effectiveness of the review process.”
The conference became “a political hostage” to unacceptable US/Western demands — including by “poisoning discussions with their politicized, biased, groundless and false statements with regard to Ukraine.”
Kiev and its US/Western patrons “bear full responsibility for” failure to achieve positive results.
Anti-Russian “statements were heard throughout the conference.”
“They (were) particularly cynical” and fabricated in defiance of reality.
“Their background was the barbaric shelling of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant by Ukrainian forces,” what continues to threaten a “nuclear disaster.”
Reasons explained above “prevented (Russia) from supporting the draft report.”
What’s unacceptable demands rejection.