Tuesday 9th of August 2022

canada's fascists…...

The first foreign fighters to arrive in Ukraine at the start of the war in February, 2022 were Canadians. The first foreign officer arrested by Russian forces on May 3 was a Canadian general. Clearly, Canada, although more than 6,000 kilometers away from Ukraine, has a hidden involvement in this conflict.



Canada and the Banderites


by Thierry Meyssan


In previous articles, Thierry Meyssan has shown how the Banderites, collaborators of the worst Nazi exactions in Ukraine and Poland, came to power in Kiev, in the young independent Ukraine. He shows here that, for eighty years, Banderite immigrants have been embedded in the Canadian Liberal Party to the point of occupying the number two position in Justin Trudeau’s current government.


In this article, I will show that all Canadian Liberal governments have supported the Ukrainian Banderites since the beginning of the Second World War. They had it both ways during that war, fighting the Nazis, but supporting the Banderites. Worse still, the current Canadian government is composed of Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, flanked by a Banderite deputy, Chrystia Freeland.

While the CIA’s connections to the Nazis during the Cold War were not revealed until 1975 with the Pike, Church and Rockfeller Congressional Commissions, and only ended with President Jimmy Carter, the Canadian Liberal Party’s ties to the Nazis continue. Canada is the only country in the world, outside of the Ukraine, to have a Banderite minister, and what’s more, she is the number two in its government.

In 1940, when the United Kingdom was at war but the United States was not, the Canadian Liberal government of William King created the Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC) to help anti-Bolshevik immigrants against the pro-Soviet Association of United Ukrainian Canadians (AUUC) and the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC). Pro-Soviet libraries and synagogues were banned.

The Liberal Party of the Kingdom of Canada was not created to promote individualism against conservative ideas, but against the Republican idea [1].

During the Second World War, Prime Minister William King was well liked by his fellow citizens, but he was booed by his soldiers when he visited them in Europe. The Liberal Party always held anti-Russian positions, presenting them as anti-Soviet until 1991, and always interpreted Christianity as opposed to Judaism.

Also, at the end of the Second World War, Canada was the main refuge for Lyon Mackenzie (35,000 immigrants) and Baltic Nazis. Among them were Volodymyr Kubijovyč and "Michael Chomiak" whose real name was Mykhailo Khomiak, the editors of the main Nazi newspaper in Central Europe, Krakivs’ki Visti.

Chomiak, who worked under the direct control of the Nazi Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, never denied his collaborationist past. On the contrary, he always militated for the OUN(B). It is in this spirit that he raised his granddaughter, Chrystia Freeland, the current Deputy Prime Minister of Canada. Far from condemning the crimes of the Banderites, she began her career as a journalist, at the age of 18, working for Kubijovyč’s Encyclopedia of Ukraine (now available on the Internet). Then she worked for The Ukrainian News, the newspaper of the Canadian Banderites, and The Ukrainian Weekly, the newspaper of the American Banderites linked to the ABN and the CIA. She traveled to the Soviet Union at the end of that country. The Soviet authorities questioned the Canadian government for its support of the Banderites and forbade her to return. However, after the dissolution of the USSR, she became the Moscow bureau chief of The Financial Times. Then she became deputy editor of The Globe and Mailand editor-in-chief of Thomson Reuters Digital.


In her articles and books, Sale of the Century: Russia’s Wild Ride from Communism to Capitalism [2] and Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else [3], Chrystia Freeland develops two theses dear to her grandfather. 

She criticizes the ultra-rich by choosing almost exclusively Jewish examples. 

She denounces at every turn the USSR, and then Russia.

It should be remembered that fascism was a response to the economic crisis of 1929, proposing a nationalist class alliance by corporation. The nazis and Banderites added a terrible racial dimension. By targeting the super-rich, Chrystia Freeland rightly addresses the main problem of today. Today, only finance is profitable, while production is in crisis. However, she insidiously drifts towards a racial reading by noting that Jews are more numerous among the super-rich than in the population and by suggesting that this correlation is significant.

In 1991, Polish-Ukrainian Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj intervened to make Canada the first country in the world to recognize Ukrainian independence. With his family fortune (Future Bakery), he created a service to distribute news from Ukraine to every member of parliament. He financed the archiving by Volodymyr Kubijovyč and "Michael Chomiak" of documents on Ukrainian nationalists during the Second World War. It must be admitted that the Encyclopedia of Ukraine is not a scientific work, but a rehabilitation of the Banderites and a falsification of history. Because of his family ties, Borys Wrzesnewskyj introduced the future Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko to Canada.

In 1994, Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien negotiated a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with Ukraine, and in 1996 he asked for NATO membership.

In January 2004, Canada, under Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, participated in Washington’s preparation of the "Orange Revolution". The Canadian ambassador in Kiev, Andrew Robinson, organized meetings of his colleagues from 28 countries to bring Viktor Yushchenko to power. The aim was to break the policy of President Kuchma, who had accepted Russian gas instead of favoring the US search for oil in the Caspian Sea [4].

The Canadian ambassador financed the survey of the Ukrainian Center for Economic and Political Studies Oleksandr Razumkov, according to which the presidential election was rigged, and he also provided 30,000 dollars to the Pora! (“It is time!”) association of NATO strategist Gene Sharp [5].

On the basis of the Razumkov poll alone, Pora! organized demonstrations, the election was cancelled and another one called. Canada spent $3 million to send 500 election observers. The second election brought Viktor Yushchenko to power. Yushchenko put together his team, choosing Vladislav Kaskiv (George Soros employee and leader of Pora!) as his special adviser and Anatoliy Gritsenko (U.S.-trained military officer and president of the Razumko Centre) as Minister of Defence.

Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj, was particularly active during the Orange Revolution; his sister, Ruslana, being very close to Mrs. Yushchenko, Katerina Chumachenko. He invested 250,000 Canadian dollars to support the movement and used his apartment in the center of Kiev to coordinate the demonstrations between the two elections. Pora! processions chanted "Ca-na-da!" and flew the maple leaf flag.

Chrystia Freeland began her political career in 2013 with the Liberal Party. She was elected Member of Parliament for Toronto. In 2014, she supported the "Revolution of Dignity" in Kiev (i.e. the Banderites’ coup), of which she met the main actors. She denounced the independence of Crimea and met Mustafa Dzhemilev, the famous US spy during the Cold War and leader of the Tatars. Eventually, President Vladimir Putin banned her from entering Russia.

She was appointed Minister of Foreign Trade by Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2015, then Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2017 and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs in 2019 with the dignity of Deputy Prime Minister. She became Minister of Finance in 2020.


In 2014, Conservative Foreign Minister John Baird visited Maidan Square and met with the main leaders of the protest. Canadian Television considered that he was thus giving an argument to President Putin’s version that this revolution is only a Western manipulation.

The embassy’s spokeswoman, Inna Tsarkova, was one of the leaders of the AutoMaidan movement. The embassy, located next to Maidan Square, was a refuge for the protesters who camped in its hall for a week. The neo-Nazi group C14 [6] took refuge there on February 18 during the massacre.

When Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over Ukraine on July 17, 2014, the Montreal-based International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) sent four inspectors to the crash site. Even before the investigation began, Chrystia Freeland began an international campaign to denounce Russia. She would later use her ministerial status to throw as much fuel on the fire as possible.

After the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych and the rise to power of the Banderites, Canada created Operation UNIFIER (Canadian Armed Forces Joint Task Force-Ukraine). The aim was to train the Ukrainian military and develop their military police. The operation was conducted under the orders of London and Washington. It included the sending of 200 instructors and non-lethal equipment. It ended on February 13, 2022, just before the Russian operation, so as not to place Canada in a war situation.

In 8 years, Canada has given nearly $900 million in aid to Ukraine.

In 2016, Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau received with honors Mustafa Dzhemilev, whom his deputy Chrystia Freeland had already met. He had become, in August 2015, the emir of an international Muslim Brigade, co-financed by Ukraine and Turkey to retake Crimea [7].


At the same time, Chrystia Freeland negotiated the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement.


When in 2017, the site Russia Insider revealed the criminal past of her grandfather and his still close ties with the Banderites, she denied the facts and denounced Russian "propaganda". However, on February 27, she appeared with a group of OUN(B) Banderites at a demonstration against Russian aggression. The photo, which she posted herself, was quickly removed from her Twitter account.


Reacting with its Nato partners to the Russian military operation, Canada has modified its budget to set aside $500 million for the Ukrainian army, including the Banderites. It has already sent machine guns, pistols, rifles, 1.5 million rounds of ammunition, sniper rifles and various related equipment (February 14), night vision goggles, helmets and body armour (February 27), 100 Carl Gustav M2 recoilless rifles and 2,000 rounds of 84 mm ammunition (Feb. 28), 390,000 individual field rations and approximately 1,600 flak jackets (March 1), 4,500 M72 rocket launchers and 7,500 hand grenades, as well as a subscription to commercial satellite imagery for $1 million (March 3), cameras for surveillance drones (March 9), M777 howitzers and related ammunition, as well as additional ammunition for the Carl Gustav M2 anti-armour weapon (April 22), 8 commercial model armoured vehicles, and a service contract for the maintenance and repair of specialized drone-carried cameras (April 26), and began training Ukrainian soldiers in the handling of M777 howitzers.

On March 2, Justin Trudeau, who believes in the United States, had some 20 countries sign a declaration denouncing Russian disinformation [8]. The aim is to prevent the dissemination of information about Ukrainian and Canadian Banderites.

On March 10, Canada managed to get some thirty countries to sign a second, very Orwellian declaration, welcoming - in the name of press freedom - the censorship in the West of Russia Today and the Sputnik agency, two Russian public media organizations.

Since the Banderites regime came to power in Kiev, Canada has sanctioned more than 900 Russian and Ukrainian opposition figures and companies. It has added to this list people close to the Russian president and members of their families.

In spite of its declarations of principle in favour of the equality in right of all men, Canada supports without reserve the Banderites, heralds of the racial superiority of the Ukrainians over the Russians.


Thierry Meyssan



This article is a follow-up to : 

 1. "Russia wants to force the US to respect the UN Charter," January 4, 2022. 

 2. "Washington pursues RAND plan in Kazakhstan, then Transnistria," January 11, 2022. 

 3. "Washington refuses to hear Russia and China," January 18, 2022. 

 4. "Washington and London, deafened", February 1, 2022. 

 5. "Washington and London try to preserve their domination over Europe", February 8, 2022. 

 6. “Two interpretations of the Ukrainian affair”, 16 February 2022. 

 7. “Washington sounds the alarm, while its allies withdraw”, 22 February 2022. 

 8. “Russia declares war on the Straussians”, by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network, 5 March 2022. 

 9. "A gang of drug addicts and neo-nazis”, 5 March 2022. 

 10 “Israel stunned by Ukrainian neo-Nazis”, 8 March 2022. 

 11. "Ukraine: the great manipulation", March 22, 2022. 

 12. "The New World Order being prepared under the pretext of war in Ukraine", 29 March 2022. 

 13. “The war propaganda changes its shape”, 5 April 2022. 

 14. "The alliance of MI6, the CIA and the banditry", 12 April 2022. 

 15. "The end of Western domination", April 19, 2022. 

 16. "Ukraine: the Second World War never ended", April 26, 2022. 

 17. "Washington hopes to restore its hyper-power through war in Ukraine" May 3, 2022.






FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@



the US abhors security guarantees…...

The assistant US secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, has apologised after her phone conversation about the political crisis in Ukraine was leaked on the internet. The call between Nuland and a US ambassador focused on the future of the country if it gains a new government. Nuland declined to comment on 'private diplomatic conversations'








signing a treaty on security guarantees


BY  • MAY 10, 2022



On Monday, Putin delivered the annual “Victory Day” speech celebrating Russia’s victory over Nazi Germany in 1945. The Russian president made none of the hyperbolic pronouncements the media had predicted but, instead, gave a brief recap of the events leading up to the war in Ukraine. There was none of the bravado you’d expect from a leader trying to gin up support for the ongoing war. Putin simply reminded the crowd that he had done everything he could to avoid the bloody conflict in which Russia is currently embroiled. Here’s part of what he said:

“Last December we proposed signing a treaty on security guarantees. Russia urged the West to hold an honest dialogue in search for meaningful and compromising solutions, and to take account of each other’s interests. All in vain. NATO countries did not want to heed us, which means they had totally different plans. And we saw it.”

This is an accurate account of what took place in the months preceding the war. Putin tried to avoid a confrontation by repeatedly asking the US to address Russia’s reasonable security concerns. Unfortunately, the Biden administration brushed off Putin’s demands without even providing a response. The US and NATO insist that Ukraine has every right to choose whatever security arrangement it wants. But that’s clearly not the case. The United States and every nation in NATO have signed treaties (Istanbul in 1999, and Astana in 2010) that stipulate they cannot improve their own security at the expense of others.

The principle underlying these agreements is called “the indivisibility of security”, which means that the security of one state can’t be separated from the security of the others. In practical terms, that means that signatories to these treaties are not free to develop their own military capability to the point where it poses a danger to their neighbors. These terms are especially applicable to Ukraine which is seeking membership in a military alliance that is openly hostile to Russia. NATO membership has always been a “red line” for Putin who has stated repeatedly that he will not allow NATO bases, combat troops and missile sites to be located on Ukrainian soil where they’d be just a stone’s throw from Moscow. As one critic from Texas put it, “You wouldn’t let a rattlesnake make its home on your front porch, would you?” No, you wouldn’t, and neither would Putin. Here’s more from a speech Putin gave in 2007:

“I’m convinced that we have reached the decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security. And we must proceed by searching for a reasonable balance between the interests of all participants in the international dialogue.” Munich Security Conference, 2007

For Putin, security has always been the paramount issue. How do we create a world in which ordinary people can feel safe in their homes, their communities and their countries? How do we protect the weaker countries from the constant threat of intervention, invasion or regime change by an impulsive superpower whose behavior is guided by its own material interests and its own insatiable geopolitical ambitions? Concepts like the “indivisibility of security” might appeal to the sensibilities of idealists, but where’s the enforcement mechanism? And, how do we use these grand ideas to rein in an intractable hegemon rampaging across the planet?

These are questions that need to be answered, after all, if the United Nations actually worked the way it is supposed to work, Russia’s demands would have been thoroughly debated at emergency meetings before the first shot was ever fired. But that didn’t happen. International law and global institutions failed again. As everyone knows, most of these institutions have been hijacked by Washington which now uses them to provide a fig leaf of legitimacy for its serial depredations. That’s certainly how they are being used in the current war against Russia.

The western media is also being used as a weapon against Russia. For example, Russia has been universally blamed for starting the war, but Russia did not start the war and everyone on the Security Council knows it. Ukraine started the war, and the Observer Mission of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has collected evidence to prove it. Check out this excerpt from an interview at the Grayzone with Swiss Intelligence officer and NATO advisor, Jacques Baud:

JACQUES BAUD: “I think we have to understand, as you know, that the war in fact hasn’t started on 24 February this year… what led to the decision to launch an offensive in the Donbas was not what happened since 2014. There was a trigger for that…

The first is the decision and the law adopted by Volodymyr Zelensky in March 2021—that means last year—to reconquer Crimea by force…

(And,also,) the intensification of the artillery shelling of the Donbas starting on the 16th of February, and this increase in the shelling was observed, in fact, by the Observer Mission of the OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe], and t hey recorded this increase of violation, and it’s a massive violation. I mean, we are talking about something that is about 30 times more than what it used to be... On the 16th of February you had a massive increase of violation on the Ukrainian side. So, for the Russians, Vladimir Putin in particular, that was the sign that the operation—the Ukrainian operation—was about to start.

And then everything started; I mean, all the events came very quickly. That means that if we look at the figures, you can see that there’s…. a massive increase from the 16th-17th, and then it reached kind of a maximum on the 18th of February, and that was continuing.

… And that’s why, on the 24th of February when Vladimir Putin decided to launch the offensive, it could invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter that provides for assistance in case of attack.” (“US, EU sacrificing Ukraine to ‘weaken Russia’: fmr. NATO adviser“, The Grayzone)

You can see that by the time Putin invaded Ukraine, the war had already begun. The shelling of ethnic Russians had already intensified by many orders of magnitude. People were being slaughtered in droves, and tens of thousands of refugees were fleeing across the border into Russia. And, all of this had been going on since the 16th of February, a full week before Russia crossed the border. (Moon of Alabama has compiled the data on the bombardment that took place in the Donbas preceding the invasion: “The February 15 report of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine recorded some 41 explosions in the ceasefire areas. This increased to 76 explosions on Feb 16, 316 on Feb 17, 654 on Feb 18, 1413 on Feb 19, a total of 2026 of Feb 20 and 21 and 1484 on Feb 22.”)

So, why does the media keep repeating the lie that Russia started the war when it is clearly false?

The fact is, Putin sent in the troops to put out a fire not to start one. If ever there was a situation where the Responsibility To Protect (R2P) could be justified, it’s in east Ukraine prior to the invasion. 14,000 ethnic Russians had been killed before the shelling began. Should Putin have looked the other way and allowed another 14,000-or-so to be slaughtered without lifting a finger?

No, Putin did what he had to do to save lives and defend Russia’s national security. Even so, he has no territorial ambitions and no desire to recreate the Soviet Empire.His “special military operation” is, in fact, a defensive operation designed to remove emerging threats that could no longer be ignored. Putin’s 83% public approval rating proves that the Russian people understand what he is doing and fully support him. (A political leader would never garner that level of support if the people thought he had launched a war of aggression.)

Some readers might remember that –before sending in the tanks– Putin invoked United Nations Article 51 which provides a legal justification for military intervention. Here’s an excerpt from an article by former weapons inspector Scott Ritter who defended the Russian action like this:

“Russian President Vladimir Putin, citing Article 51 as his authority, ordered what he called a “special military operation”….
under Article 51, there can be no doubt as to the legitimacy of Russia’s contention that the Russian-speaking population of the Donbass had been subjected to a brutal eight-year-long bombardment that had killed thousands of people.… Moreover, Russia claims to have documentary proof that the Ukrainian Army was preparing for a massive military incursion into the Donbass which was pre-empted by the Russian-led “special military operation.” [OSCE figures show an increase of government shelling of the area in the days before Russia moved in.]


The bottom line is that Russia has set forth a cognizable claim under the doctrine of anticipatory collective self-defense, devised originally by the U.S. and NATO, as it applies to Article 51 which is predicated on fact, not fiction.

While it might be in vogue for people, organizations, and governments in the West to embrace the knee-jerk conclusion that Russia’s military intervention constitutes a wanton violation of the United Nations Charter and, as such, constitutes an illegal war of aggression, the uncomfortable truth is that, of all the claims made regarding the legality of pre-emption under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, Russia’s justification for invading Ukraine is on solid legal ground.” (“Russia, Ukraine & the Law of War: Crime of Aggression”, Consortium News)

And here’s more on the topic from author Danial Kovalik in his article titled “Why Russia’s intervention in Ukraine is legal under international law”:

“One must begin this discussion by accepting the fact that there was already a war happening in Ukraine for the eight years preceding the Russian military incursion in February 2022. And, this war by the government in Kiev… claimed the lives of around 14,000 people, many of them children, and displaced around 1.5 million more … The government in Kiev, and especially its neo-Nazi battalions, carried out attacks against these peoples … precisely because of their ethnicity. ..

To remove any doubt that the destabilization of Russia itself has been the goal of the US in these efforts, one should examine the very telling 2019 report of the Rand Corporation… entitled, ‘Overextending and Unbalancing Russia, Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options’, one of the many tactics listed is “Providing lethal aid to Ukraine” in order to “exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability.”…

In short, there is no doubt that Russia has been threatened, and in a quite profound way, with concrete destabilizing efforts by the US, NATO and their extremist surrogates in Ukraine….

It is hard to conceive of a more pressing case for the need to act in defense of the nation. While the UN Charter prohibits unilateral acts of war, it also provides, in Article 51, that “nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense… ”  And this right of self-defense has been interpreted to permit countries to respond, not only to actual armed attacks, but also to the threat of imminent attack.

In light of the above, it is my assessment.. that Russia had a right to act in its own self-defense by intervening in Ukraine, which had become a proxy of the US and NATO for an assault – not only on Russian ethnics within Ukraine – but also upon Russia itself. A contrary conclusion would simply ignore the dire realities facing Russia.” (Why Russia’s intervention in Ukraine is legal under international law”, RT)

Assigning blame for the current conflict is more than just an academic exercise. It is the way that reasonable people weigh the evidence to determine accountability. That might be a way-off, but it’s a goal worth pursuing all the same.

Finally, it should be clear by now, that the war in Ukraine was planned long before the Russian invasion. At every turn, Washington has orchestrated the provocations that were designed to lure Russia into Ukraine, drain its resources and, thus, remove a major obstacle to US strategic objectives in Central Asia. The ultimate goal– as US war planners have candidly admitted– is to “break Russia’s back”, splinter the country into smaller pieces, topple the government, seize its vast energy resources, and reduce the population to a permanent state of colonial dependency. Washington knows that it will not be able to encircle and control China’s explosive growth, unless it crushes Russia first. That is why it has embarked on such a reckless strategy that could end in an unprecedented catastrophe. Our miscreant leaders believe that preserving their grip on global power is worth the risk of nuclear annihilation.




















FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!