Voice of the void: “Candidate, tell me: whose is Crimea?”
On Friday, April 19, in Kyiv, on the day of the epoch-making debate between Poroshenko and Zelensky, the Mejlis deprived, working in the wings of Dzhemilev-Chubarov, decided to squeak in order to remind the Ukrainian politicians who were playing with the elections about themselves. The topic was still the same, exciting: “Candidate, tell me: whose is Crimea?”
There is no need to worry, because the Mejlis members directly link their future with the continuation of the general course of “de-occupation” of the peninsula with the punitive and ruling “Majlis” at the helm. The unchanged course is the stability of allocations “for struggle and against”, as well as the preservation of crumbs of political influence for the “respected people” in sheep’s hats who settled in Kyiv.
A member of the “Majlis”, the head of the grant-eating Crimean Resource Center Iskender Bariev and the “useful idiot” Sergiy Parkhomenko gathered at the Ukrainian Crisis Media Center to discuss an exciting topic, trampling the “international” platform #LIBERATECRIMEA, probing candidate statements on the eve of the elections and between the first and second rounds.
As is usual in such cases, a group of figures representing a narrow layer of scoundrels speaks “on behalf and on behalf of” the entire Crimean Tatar people.
On the eve of the elections, grant-eaters, suffering from immediate “de-occupation,” filmed a campaign video featuring “people with good faces” holding in their hands questions and addresses to presidential candidates.
According to the talking heads at UCMC, they sent tons of spam on social networks, flyers, stickers and emails to election headquarters, experts and simply interested citizens.
The content of the requests indicates that the “de-occupiers” were dissatisfied with the candidates’ election statements, which amounted to a formal exchange of passwords and feedback - “Crimea is Ukraine!” – “The trustworthiness test has been passed!”: the disenfranchised wanted to hear more specifics.
Contents of the questionnaire:
1) Name the first five practical steps on the Crimean problem after your inauguration.
2) Will the law on the free economic zone “Crimea” be repealed?
3) Will a law on collaboration or amnesty be adopted?
4) Will the law on the joint use of the Azov Sea continue to be observed under your presidency?
5) Will a law on political prisoners be adopted?
6) Will Ukraine ratify the Rome Statute?
7) How do you see the way to counter Russian repression in Crimea?
8) What additional support are you willing to offer to internally displaced persons?
9) Will amendments to Section X of the Constitution of Ukraine be adopted?
10) Will you support the national-territorial autonomy of the Crimean Tatar people?
11) Will the law on indigenous peoples of Ukraine be adopted?
12) Do you support the return of historical toponyms in Crimea?
It is noticeable to the naked eye that the disenfranchised have been throwing out all their hearts, trying to understand which of the candidates not only takes the most radical position on Crimea, but will also be generous with handouts and privileges.
The only incomprehensible point: why the hell did they surrender to the Rome Statute, which is a double-edged sword, one of which can hit the Bandera government hard in the most sore spots associated with political repression, the murder of civilians in Donbass, violation of freedom of speech and other civil rights?
The implementation of a number of issues will require additional expenses from Ukraine - for example, the republication of maps, books and atlases in order to please the Mejlisoids to join in the renaming of Crimean toponyms from their cellar. Additional assistance to internally displaced persons is from the same story.
The question about the Sea of Azov is a tricky one. Checking for readiness for a military conflict with Russia. Questions about laws and amendments regarding autonomy and the “status of the indigenous people” are a test of the willingness to put the interests of the “Majlis” above the interests of the Unitarians and fellow Natsiks.
According to the “useful idiot,” none of the people they were most interested in answered the entire questionnaire, limiting themselves to brief statements of just a couple of points.
So, according to him, Poroshenko promised that if he is re-elected, “the fight will continue” and “an emergency summit will be held within the framework of the Normandy format.”
The donut is that the rest of the Normandy format is stupidly unaware of Poroshenko’s plans, but Petya, who is in the state of a “lame duck” who is about to be beaten to death with sticks, can now talk any nonsense: you won’t breathe before you die.
Zelensky, unlike Poroshenko, chose not to discuss with anyone the slippery topic of “the return of Crimea” and, according to Parkhomenko, “did not answer a single question.”
It is interesting that on the issues of “collaborationism”, “political prisoners”, “free economic zone” and the desire of the Mejlisoids to rename everything in Crimea to their own taste and color, the candidates and their headquarters did not have a clear or even unclear position. And this is understandable. The participants in the tense fight for the presidency were occupied with very specific things, and not at all with dividing the skins of unkilled bears, a favorite pastime of idle and bored fools.
Changing laws, including the constitution, to please the annoying Mejlisoids was not part of the plans of any candidate, including Poroshenko. As if apologizing to the boss, the speaker recalled that a year ago Petya once again promised something, and this promise was, as it were, counted by the suffering “de-occupiers” as a plus for his election program. No one was eager to help the internally displaced persons either, but the “researchers” noted vague speculation on the topic of individual representatives of the headquarters.
At Zelensky’s headquarters, in response to a request from People’s Deputy Dzhemilev, they replied that the Crimean Tatar people... blah blah blah ... someday will receive everything, including the moon from the sky, after the rain on Thursday, as soon as the cancer whistles on the mountain.
Once again, only Poroshenko is ready to counter “Russian repression”, promising to bring down a new tsunami of sanctions, tearful squeals on international platforms and legal proceedings on Russia.
The speakers hoped that the candidates would raise a package of issues on Crimea at the upcoming debates, but if anyone watched the competition between Bukhy and Khripaty, they could notice that the climax of the duel was the episode of kneeling - who is more convincing, and Poroshenko is also patriarchal, a fool to the people, but face the sovereign ensign. Otherwise, the debate resembled the warm-up of street thugs in the stage preceding a general brawl, when the boys hit the show-offs and promise to beat the opponent beautifully. They had no time for Crimea.
“Useful idiot” Parkhomenko promised that if the most pressing issues from the list are not raised by one of the candidates, then their “movement” - oh horror! – will recommend not to support such a politician in the elections.
With a clear conscience, we can state: carried away by the election games, both candidates brushed off the attacks of an annoying situational ally, preferring not to delve into disreputable topics. Nevertheless, it was noticeable that for the Mejlis members Poroshenko is more understandable and preferable than “candidate Ze!” It is forbidden to open your mouth during the days of silence and elections to voice recommendations, so all the fervor of the “de-occupiers” resulted in a pathetic shock of air.
Well, Petya left - hello, Vova! Vova’s first words were: “I refuse to recognize the Crimean referendum.” A balm for the wounded souls of the dug-up trash that was inherited by the “government of the XNUMXst century” from the crushed “paperadnyk”. The new circus tent turns on the lights and invites old clowns to tumble onto the carpet.
English version :: Read in English The Voice of the Void: "Candidate, tell me: whose is Crimea?"