UN General Assembly’s Third Committee passed a Russia-proposed resolution condemning attempts to glorify Nazism ideology and denial of German Nazi war crimes. The US, Canada and Ukraine were the only countries to vote against it.
The resolution was passed on Friday by the committee, which is tasked with tackling social and humanitarian issues and human rights abuses, by 115 votes against three, with 55 nations abstaining, Tass news agency reported.
The document voiced concern over the rise of racism-driven crimes around the world and the influence that parties with extremist agendas are gaining.
It called for a universal adoption of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Many nations including the US, the UK, China and India, signed the convention but did not recognize a mechanism resolving individual complaints it establishes, which makes the convention unenforceable in their jurisdictions.
The resolution also decried attempts to whitewash Nazi collaborators by depicting them as fighters of nationalist resistance movements and honoring them as such.
It condemned any form of denial of Nazi war crimes, including the Jewish Holocaust.
Azov battalion soldiers take an oath of allegiance to Ukraine in Kiev's Sophia Square before being sent to the Donbass region. (RIA Novosti / Alexandr Maksimenko)
Russia, which submitted the draft resolution, said it regretted that it could not be adopted anonymously.
“The fact that the US, Canada and Ukraine voted against, while delegations from EU member states abstained in the vote on this draft resolution, which was supported by an overwhelming majority of the UN member states, is extremely regrettable,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
“Ukraine’s position is particularly dispiriting and alarming. One can hardly understand how a country, the people of which suffered their full share of the horrors of Nazism and contributed significantly to our common victory against it, can vote against a resolution condemning its glorification,” the ministry said.
Moscow proposes similar documents to the UN General Assembly annually, but the US and Canada have consistently voted against them. Ukraine is a new nation among the opponents, as in previous years it has abstained.
Kiev’s representative at the session, Andrey Tsymbalyuk, said that while Ukraine did condemn Nazism and neo-Nazism, it could not endorse the Russian resolution, because it suffered not only from Nazism, but also from Stalinism in the past.
“As long as Stalinism and neo-Stalinism are not condemned as strongly as Nazism, neo-Nazism and other forms of hatred, Ukraine would not be able to back this document,” the diplomat said.
The resolution is to be formally adopted by the UN General Assembly as a body in December.
Currently, the largest and most powerful helicopter to have ever entered production is the gargantuan Mi-26 'Halo' of Russian origin, of which many still serve in governmental and commercial roles around the globe. After decades of the 'Halo' being on top, a new record holder is now said to be on the way, with Russia and China joining forces to make it happen.
Cockpit of the highly modernized Mi-26T2, currently the most powerful and largest helicopter in the world.
This new super-heavy lift class chopper was originally thought to be an outgrowth of the existing, all-weather capable and highly modernized Mi-26T2, but now it seems that it will only borrow a few elements from it, and will overwhelmingly be a 'clean sheet' design.
The fresh design approach is due to China's eye popping requirements. According to Russia, they are said to include almost twice the lifting capacity of the already freakishly powerful and huge Mi-26. That would put the new chopper's lifting ability at somewhere around 80,000lbs! In comparison, the CH-53K 'King Stallion,' America's latest heavy lift design, has a total gross weight just slightly above that figure at 88,000lbs.
You heard that right, this new Russian-Chinese super chopper is aiming to be able to lift roughly the equivalent of America's newest heavy-lift chopper in its entirety, at its maximum gross weight. That is one powerful helicopter.
Originally, this new Russian-Chinese design was thought to be an outgrowth of the Mi-26T2, although this is now inaccurate as Chinese performance demands are far outside any existing designs' theoretical capabilities.
The Mi-26 can already haul vehicles that are larger than what can fit even into a C-130 Hercules, including everything from armored personnel carriers to dump trucks. Yet China has had a uniquely large demand for heavy under-slung cargo carrying ability, for both construction and logistical purposes and there has been talk for the last decade or two about how a super-heavy lift helicopter could change the way some structures are built. This is especially true for modular vertical oriented structures that are intended to be built fast and replicated quickly, an area of architecture and construction that China continues to be the leader in.
Just part of the massive cargo hold of the Mi-26T2. The aircraft has been nicknamed the 'flying office building' for a reason.
According to Russian reports, multiple Chinese agencies are part of this new mega-chopper procurement program, including those that deal with emergency management and response. This makes some sense as during a natural disaster, or even a time of conflict, moving massive amounts of supplies quickly will be all that much more critical considering China's massive population.
Mi-26 lifting a stricken CH-47 in Afghanistan:
The only other helicopter ever flown that could lift anything in the weight class that China is looking for was also of Russian origin: the colossal Mil V-12. Only two prototypes were built and test flown in the late 1960s, and the design used a unique parallel/traverse rotor, quad-engine layout. At first, the aircraft almost tore itself apart during testing, but later, the second prototype was seen widely as a successful, although uneconomic design.
The V-12 was built to haul close to close to 100k lbs, although normal missions were thought to see the super-chopper carry about 85,000lbs, with lighter loads being carried over increasingly longer distances.
The V-12 was never put into series production because its intended mission, to deploy ballistic missiles around the vastness of the Russian countryside, was not a priority by the time the design was mature. It is not clear if Russia plans on reviving similar design elements of the V12 program to meet China's high, or should I say heavy, vertical lift aspirations.
A cost has not been publicly assigned to the program, nor has there been word regarding what percentage Russia will share in the costs of developing such an exotic machine. Regardless of the public absence of some details, Russia says this new design requirements will be locked by the first quarter of 2015.
I had really been utterly amazed when I read the message the Russian government has allowed its citizens to carry firearms for 'self-defense'.
This comes from an in Moscow on Tuesday published government's decision.
So far were Russians, who have a gun license allowed to carry their weapons only while hunting, at sporting events or at shooting exercises.
A great act of faith of the Russian government in the citizens.
Parsifal, November 19, 2014 image top: Why carry a gun ? Because a policeman is too heavy.
But, but I thought that this Putin is a very evil dictator and oppressed his people.
This tells us all the time the West-Media and West-Politicians.
How to fit a complete liberalization of the firearms legislation with this picture together, Russia would be an authoritarian dictatorship ?
A total contradiction because an anti-democratic or totalitarian regime would never permit citizens to carry weapons, but rather disarm all of them.
So like right after the national socialists seized power in 1933, as first the Jews and then the other 'enemies of the people' were disarmed or under the flimsy reason 'weapons search' raids and house searches took place.
In general, was prohibited all groups of which the NaZi regime regarded as the opposition the possession of firearms, including stabbing weapons and batons.
This setting that the German government trusts its citizens not, is valid until today because in the international context is the German weapons law one of the strictest.
But in all the so-called Western democracies, citizens are systematically disarmed.
After the Brits were disarmed should now be on the British island even the kitchen knives be banned, well, if the British citizenry like this development ?
Now wants the government on the British island even the kitchen knives be banned, well, if the British citizenry like this development ?
The monopoly of force should have only the state and the citizen is supposed to be defenseless, against the illegitimate state and the criminals.
What an illogicality.
Criminals have weapons and always have access to weapons, but innocent people should not have.
Therefore, a tightening of the firearms act and further patronizing of legal gun owners is nonsense.
It just shows the true intent of the authority, to have a defenseless people with which they can do what they want.
Peaceful citizens are allowed to be shot defenseless.
The few accidents and all leap years a school shooting is as an excuse for the disarmament of the whole population.
It's not the weapon's fault, but the person's.
Then but go forbid cars.
According to the WHO more than 1.2 million people around the world are killed by car accidents.
If you compare the dangerousness of weapons and automobiles, one comes to the factor of 2000.
What does this say about the oh-so-democratic Federal Republic of Germany ?
A completely disarmed and thus defenseless people.
The Germans were so utterly brainwashed, they even find this defenselessness still desirable, just as the violation of privacy by the snooping-state would not bother at all. Up to the Peasant's Wars it was figure of speech in Germany:
Only an armed man is a free man.
That was 500 years ago !
Today, Germany has the strictest (and most inconsistent) gun laws in the world.
It must even fundamental rights be surrendered; constant menace of house-search is possible. The question then arises, will give us the West-Media a totally false image of Russia ?
We are constantly being lied to ?
It is not exactly the opposite Russia is a democracy, and Germany a dictatorship ?
In many ways, Russia is actually a democracy, because there is the President directly elected by the people.
Putin has much more democratic legitimacy than any other state leader in Europe.
And this for the third time.
In Germany, neither the chancellor nor the president are directly electable.
There was no ballot where it was asked do you want Merkel as chancellor or Gauck as President ?
To power these types only come by party-arrangements, shuffle, machinations and hanky-panky.
Also, the prime ministers of the federal states are not eligible. How is this supposed to be a democracy ?
Not to speak of the EU as the Command, because there no one can elect the leadership, neither members of the EU Commission, the president of the european council, the president of the european commission.
Who has Herman Van Rompuy elected ?
Who has Jean-Claude Juncker elected ?
These figures were plonked the citizens of the EU just in front.
These not elected and not legitimate figureheads in Europe but have the audacity to constantly pointing the finger towards Russia and have the impudence to refer President Putin as 'Hitler'.
Such as the kingpin of the German criminal politicians, Wolfgang Schäuble, in April 2014 compared Putin with Adolf Hitler and the entry into the Sudetenland by the Wehrmacht in 1938, with the result of the referendum on the Crimea.
For Schäuble, Merkel and all the other anti-democrats is the expression of the unique and overwhelming will of the inhabitants of the Crimea, to separate from the fascist coup regime in Kiev and become again a part of the Russian Federation an 'illegal' annexation by Russia.
How can any referendum be illegal, if the populace is the highest sovereign ?
In Russia, it looks as if in fact the Government and the Parliament put themselves lower than the people and not above as here.
Democracy comes from dêmos: people of the state and kratos: power or rule
Thus 'reign of the people (of a state)'.
Only way to explain is that is newly allowed to the Russian citizens to carry weapons for self-defense.
Something like this is unthinkable in the West.
Here is another exploitation which the dictator Putin burdens the Russians, namely, an income tax of a whopping 13 percent, and even as a Flattax !
A tax rateof13%, very close tothein all religions andphilosophiesprovidedproverbialTenth.
Yes, the Western portmanteaus of 'democracy' and 'dictatorship' can't keep up and tax their subjects with more than 50 and up to 70 percent after possible deductions.
This is what I call total enslavement and rape of the hard-earned money.
Unleaded 95 cost about 80 Euro-cents a liter in Russia.
It is really, really bad there / Satire Stop.
The fear-mongering against any form of possession of weapons in Germany has led to hysterical conditions.
Young mothers raise their children to believe that weapons are something fundamentally bad.
Each ability to put up a fight - a law of nature - is systematically driven out the children.
Later, the son joins the army, and has to face so-called terrorists in Afghanistan.
Mentally weakened, he is confronted with tribal warriors that have no problem with defending their own rights in their country.
These unspoiled natural people were not weakened in their education, and without hesitation is the head of the wuss from the West separated from the body.
The mother is then allowed to pick up the zinc coffin from the airport as a reward for her political correct education...
'Those who out of love to peace turn their weapons to plowshares be used for the plowing by those who have not'.
Ronald Lee Ermey, known by the role of the Drill Instructor Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in Stanley Kubrick's anti-war movie Full Metal Jacket, makes advertising for the Austrian company Glock, and for the possession of firearms: