“Kill the Russians.” 105 years ago, the Finnish army staged the massacre in Vyborg. The truth must come out!

This year there is an anniversary of a dark page in Finish history that Finland studiously ignores – the genocide of the Russian population of Vyborg in 1918. Not only does Finland ignore it, but as was mentioned earlier in the article More on the Finnish finishing NATO move, they are actually proud of it, having release a commemorative 1 Euro coin celebrating the genocide…

In the Soviet Union this topic was “shoved under the rug” for the sake of the good neighbourly relations. Much like one did not talk at all about the part played by Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania in the WWII on the German Nazi side.

But times are changing. Ukraine turning Nazi, committing a massacre of their own in Odessa on the 2nd of May 2014, and Finland now openly supporting the Kiev regime and showing hostility towards Russia, opens up the doors for the truth to be spoken, neigh, shouted!

Below is a translation of an article published in “Argumenty i Fakty” on the 29th of April 2023.

Continue reading

Finnish blogger: That’s why half the world owes Russia to the grave

I am reposting an article under the same name from the English edition of NewsFront. This is probably the best – in its brevity – description of Russia’s role in state-building in the recent history! This is the kind of material that cannot be re-posted or re-told too few times.

In the list the author mentions the Napoleonic time, and in this regard I want to especially draw attention to Holland that exists as a state today solely thanks to the Russian effort in 1813: “Russians Are Coming!”: Restoration of the Dutch Kingdom. Year 1813.

The list also mentions Kazahstan, and the statement there is best understood in light of purveying of a certain map of the USSR from exactly 100 years ago – from 1922, something that I did a short time ago in A short look at the short history of Kazakhstan through the lens of a 1922 map.


Finnish blogger: That’s why half the world owes Russia to the grave

A blogger from the Finnish city of Oulu Veikko Korhonen, as most modern Finns periodically fell under the corrupting influence of pro-Western history textbooks.

Everything related to Russia there was usually poured with total mud, the joint Russian-Finnish history was presented as a nightmare, and the pernicious influence of the present was constantly supported by stories about the aggressiveness and hostility of the nearest neighbour.

Fortunately, Veikko Korhonen had a very wise and well-educated grandmother, and so he knew very well about the true course of our joint history.

And once, tired of constant disputes with anti-Russian compatriots, he wrote a small article on his Facebook page, and whenever he met another Russophobe, just gave him direct link.

Are you asking about the results of Russia’s “aggression”? They are as follows: half of Europe and part of Asia got their statehood from the hands of this particular state.

Let’s remember who:

Finland in 1802 and 1918. (Until 1802, never had its own state).

Latvia in 1918 (before 1918 it never had its own state).

Continue reading

More on the Finnish finishing NATO move

I’ve written in my earlier posts about the consequences that Finland will face by abandoning its neutral status and painting a large NATO bullseye on their country: Finland – Life after NATO. More consequences are looming. Before I proceed to translating an article on the matter, let me start off with a few Telegram re-posts on the topic of “NATO does not give Russia guarantees regarding the non-deployment of nuclear weapons in Finland and Sweden if they join the alliance”

This nice gentleman is NATO Assistant Secretary General Camille Grand. Today he made a very nice statement, check it out:

“NATO does not give Russia guarantees regarding the non-deployment of nuclear weapons in Finland and Sweden if they join the alliance”

Russell gave a very apt response to that:

Therefore, Russia does not give NATO guarantees that it will not deploy its nuclear weapons in Warsaw, Berlin, Brussels, Paris, London or Washington D.C.

Another consequence of the NATO-finnazation is outlined in Brian Berletic’s Telegram post:

Finland already begins paying price for NATO membership even before becoming a member.

Reuters reports Finland to build barriers (which requires $) along border with Russia. All just to play along with “Russia bad” narrative at the cost of Finnish treasure and its longstanding ties with Russia.

And on this note let me proceed to the translation of the main article for this post, published on Cont on the 28th of May.

It has started… Russia asked Finland only two territorial questions…

The NATO Secretary General admitted that the plan for accelerated expansion to the north has been thwarted: Finland and Sweden are unlikely to become candidates for membership at the alliance summit in June due to Turkey’s demands. But since then, Russia has had its own questions to Finland and they relate to the status of the territories that are so far managed from Helsinki. So far.

Helsinki was warned: Russia will not turn a blind eye on the fact that the length of its border with NATO countries will increase by about half. The main answer, presumably, will come from the General Staff and will include the relocation of troops and weapons. But there will also be political consequences – Russia and Finland have a long history of “special relations”. We have some pots to break.

Continue reading

Finland – Life after NATO

Finland votes to join NATO. Well, to each their own, and Finland choses to exchange a prosperous border trade with almost transparent border without any remotely significant number of troops stationed along it to a locked border with a heavy concentration of military hardware and Helsinki added to the nuclear deterrent target list. If Finland wants to have the longest NATO border with Russia with all the consequences it entails, so be it.

In this post I want to present to translations of articles, one looking back at the history of Finnish-Russian relations, which the Finns prefer not to remember (or, maybe, they do remember, and are afraid of retribution?), and one looking at the possible future consequences, including economic, of the Finnish choice.

Dedicated to the upcoming ascension of Finland into NATO….

Sergey Vasiliev on April 15, 13:45

In 1550, the Swedish king Gustav I Vasa, by his decree, resettled several hundred residents of the city of Borgo, in Finnish – Porvoo, at the mouth of the Vantaa River flowing into the Gulf of Finland, ordering the construction of a commercial port. The river with the local name Helsing had several rapids – in Swedish “fors”, which gave the name of the settlement – Helsingfors. By the time it became part of the Russian Empire under the Friedrichsham Peace Treaty, the city had only four thousand inhabitants. Quite a backwater.

The first thing that Russians always did when they came to the wild lands was to build furiously and selflessly. The poor, shabby former outskirts of Sweden did not escape this fate either. Emperor Alexander I made Helsingfors the capital of the Grand Duchy of Finland. Under Nicholas I, a university was transferred here from the capital, named by him in honour of his brother Alexandrovsky. Alexander II granted the Russian colony its own constitution and a set of rights and freedoms that no one else enjoyed in the metropolis. Finland did not know serfdom. Finns were not recruited into the army even during the World War. They did not pay taxes, but enjoyed all the rights of subjects of the Empire. Finland had schools and gymnasiums with instruction in the Finnish language, had its own parliament and court. Along with the rouble, the Finnish Marka issued by the Bank of Finland was in circulation. The internal market of the principality was protected by customs while Finnish goods crossed the border of the Empire duty-free.

According to the tsarist authorities, all these goodies were supposed to arise a sense of gratitude among the local population, awaken a burst of patriotism and firmly bind the Scandinavian outskirts to the Russian Empire. Everything happened the other way around. Spoiled by the unprecedented benefits and privileges that fell on them for who knows what merits, the Finnish population gradually began to look at the titular people of Russia with disdain, as losers who were not able to organize for themselves the same standard of living as the Scandinavians, basking in the warmth of the tsar.

The Grand Duchy of Finland paid nothing to the treasury of the Russian Empire. The welfare of the natives exceeded the average Russian level. Thanks to this, peasant day-workers came from nearby provinces streamed to the Finnish village. Newcomers in Finland have always been disliked, a rural policeman could detain them, rob them for no reason, simply out of a sense of personal hostility. Archival reports have preserved eyewitness accounts of how, long before the revolution, the robbed peddlers from the Russian villages had to flee from the Finnish “hospitality”, while local policemen shouted: “Kill the damned Russians, nothing will happen to you!”.

Everyday nationalism, growing like a wild flower in the backyard of a Finnish village, as the local intelligentsia formed, successfully attached its root to the Russian treasury, flourished at the beginning of the twentieth century in the high society of the principality. In Finnish opposition newspapers, at first timidly, and then more and more insistently, appeals began to appear: “If we love our country, we need to learn to hate its enemies… Therefore, in the name of our honour and freedom, let our motto sound: “Hate and love! The death of “ryusya”! Or: “Russia has always been and will remain the enemy of humanity and humane development. Has there ever been a benefit from the existence of the Russian people for us? No!”.

Continue reading