Tag Archives: history

“The Great Gas Game” – An Excellent Documentary from Vesti

Posted on by
Reading time: < 1 minute

The Gas Wars are continuing. Starting well during the time of USSR, when the USA tried to stop the supply of the Russian gas to Europe by the means of sanctions and provocations, through the Ukrainian gas machinations, when Ukraine was used as a patsy to sabotage and undermine Russian supplier reputation, while at the same time blackmailing Russia for cheap under-market-priced gas, which I wrote about in a 2014 article The Third Gas War: EU and US must pay for their “successes” in Ukraine.

Now the USA are trying to sabotage Nord Stream 2 by blackmailing Germany. This follows the successful blackmailing and sabotage of Bulgaria, which stopped the construction of the South Stream and depriving Bulgaria of about $700.000.000 and $800.000.000 per year over a span of 50 years – USA and EU successfully stole from Bulgaria about $37.500.000.000

And before that, USA/NATO invaded and bombed Yugoslavia, bombing into oblivion the gas refinery in the Serbian town of Pacevo in 1999.

All this recent, and not so recent, history is very well chronicled in the new English-subtitled documentary from Vesti: “The Great Gas Game”

UPDATE 2022: Since YouTube applied the “freedom of speech” principle and removed all speech that does not conform to the American directive on freedom, i.e. all Russian channels, including the one from the VGTRK that hosted the documentary, I re-uploaded a backup copy, which I happened to have, to Odysee.

The Clinton – Yeltsin Collusion — How USA Interfered in the Russian Affairs and Elections

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

The devastating period of the Wild ’90s during Yeltsin’s reign of chaos, is a topic which I have previously covered on multiple occasions, and which I will be coming back to in the future.

This time, I want to draw your attention to the newly-declassified documents, pertaining to the communications between Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin. These documents are especially telling in the current “Russian elections meddling” hysteria, which has engulfed the United States. In a flurry of accusations, backed by so far zero evidence, the US accuses Russia of swaying the public opinion in Trump’s favour by placing a few ads on Twitter. As the Russian saying goes, “a thief is always screaming ‘catch the thief’ loudest of all”. This perfectly illustrates the situation in the USA, in light of their continued and brazen track record of meddling in other states’ affairs, and in this case, specifically the Russian affairs during the Wild ’90s period.

The Clinton Digital Library declassified the Documents Concerning Russian President Boris Yeltsin.

RT made a short digest of 5 highlight points from this 591 page long publication:

‘Smart’ Putin & election loans: 5 must-read Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges released

The exchanges include:

  • Clinton sends ‘his people’ to get Yeltsin elected
  • Yeltsin questions NATO expansion
  • NATO bombing of Yugoslavia turns Russia against the West
  • Yeltsin asks US to ‘give Europe to Russia’
  • Clinton on Putin: ‘He’s very smart’

Continue reading →

Tolkien’s Beorn as a Personification of Russia

Posted on by
Reading time: 4 minutes

There are times when an article or an idea would sit as a draft for some time before seeing the light of publication, as if waiting for something. This article is of that kind, and it seemed to have been waiting for Lada Ray’s Forbidden History and Forgotten Origins webinars to catalyse me into putting some finishing touches and publishing it.

I first had an inkling of there being a connection between Tolkien’s depiction of Beorn and Rus when I was reading his books. Much later, that feeling returned as I was watching Peter Jackson’s dramatisation of The Hobbit. And the final pieces fell into place, while watching the behind the scenes documentaries on construction of Beorn’s house set and the visualisation of his character. I have created the shortened versions of the two documentaries to showcase the fragments that are especially interesting and telling for the topic at hand:



Before I proceed, let me reference my reader to another article of Lada Ray – Forbidden History: Are Scandinavians Slavs?. Many of the prerequisites are discussed there, so I would be repeating much of that article otherwise.

Continue reading →

UPDATED: Russian Calendar Shows Year 7527, or How Russian History Was Shortened by Peter I

Posted on by
Reading time: 8 minutes

The article you are about to read appears in Russian on The Svarog Day site (Update: the site went off-line in 2021, so the link is update to point to the WebArchive). Before embarking on it, a short contextual and linguistic introduction is needed.

I have been meaning to translate this article for some time, but as with a few other articles that will be coming out around this time, it did not feel like the time was ripe. It is Lada Ray’s forbidden history & forgotten origins webinar series that are now playing as a certain catalyst. Lada addresses this topic and the historical background behind this transition of the calendar in great detail in her webinar. She also addresses the aspects of a supposed impostor that replaced Peter I, which the article below alludes to. She presents arguments that there was no impostor, but that Peter was swayed in his views by his Western advisors during his travels to the West. Later I plan to do a translation of a film that dives into this topic, but for now, back to the topic of the Calendar.

Another note is the word “calendar”, which in old Russian was “kolo dar”, meaning “the gift of the sun-circle”. Lada Ray wrote an extensive article on this topic in 2015: Why Russians celebrate the New Year, and not Christmas, with New Year’s Tree? The Origin of ‘Calendar’ and Christmas/New Year’s Forbidden History. The article to some degree intersects with what I am about to translate, and it also greatly expands on the meaning of the word “calendar”.

The word “year” in modern Russian is written as “god” (год), and the reason for it will become apparent from the article. However, Russian originally used the word “leto” (лето) to denote “year”. In modern Russian the word “leto” means “summer”, but its original meaning is still preserved in different contexts and words, such as “letopis” (летопись, literally: “year writing”), meaning “chronicles”. “Leto” is also used to denote the age or timespan starting from 5 (it seems the reforms of which the article will talk, were only successfully enforced on short intervals), so you’d say “1 god” (1 year), but “5 let” (5 years).

In my translation I will use “year” for both, but will mark the word with either (god) or (leto) in parenthesis, where the context requires it.

Continue reading →

How the Russian Queen of France Anna Yaroslavna Taught the French to Wash

Posted on by
Reading time: 5 minutes

This is my translation of an interesting article from the 30th of July 2013, containing a letter from Anna Yaroslavna, Queen of France. The original in Russian can be found at the site of the on-line newspaper The President.

This article goes well along with Lada Ray’s “Forbidden History Forgotten Origins” webinar series, where the line of Rjurik and Anna Yaroslavna are discussed in Webinar 8 “1000 Lost Years & Falsified History”.

I have not verified the authenticity of the letter’s text, though given the other historical accounts of the French court of that time, the letter seems to describe the genuine state of affairs. I’ll try researching more into Anna’s letters at a later point.

An English translation of this personal old-Slavic text cannot convey all the emotions and colloquialisms, but should be read as the best approximation.

A Russian girl, Anna Yaroslavna – the Queen of France. She carried out a revolution in a foreign country. It was she who taught the French court to read and write in the XI century. She introduced the French to the bath and forced them to use fork and knife during meals. Anna kept up a correspondence with the Pope. Subjects of a foreign for her France worshipped Anna and called her Red Agnes.

The TV series “In Search of Truth” on STB TV channel with the host Vyacheslav Garmash is dedicated to this topic.

Anna Yaroslavna (also known as Anne of Kiev in the West) signed her name as “Анна Ръина” – “Anna Rhine”. Some translate this from the French “roi”, “Queen Anne”, which is wrong. The word “Ръина” – Rina – should be translated from the old Russian “Ra”, which means, well, “Russian”, (tl. note: or “light”) or “Queen”, which is the same.

Anna was born around 1024. At that time all of Rus was literate. Let us, for example, remember the birch bark letters of that time, of which many have been found. Anna was the youngest of three daughters of Knyaz (King) Yaroslav the Wise of Kiev, wife of French king Henry I, and Queen of France.

Anna grew up at the King’s court in Kiev and received good education. On may the 19th of 1051 she married the widowed Henry I, from whom she later had children.

And so, a very interesting letter from Anna Yaroslavna.


“Hello, my beloved father! Greetings to you, King of all Russia, from your faithful daughter Anya, Anna Yaroslavna Ruricovich, and now the Queen of France. And where did you send me, a sinner? To such a stinking hole, to France, to Paris-town, wishing to never have set my eyes on it!

You said the French are smart, while they don’t even know about the stoves. As the winter starts, they stoke the open hearths. From them soot fills the whole Palace, smoke in the whole room, and not a droplet of heat. I only find refuge here in the Russian beavers and sables. I once called theirs masons, and began to explain what a stove is. I drew and sketched, but to no avail – they do not understand, and that’s it. “Madam,” they say, “it’s impossible.” I answer: “Do not be lazy, go to Russia, we have a stove in every wooden hut, not to speak of the stone chambers.” And they say to me: “Madam, we do not believe. A house with a small chamber filled with fire, and there are no fires? Oh, non-non!” I swore that’s true. They say, “You, Russ, are barbarians, Scythians, Asians, that’s your witchcraft. Madame, see that you don’t tell this to anyone but us, or else both you and we will be burnt at the stake!»

And do you know what they eat, daddy? You won’t believe it – frogs! Even our common folk would be ashamed to put such things into their mouth, while here the dukes and duchesses not only eat them, but at the same time praise them. And they eat “côtelettes”. They would take a piece of meat, beat it with a hammer, fry and eat it.

The Byzantine spoons are still new to them, while they’ve never seen the Venetian forks. I once prepared for my husband, king Henry, the kurnik (translator note: a variaty of a large royal Russian pie, traditionally stuffed with chicken, duck, buckwheat porridge, potatoes and nuts – a few recipes here). He licked his hands. “Anchor! — he cried – More!” I made him some more. He screamed again, ” Anchor!” I said to him: “You stomach will ache!” He asks:” Kes-ke-se? — What is it?” I explained to him according to [the writings of] Claudius Galen. He says, ” You’re a blackbooker (witch)! See that you don’t tell anyone or the Pope will have us burnt at the stake.”

Another time I say to Henry: “Let me teach your clowns to perform ‘Alexandria’.” He replies: “And what is it?” I say, “the history of the wars of Alexander the Great.” — “Who is he?” Well, I explained to him in accordance with [the writings of] Antisthenes the Younger. He told me: “Oh, non-non! It’s incredible! One person cannot conquer so many countries!” Then I showed him the book. He grimaced and said, “I am not a priest to read so much! In Europe, no king can read. Don’t show this to anyone or my Dukes and Counts will promptly stab you with the daggers!” That’s the life here, father.

And also, Saracens came to us. No one, except me, could speak the tongue of the Saracens, so the Queen had to become an interpreter, even if the Dukes with Counts where gnashing their teeth. Yet this is something that I am not afraid of – my Varjags are always with me. Something else is scary. These Saracens invented al’kugl (Arab. — alcohol), it’s stronger than even our beer and mead, not speaking of the Polish water.

And this is why I am writing to you, father, so that not a single barrel of this al’kugl is allowed into Russia. God forbid! That will be the death to the Russian folk. And with this I bow to you in farewell, being thy true daughter Anna Yaroslavna Ruricovich, and by husband, Anna Regina Francorum.”

Such letters wrote the Russian Queen back home to Russia.

The ”Wild ’90s” in Russia, more memories

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

I’ve written several posts on the topic of the devastating “Wild ’90s” in Russia. What I find to be very important is the preservation of the peoples memories of that tragic era. Already there are signs that it has become etched in the Russian “gene pool” on the same level as the Time of Trouble of 1599, the Borodino battle of The Great Patriotic War of 1812 and the memories of The Second Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945, along with many other historic turning point events – both in hardship and happiness.

I wrote a translation of one such recollection in the article The ”Wild ’90s” in Russia, as reflected in people’s memory and in the second part of the testimonials translations. Here is another characteristic story from Ankdot.ru site, New Year-themes, yet sad and bittersweet. The author is maybe a little younger than myself. After the main translation, I will present some select comments to the post with more memories of that terrible and confusing time.

The original can be found here.

THE GRANDSON OF SANTA CLAUS

This was inspired by the stories about Santa Claus. A fair warning: it will not be fun. As I remember, my childhood was a happy one though it can hardly be called rich. First came the “perestroika”, then the “fun” of the 90s. My father had died, mother was a kindergarten teacher with a salary equivalent of 10 pounds of buckwheat a month (those who remembers 1992-1993 – he will understand). And all this against the background of the emerging abundance of imported goods. Kids today won’t understand what it was like in the early 90-ies to eat Snickers on a school break or go outside with a cassette tape recorder. As you can gather, with a monthly budget of 10 pounds of buckwheat, Snickers at a break, and especially the tape recorder in the courtyard were not to be dreamt of. I knew better, and didn’t even hint about such things.

So when on January 1, 1993 I received Sony Walkman as a gift – I was close to a shock. First, at the time it was better than both iPhone X and Apple Watch combined nowadays. Secondly, I knew that for the next six months the monthly ration of buckwheat would be halved. “Mom, from where?” “Don’t worry, it’s a present from work.” In short, until the summer I was treated at school, if not like a king, then at least as of particular noble bloodline.

And only a few years later did I learned that for the sake of the player, my mom worked part time as a cleaner in the same garden a few months…

Now I’m an adult of about the same age as my mother was back then. I earn more than well. But I cannot get my mom to agree to any expensive purchase (“You need to save money for a new car/apartment/dacha”. Those, who have parents who survived the 90s as adults will understand me). So I every time have to come up with some excuse for where the present came from. Travel package – “Yes, it’s a promo tour from some acquaintances, with a 50% discount, we must take it.” TV – it’s a bonus from the store, the phone – “we can buy it here twice as cheap, than what you have in Russia”. In my experience, what works best is to get tickets to the theatre “for the bonuses of the mobile operator, which will expire if they are not spent now.”

And also now I bought her tickets to the concert in the Kremlin, “tickets from friends, whose firm is sponsoring the concert”, while with tears welling up, in my inner eye I see a 13-year-old glowing from happiness, with a player in his hands.

My dears, my advice to you while it is not too late – please your parents. They, though they are already old, still believe in miracles. And I told you of some modern versions of the “miracles”.

Another NATO Lie Exposed – Not a Step Eastwards Were Empty Words

Posted on by
Reading time: 5 minutes

Last week saw another major newsworthy event that had the honour of being completely and silently ignored by the Western MSM. And that is no wonder. For one, the news item reaffirmed what was said before, and vehemently denied by USNATO: the reassurance given to Gorbachev that the block would not be expanding Eastwards of the Eastern Germany’s Border once the West (read: USA) got control of the whole of Germany.

The extensive report from the National security Archive, titled “NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard” demonstrates that assurances were, indeed, given from various NATO politicians and military top brass.

However, not even 10 years passed when the military block, having seen no repercussions for invading, bombing and demolishing the sovereign state of Yugoslavia – in breach of the international law, set its course Eastwards, creeping ever closer to the Russian borders, all the while increasing the demonising rhetoric aimed at Russia. You can see the dynamics of the expansion on the map below:

And so, the news, as published in RT:

Gorbachev WAS promised NATO would not expand east – declassified docs

In 1990, Western politicians repeatedly assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO wouldn’t expand east of Germany’s borders, but broke that promise less than a decade later, say insider archives from both sides of negotiations following the dismantling of the Berlin Wall.

Researchers from the respected George Washington University-based National Security Archive, which specializes in obtaining key declassified information from the government, have put together 30 crucial documents that clearly show several top Western officials vowing to Gorbachev in unison that NATO would not expand eastward. Some of these have been publicly available for several years, others have been revealed as a result of Freedom of Information requests for the study.

…

Other free and independent media published their own articles and commentary to the revelation. Here is an article from Russia Insider, republishing the article from National Interest:

Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev WAS PROMISED Numerous Times NATO Wouldn’t Move Past East German Border

Just take a look at the number of assurances given!

The West lied to Moscow and then lied about the lying. It can’t lie any longer.

Gorbachev only accepted German reunification—over which the Soviet Union had a legal right to veto under treaty—because he received assurances that NATO would not expand after he withdrew his forces from Eastern Europe from:

    James Baker,
    President George H.W. Bush,
    West German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher,
    West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl,
    the CIA Director Robert Gates,
    French President Francois Mitterrand,
    British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,
    British foreign minister Douglas Hurd,
    British Prime Minister John Major,
    and NATO secretary-general Manfred Woerner.

One very chilling fragment is the quotation of a prophetic interview of the American diplomat George F. Kennan:

“Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era,” Kennan wrote on February 5, 1997 in a New York Times op-ed. “Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”

Kennan’s sage advice was ignored, and the exact scenario he warned about has today come to pass. More than 25 years after the end of the Cold War, relations between Moscow and Washington are at their lowest point since the fall of the Soviet Union. Indeed, some have suggested that the United States and Russia are entering into a new cold war of sorts.

USA surely shot itself in the foot there, but, in a way, that was a positive move to awaken Russia from its self-destructive complacency.

Lada Ray offers some more insight in her expanded commentary to the Rt article in:

New Documents Prove US Lied to Gorbachev and Broke Promise of NATO Eastward Non-Expansion

The evidence presented in the video above shows without a shadow of a doubt that US/Germany/EU/NATO lied and swindled Russia and the USSR. The temporary weakness of Russia was used as an excuse to break promises. Moreover, Germany never paid in full the agreed upon compensation for the withdrawal of Soviet troops, and we are talking billions of euros (plus close to 30 years worth of intrest!). This Germany denies as well, but I’m sure the documents to that effect will also come to light in due course. By the way, I have discussed this issue in Earth Shift Webinar 6: THE PUTIN ENIGMA.

EDIT:
Today Russia Insider published a follow-up article by Eric Magrolis, someone who was there as the historical move and the historical lie happened:
‘Sorry Chump, You Didn’t Have it in Writing’

The Poles, Hungarians and Czechs were brought into NATO, then Romania and Bulgaria, the Baltic States, Albania, and Montenegro. Washington tried to get the former Soviet Republics of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. The Moscow-aligned government of Ukraine was overthrown in a US-engineered coup. The road to Moscow was open.

All the bankrupt, confused Russians could do was denounce these eastward moves by the US and NATO. The best response NATO and Washington could come up with was, ‘well, there was no official written promise.’ This is worthy of a street peddler selling counterfeit watches.

By the way, consider this paragraph, and dwell on the numbers:

Gorbachev was a humanist, a very decent, intelligent man who believed he could end the Cold War and nuclear arms race. He ordered the Red Army back from Eastern Europe. I was in Wunsdorf, East Germany, HQ of the Group of Soviet Forces, Germany, and at Stasi secret police HQ in East Berlin right after the pullout order was given. The Soviets withdrew their 338,000 troops and 4,200 tanks and sent them home at lightening speed.

Soviet Union was not prepared to take that large a number of servicemen back – there was no local infrastructure, no prepared dislocation settlements. All this put a huge additional economic strain on the already ailing economy of the USSR, and was one of the many blows, dealt to it by the West.

204 A-Bombs Against 66 Cities: US Drew up First Plan to Nuke Russia Before WWII Was Even Over – Reblog

Posted on by
Reading time: 8 minutes

We’ve written about it before, how USA was planning to annihilate USSR (read – Russia) just as WWII was drawing to a close. You can read that first article USA declassifies its plans to nuke 1/3 of planet Earth.

But it’s never too seldom to repeat this, and today’s publication in Russia Insider 204 A-Bombs Against 66 Cities: US Drew up First Plan to Nuke Russia Before WWII Was Even Over does just that.

UPDATE May 2, 2025: the original of the RI article disappeared, so the link is updated with the version stored at the WebArchive. We also update this post to include the complete copy of the article, with all the image. The article at Russia Insider was in turn re-published from South Front, here at the new address.

Our reader, JMF, found two more articles of interest on this topic: From 1945-49 the US and UK planned to bomb Russia into the Stone Age and The First Atomic Stockpile Requirements (September 1945).

“Wipe the Soviet Union Off the Map”: Planned US Nuclear Attack against USSR

This video from South Front is based on the research of Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Below is the full text of Professor Chossudovsky’ article published by Global Research

According to a secret document dated September 15, 1945, “the Pentagon had envisaged blowing up the Soviet Union with a coordinated nuclear attack directed against major urban areas.

All major cities of the Soviet Union were included in the list of 66 “strategic” targets. The tables below categorize each city in terms of area in square miles and the corresponding number of atomic bombs required to annihilate and kill the inhabitants of selected urban areas.

Six atomic bombs were to be used to destroy each of the larger cities including Moscow, Leningrad, Tashkent, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa.

The Pentagon estimated that a total of 204 bombs would be required to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”. The targets for a nuclear attack consisted of sixty-six major cities.
Continue reading →

Agents of Revolution-2. How the Leaders of October Repaid their Debts to the Sponsors

Posted on by
Reading time: 6 minutes

Marking the centenary of the October Revolution, I am publishing translations of three articles from “Argumenty i Fakty”. The second article in a series of two from 18.04.2012, taking a look at how the Western funds invested into the revolution got repaid. The article is by a reputable historian and writer Nikolai Starikov. Read the translation of the first article to learn the role of Valdimir Uljanov / Lenin on the eve of the October Revolution.

Having declaring war on global capital, once in power, Lenin and Trotsky gave up enormous resources to the mercy of their enemies. Was it a repayment for the “sponsorship” assistance in organizing the revolution and the Civil war?

In the previous atricle we told about the adventures Vladimir Lenin and his comrades experienced 95 years ago (note: the article is from 2012) travelling from abroad to Russia, and who aided them in that.

Writer, historian Nikolai Starikov, author of the books “Chaos and revolution weapon of the dollar”, “1917. The answer is “Russian” revolution,” etc., says that the Bolsheviks did not forget their benefactors. And though they did not completed the “order” for the collapse of Russia, they, nevertheless, more than repaid the financial debts.

The Civil war was barely over, when the young Soviet government started showing serious interest in the production of the yellow metal. On the 14th of November 1925, the government of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR), with a light hand of Trotsky (recall that this fiery Russian revolutionary of Jewish origin spent about 12 years of the early twentieth century in the West and even managed to obtain an American passport), transfers the rights to the development of the gold mines in Eastern Siberia to the company “Lena Goldfields Co., Ltd”. The very same, whose workers were shot in cold blood in 1912, when they were protesting against low wages. The famous Lena massacre gave at that time the Bolsheviks an excuse to denounce the autocratic rule in Russia. While now the Bolsheviks themselves transferred to a British consortium that owned “Lena Goldfields” the rights to mine gold in the basin of Lena river (and not only there) for 30 years! The area of the concession covered a huge territory from Yakutia to the Urals, and the interests of the Western company now went far beyond gold. They included silver, copper, lead, iron…

Under the agreement with the Soviets, a whole group of mining and metallurgical enterprises was handed over into disposition of “Lena Goldfields”. And what did the country receive in return? A measly 7% of the volume of the extracted metal.

Enormous wealth went overseas for virtually nothing. However, this blatant robbery of the country lasted for a relatively short period of time. On the 10th of February 1929 Leon Trotsky was expelled from the Soviet Union. And – what an amazing coincidence – in December of the same year “Lena Goldfields” was forced to cease its operations in Russia.

Swedish business

Someone will remark that the looting of the country was happening after the death of Lenin in January 1924. The debts for the sponsorship of the revolutionaries were seemingly returned only by Trotsky, who in spring 1917 arrived to Russia from New York with ten thousand dollars in his pocket? (By the way, not only he and Iljitch [patrimonial of Ulianov {Lenin}] returned to the country back then. Other “agents” came to the revolutionary Russia from the West: V. Antonov-Ovseenko, who later arrested the Provisional Government; the future head of the Petrograd Special Services, Moisey Uritsky, with whose murder starts the “red terror”; V. Volodarsky (Moisey Goldstein) and many others.)

In reality, the Bolshevik government entered into the shady deals with the West also during the life of Lenin. Perhaps the most notorious of these concerned the purchase of locomotives from the factory of the Swedish firm “Nidquist and Holm” (NoH AB).

The volume of the order is staggering – 1,000 locomotives to the price of 200 million gold roubles. It’s almost a quarter of the then gold reserves of the country! Note that until then, this firm could not afford a production of more than 40 locomotives per year. And then it was offered to make a thousand! The order was distributed over 5 years: in 1922, Russia was to receive 200 locomotives, and in 1923-1925 – 250 annually. Why would the Soviet country, in dire need of railway technology, want to buy them from this particular Swedish company and at highly inflated prices? Why would she agreed to wait for the delivery for 5 years, instead of having to buy the right product cheaper and immediately, but in a different place? The people’s Commissariat of Railways, headed in the early 1920s by Leon Trotsky, desired exactly these locomotives so much that not only did they make an advance payment of 7 million kronor, but also gave the Swedish company… an interest-free loan of 10 million kronor “for the construction of a mechanical workshop and boiler room”.

The Soviet magazine “The Economist” wrote about the peculiarities of this affair in early 1922. The author A. Frolov proposed to investigate: why was it necessary to order engines in Sweden? After all, for such money it was possible “to put in order our locomotive plants and feed theirs workers”. The Putilov factory had been producing more than 200 locomotives per year before the war. Why not issue a credit to them? And Lenin indeed sorted out the situation. After consulting with Trotsky, he asked Felix Dzerzhinsky to close down “The Economist” magazine (which also on previous occasions published articles unpleasant for the Soviets), stating: “the Staff of “The Economist” are the enemies of the most ruthless kind. All of them must be sent out of Russia”. The suspicious contract with the Swedes remained unchanged after the intervention of the leader.

So how did the Bolsheviks return the money to the foreign bankers? They obviously could not simply transfer them to the West and write in the “Purpose of payment” column: “Repayment for the Russian revolution and the victory in the Civil war”. A good excuse was needed. Such as to buy something in the West, for example those selfsame locomotives. Trotsky organizes the purchase, but Lenin, it seems, is aware of the transaction and does not prevent it. Otherwise this doubtful contract would have cost Trotsky his career.

In fact, many documents confirm, that the Swedish banking system was used to inject money for the revolution into Russia. And later it was also used to transfer money out. Already in the autumn of 1918 Isidore Gukovsky, deputy of the People’s Commissar of Finance in Soviet Russia, arrived in Stockholm. With him he had crates full of money and jewellry. The value of the goods was estimated at 40-60 million roubles. Millions of roubles were transferred to the Stockholm banks, including “Nya Banken” of Olof Aschberg, whose name often appears in the books on the financing of the Bolsheviks.

A Deal with the Devil

It is difficult to tell the exact number of contracts and concessions issued by the Soviet government to the American firms at the beginning of the construction of a new state. But this includes both $25 million of commissions to the American Industrialists for the period from July 1919 to January 1920, and the concession for the extraction of asbestos that was issued to Armand Hammer in 1921, and the lease agreement issued for 60-years to the Frank Vanderlip and its consortium, which provided for the exploitation of deposits of coal and oil, as well as fishing in the North-Siberian region, with an area of 600 thousand sq. km.

The return of funds allocated for the elimination of the Russian Empire, was obviously one of the agreements between the representatives of the Western governments and the Bolsheviks. And both Lenin and Trotsky carefully observed this agreement. However these new leaders did not meet the other Western hopes. Having been put at the helm of Russia to completely ruin it (and the initial aims of the West coincided with the revolutionary dreams of Lenin), Lenin started instead to put the torn apart country back together. To build a strong and independent state which again plays a key role in world politics.

However, the leader of the proletarians did not have long left to live. I do not exclude that the shot from SR member F. Kaplan, that precipitated his death, was a precautionary measure on the part of his former foreign guardians, so that he would not be getting full of himself. Trotsky, perhaps, was ready to continue to work for the West, but in 1929 Stalin sent him out, and then sent in pursuit an assassin R. Mercader, with an ice pick. As we know, no deal with the devil goes without repercussions.

Agents of Revolution-1. Was Lenin a Spy for Germany?

Posted on by
Reading time: 6 minutes

Marking the centenary of the October Revolution, I am publishing translations of three articles from “Argumenty i Fakty”. The first article in a series of two from 11.04.2012, taking a look at who was Valdimir Uljanov / Lenin. The article is by a reputable historian and writer Nikolai Starikov.

Vladimir Lenin’s journey with a group of friends in a “sealed train” starting from a quiet and well-to-do Switzerland, through Germany and into the revolutionary Russia, that took place exactly 95 years ago (the article is from 2012), gave rise to the rumours that Lenin was a German spy.

This trip that changed the course of the world history, still raises many questions. Chief among them: who helped Lenin to return home? In the spring of 1917 Germany was at war with Russia, and it would have benefited Germans to drop at the heart of the enemy a handful of Bolsheviks who preached the defeat of their government in the imperialist war. But not all is that simple, says the writer and historian Nikolai Starikov, author of the books “Chaos and revolution – weapon of the dollar”, “1917. The answer to “Russian” revolution,” etc.

– If Lenin was a German spy, he would have immediately begun to seek the return to Petrograd through Germany. And would, of course, immediately get a go-ahead. But reality was different. Let’s remember: tiny Switzerland, where Iljich lived, was surrounded by France, Italy, Germany and Austria-Hungary, locked in mortal combat.

There were two ways to leave Switzerland: through an Entente member country or through the territory of its opponents. Lenin initially selects the first option. On the 5th (18th) March (here and further the date in bracket is according to the new style. – Ed.) Inessa Armand receives from him the following telegram: “My Dear friend! We are dreaming about the trip… I would love to give You an assignment in England to learn quietly and surely, if I could pass through. I shake your hand. Yours V.U.”. Between the 2nd (15th) and 6th (19th) of March of 1917, Lenin telegraphs to his colleague Ganetsky in Stockholm, presenting a different plan: to travel to Russia under the guise of… a deaf-mute Swede. While on March the 6th, in a letter to V. A. Karpinsky he suggests: “Buy in your name papers for a journey to France and England, and I will use them to go through England (and Holland) to Russia. I can wear a wig”.

The first mention of Germany as a route appears in a telegram to Karpinsku from Lenin on the 7th (20th) of March – on the 4th day of the search for options. But soon he confesses in a letter to I. Armand: “It does not work out with Germany”. Isn’t it strange? Lenin could not agree with the “accomplices” – the Germans – on the passage through their territory and was for a long time inventing workarounds: either to “quietly” go through England, or in a wig with false documents through France, or to pretend to be deaf and dumb Swede…

Conspiracy of the “allies”

I am convinced that even if there had been some secret agreements between Lenin and the German authorities at that point, they were very vague. Otherwise there would initially be no difficulties with his delivery to Russia. The Germans did not expect a successful February revolution, they did not expect any revolution at all! Because, apparently, they were not preparing any revolution. Then who prepared the February of 1917? For me the answer is obvious: Western “allies” of Russia in the Entente. It is their agents who brought first the workers and then the soldiers out on the streets of Petrograd, while the British and French ambassadors were in charge of these events. It happened unexpectedly, not only for the Germans, but also for the Bolsheviks. Lenin and his comrades were not required until February, the “allied” intelligence agencies were able to organize labour unrest and military rebellion without their aid. But so as to bring the revolutionary process to fulfilment (i.e., the collapse of Russia, which would fully subordinate her to the will of the Atlantic powers), it was required to add fresh yeast to the boiler – in the form of Lenin.

There is every reason to believe that in March 1917 it was the “allied” intelligence that in separate negotiations with the Germans convinced them not to hinder the movement of the Russians-Bolsheviks (i.e. representatives of the enemy country, who, according to the law of war, should have been arrested and put in jail until the end of the war). And the Germans agreed to that.

General Erich Ludendorff wrote in his memoirs: “By sending Lenin to Russia our government assumed a special responsibility. From a military point of view his journey through Germany had its justification: Russia had to collapse into the abyss.” After learning the good news, Lenin was delighted. “You will maybe say that the Germans will not provide a carriage. Let’s bet that they will!” he writes on March the 19th (April 1st) to Inessa Armand. And later, also to her: “We have more money for the trip, than what I anticipated… our comrades in Stockholm helped a lot”. Less than two weeks passed between the two letters to his beloved (“Germany won’t let us pass” and “they’ll give [a carriage]”), and during that time, the United States, Britain and Germany decided the fate of Russia. The Americans provided the necessary for Russian radicals money (indirectly, through the selfsame Germans and Swedes), while the British provided the non-interference from the Provisional Government, which they controlled. In Stockholm – where Lenin and his companions arrived after a long journey by train through Germany, and then by a ferry to Sweden – they easily got a group visa to Russia at the Russian Consulate. Moreover, the Provisional Government even paid for their tickets home from Stockholm! The revolutionaries were met by a guard of honour at the Finland railway station in Petrograd on the 3rd (16th) of April. Lenin gave a speech, which concluded with the words: “Long live the socialist revolution!” But the new government of Russia did not even think of arresting him…

The bucks at his bosom

Another fiery revolutionary, Leon Trotsky (Bronstein), was preparing for a journey home from the United States during those same March days. Like Vladimir Lenin, Lev Davidovich received all the documents from the Russian Consul in New York. On the 14th (27th) of March Trotsky departed with his family from New York on the ship “Kristianiafjord”. However, upon arrival to Canada, he and several of his associates were briefly taken ashore. But soon they were allowed to continue – at the request of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Provisional Government, Pavel Miliukov. An amazing request, isn’t it? Not in the least, if you consider that Milyukov was a personal friend of Jacob Schiff, an American magnate, “chief sponsor” of several Russian revolutions. During the arrest, by the way, it turned out that Trotsky was a U.S. citizen travelling on British transit visa and a visa for entry to Russia.

Additionally, ten thousand dollars were found in his possession – a huge amount at that time, which he could hardly have earned only from the fees for newspaper articles. If that, however, was money for the Russian revolution, then it was only a negligible part. Principal amounts from the American bankers were transferred to the correct accounts of verified people. This was nothing new for Schiff and other financiers of the United States. They allocated funds to the Social Revolutionaries and the Social Democrats in 1905, and also helped those who prepared the February. And now came the time to help the most “hard core” revolutionaries. By the way, in the case of Trotsky, this assistance was almost a family affair: the wife of Lev Davidovich, nee Sedova, was the daughter of a wealthy banker Zhivotovsky – companion of Warburg bankers, and those in turn were companions and relatives of Jacob Schiff.

The second part of the article is called Agents of Revolution-2. How the Leaders of October Repaid their Debts to the Sponsors

100 Year Anniversary of the October Revolution of 1917

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

This 7th of October 2017 marks the 100 year anniversary of the October (old style) Russian Revolution of 1917.

The event itself was both a curse and a blessing for Russia, a great tragedy and a salvation. Like so many times before and after, Russia rose from the ashes, stronger than what her ill-wishers could possibly imagine. Many controversies are floating around the subject of the Revolution, and many inaccuracies.

Let us start with the first – there were two revolutions. One in February, which actually depose Tzar Nikolai II, and one in October. The February revolution carried all the traits of a colour revolution – from the public unrest (justified, but externally directed), to removal of the current order in the country. There is evidence that the abdication note from Nikolai II is forged. After the February revolution, the temporary government did not have any real power, the country was plunged in a state power vacuum, which was ultimately filled in October/November 1917.

From a bird’s eye view perspective, one can argue that the foundation for the revolution (or what one would call nowadays with the ignomous term of Maidan) were laid much earlier – with the first attempt in 1905. Later, creation of the pretext of WWI, dragging of Russia in to World War (despite Nikolai II’s attempts to avoid it), the October revolution, the Versailles Treaty wich basically made WWII inevitable, and ultimately WWII itself were beads of a string of one single event.

WWI laid the foundations putting for economic strain, and thus social unrest on the pre-WWI economically blossoming Russia. WWI gave Britain hope to weaken and do away with Russia, and for Germany to get “lebensraum” (yes, that term was not coined by Hitler, but prior to WWI, and later adopted by him).

By 1917 Germany badly needed Russia to exit WWI as it overstrained itself, Britain still needed Russia destroyed. Lenin gave promises to both sides, thus getting financing from Britain and free passage from Germany. He also delivered on most, but not all of the promises, ultimately saving Russia from destruction.

British king George V, while granting asylum to a jeweller Carl Faberge, refused such courtesy to cousin of Nikolai II. Britain did not need any legitimate continuity of rule in Russi, it need Russia weakened and dismembered, and Lenin was the demolition man, though luckily for Russia he did not prove as cooperative as Britain had hoped, once in power.

There is an enlightening article at RT, Why didn’t Britain’s king save deposed Russian cousin after revolution? with this photo. Can you tell George V from Nikolai II?

Lada Ray conveyed the above and more in her post What is the Truth about 1917 Bolshevik Revolution? Striking Festival of Light in St. Petersburg, as well as in her informative Webinar INVERTED COLLAPSE USSR’S PAST – WEST’S FUTURE.

I planning on translating three articles from Aigumenty i Fakty pertaining to the financing, ties and movement of Lenin in 1917. Stay tunes.

Britain Re-asserts Its Support for Neo-Nazism in Ukraine. And the Rise of Malorossian Phoenix!

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

Graham Philips publish today a news article, which in effect highlights Britain’s re-asserted support for neo-Nazism in Ukraine, a regime that the West installed there in 2014 and which has been committing crimes against humanity and war crimes in Donbass ever since!

Rank Injustice, Hypocrisy in the UK – The Case of Ben Stimson and Chris Garrett

I’ve written, and made about this case extensively, and for some time. Now, with the imprisonment of Ben Stimson, and media exposure of that, it’s come to wider attention –

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4697734/Benjamin-Stimson-joined-pro-Russian-militia-jailed.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/british-man-pro-russian-forces-ukraine-jailed-terrorism-benjamin-stimson-a7842521.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-40612229

Interesting that here, the BBC didn’t mention one of the key reasons Ben was sent down, was the BBC’s framing of him –

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV-iJ50GxJ8

And in the BBC article, this quote –

Det Ch Supt Russ Jackson, head of the North West Counter-Terrorism Unit, said: “The images of him holding a rifle and wearing military clothing are deeply concerning.

“He has been jailed for the role he played in a violent conflict and I hope his conviction will send a message to all those who are even considering joining conflicts.”

‘Deeply concerning’. It’s interesting that no-one in UK authority finds Chris Garrett, from the Isle of Man, and his actions in the Ukraine conflict ‘deeply concerning’. Chris, joining a neo-Nazi battalion, and killing in its name, troubles no one in British officialdom.

So, while Ben is now doing over 5 years in Strangeways prison, for, as even the police admit, effectively just posing with a weapon. Chris is over on Ukrainian territory, doing much more than posing with weapons. The fates of the 2 men contrast sharply –

In other monumental news, the Federal State of Malorossiya is created and rising from the Western sponsored Ukro-Nazi destroyed remains of the former Ukraine:

Alexander Zakharchenko announces creation of new state

Today, on July 18, the capital of the Donetsk People’s Republic held a historic event – the signing of a political declaration on the creation of a new state, which will become the legal successor of ‘Ukraine’. The new state formation will consist of 19 regions of the former Ukraine and be called Malorossiya with the center of the new state in Donetsk. Kiev remains a historical and cultural center without the status of the capital city.

“All of us here are going to talk about the future. We propose a plan for the reintegration of the country through the law and the Constitution. We must build a new country in which the concepts of conscience and honour are not forgotten. We offer the citizens of Ukraine a peaceful way out of the difficult situation, without war. This is our last offer not only to the Ukrainians, but also to all countries that supported the civil war in Donbass. I am convinced that we will do everything possible and impossible,” said the Head of the DPR, Alexander Zakharchenko.”

…

“Malorossiya is a federal state with wide autonomy of the regions. The right of regional languages is guaranteed to be preserved, the flag of Bogdan Khmelnitsky is recognized as the national flag,” Alexander Timofeyev cited the constitutional act.

“The state “Ukraine” showed itself as a failed state and demonstrated the inability to provide its inhabitants with a peaceful and prosperous present and future,” one of the points of the political declaration emphasizes.”

Breaking! American military UAV over Donbass! Plus, 3rd anniversary of the MH-17 shoot-down

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

Today, on the 3rd anniversary of the Malaysian Airlines MH-17 shoot-down over Ukraine, USA made a surprising appearance over Donbass.

Here is a translation of a report from Argumenty i Fakty of 17th of July 2017:

A strategic unmanned aerial vehicle of the U.S. Air Force RQ-4A Global Hawk made on a Sunday a multi-hour reconnaissance mission along the demarcation line in Donbass, Interfax reports.

It is reported that the machine flew from an air base in Sigonella, Sicily and spent a few hours flying at an altitude of about 17 kilometres from north to south along the demarcation line between Ukraine and the self-proclaimed DNR and LNR, but did not cross it.

After the assignment, it left the Ukrainian airspace north of Moldova.

It is noted that the capabilities of the drone allow it to monitor a radius of up to 300 km, so it could monitor the entire territory of Donbass, and also the border regions of Russia.


A UAV like this flew over Donbass

This leads up to questions of what USA are up to – a preparation for an invasion?

In the meantime, the tragedy of the MH-17 shoot-down is remembered, despite the Western foot-dragging in the investigation, and despite the general withholding of information from the public. Back in 2014 I wrote that Russia will do everything that the MH-17 shoot-down is not forgotten and that the responsible for the atrocity would be found and punished.

RT commemorates the tragedy with the article

MH17 tragedy: Key questions remain unanswered as int’l probe enters 4th year

Three years after Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 crashed in Ukraine, crucial questions about the tragedy remain unanswered as international investigators are tied to dubious theories and seem to pay little attention to data provided by Russia.

…

Missile type

Continue reading →

The USA’s track record of chemical weapons use and ISIS military support.

Posted on by
Reading time: 6 minutes

We’ve all long known that whenever USA “involves” in “democratising” a country, that country turns to dust. Or a radioactive waste. It once started with firebombing and nuking of Japan, then continued with invasion and split up of Korea, then with turning Vietnam into a chemical wasteland with Agent Orange.

But it really took off when USA would no longer be balanced out by Russia and started feeling that it can do whatever it likes without any consequences. It really took off with the invasion of Yugoslavia, splitting it up and turning parts of it (the Serbian Slavic parts) into a radioactive wasteland. Then came Iraq, Lybia, Egypt,

In Ukraine, after the US-sponsored Ukro-Nazi violent coup d’etat, Ukros used white Phosphorus bombs against its own population. Besides Ukraine, only USA and Israel used white Phosphorus against humans.

And now Syria with the US-created ISIS…

Some time ago I translated a documentary Democracy of Mass Destruction, which detailed much of the above. And now the Yugoslavian drama continues. Finally Serbia takes the aggressors to court:

‘Up to 15 tons of depleted uranium used in 1999 Serbia bombing’ – lead lawyer in suit against NATO

An international legal team is preparing a lawsuit against NATO over the alliance’s alleged use of depleted uranium munitions during its bombing of Yugoslavia. These have allegedly caused a rise in cancer-related illnesses across the region over the years.

“The NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 used between 10 and 15 tons of depleted uranium, which caused a major environmental disaster,” said Srdjan Aleksic, a Serbian lawyer who leads the legal team, which includes lawyers from the EU, Russia, China and India. The legal team was formed by the Serbian Royal Academy of Scientists and Artists.

“In Serbia, 33,000 people fall sick because of this every year. That is one child every day,” he claimed.

NATO’s press office says it’s now aware of Serbia’s allegations, but gave no further comment.

When asked as of why Serbia has decided to sue NATO 19 years after the attacks, the lawyer said “considering the horrific consequences for our population… it is never too late to sue someone who has caused an environmental catastrophe, someone [who] bombed Serbia with a quasi-nuclear weapon, i.e. depleted uranium.”

The Serbian lawyer says 19 countries that were part of NATO at the time need to pay compensation for “for the financial and non-financial damages… to all the citizens who died or fell sick as a proven result of the NATO bombing.”

“We expect the members of NATO to provide treatment to our citizens who are suffering from cancer,” Aleksic said, adding that the bloc “must also provide the necessary technology and equipment to remove all traces of the depleted uranium” from Serbia.

“The use of banned weapons” by the US-led military alliance in the Balkans “was a violation of all the international conventions and rules that protect people” from such kind of weapons, the lawyer claimed, adding that NATO also used depleted uranium in Iraq in 1991.

But USA is still continuing with its atrocities and uses chemical weapons, only admitting to it, when backing out and shifting blame becomes completely impossible:

US-led coalition admits use of white phosphorus in Mosul amid mounting criticism

A New Zealand general has confirmed that the US-led coalition fighting in Mosul has used munitions loaded with white phosphorus. It comes amid mounting criticism over the use of the multipurpose weapon, which can be extremely dangerous to civilians.

US admits using toxic depleted uranium against ISIS in Syria

More than 5,000 rounds of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition were used in two attacks on Islamic State oil tankers in eastern Syria, the US military has confirmed. The US-led coalition previously pledged it would not use the controversial ordnance.

The strategy is still the same – poison the land and make it uninhabitable if you fail to completely take over it. And it looks like USA are failing to take over Syria. In their last attempt they resort to attacking Syrian forces in Syria, claiming they pose danger to the invading (!) American forces.

Tomahawk missile strike on Syria was ‘after-dinner entertainment’ – US commerce secretary
US strikes pro-govt forces in Syria, shoots down drone
US-led coalition downs Syrian army plane in southern Raqqa

In Russia they are exasperated and started to call the spade for the spade, discarding the protocol:

US-led coalition’s downing of Syrian plane ‘act of aggression’ & ‘support for terrorists’ – Moscow

“What is it then, if not an act of aggression, an act directly in breach of international law,” Ryabkov told journalists in Moscow.

“If you want, it’s actually help for the terrorists the US is fighting, declaring that they are conducting a counterterrorism policy,” the official added.

Ryabkov added that he believed the strike “should be first of all regarded as the continuation of the US agenda of neglecting the norms of international law. Regardless of who has power in Washington, people there are used to the fact that there are circumstances allowing them to arrogantly look down on – and in some situations, to openly ignore – the basics of international relations.”

And Russia is going to act upon it. Next time an American war plane tries some such atrocity in the foreign skies, it will be shot:

Russian military halts Syria sky incident prevention interactions with US as of June 19 – Moscow

“In the areas of combat missions of Russian air fleet in Syrian skies, any airborne objects, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles of the [US-led] international coalition, located to the west of the Euphrates River, will be tracked by Russian ground and air defense forces as air targets,” the Russian Ministry of Defense stated.

The ministry emphasized that Russian warplanes were on a mission in Syrian airspace during the US-led coalition’s attack on the Syrian Su-22, while the coalition failed to use the communication line to prevent an incident.

“The command of the coalition forces did not use the existing communication channel between the air commands of Al Udeid Airbase (in Qatar) and the Khmeimim Airbase to prevent incidents in Syrian airspace.”

Russia tried to act a a gentleman with the USA, warning and talking, but the USA acts and understands only bullying and force, so force they shall get

The American action in Syria may seem stupid and reckless acts of invasion. They are indeed invasion of a sovereign state, but they are not reckless. They have a goal of pushing the ISIS forces towards the government positions, but before that weakening the Syrian forces and not allowing them to take on ISIS first. that would have allowed USA to secure for itself about 60% of Eastern Syria and potentially splitting the country in two, like what they did with Korea. Take a look at the following situation maps from Rossi Barbera’s analytical blog post series “Never fight with the Russians”:


Left: Real situation of the 25th of May. Right: hypothetical situation if the US-supported forces succeeded.


And this (in green) would have been the de-facto US controlled part of Syria in case of American success and the Syrian forces’ failure.

That is the real reason and goal for the Amerecans bombing Syrians and supporting ISIS.

The following Op-Edge describes it really well:

‘US becoming de facto defense shield for Islamic State in Syria’

Washington’s Political Propaganda Tool – “Golodomor” (famine) in Ukraine

Posted on by
Reading time: 9 minutes

In this article I want to cover the topic of the so-called “Golodomor” (death by starvation), the term which was coined by the US Congress in 1988 as a tool targeting USSR, so as to foment discord and chip away the borderlands – Ukraine. The period of starvation in USSR of 1930s did indeed happen, but it was not exclusive to Ukraine and did not have such a scale, as claimed by the followers of the Washington directive.

To put that into personal perspective, my great-grandmother on maternal line died of famine, and he family lived in Southern Siberia (Altai Krai), one of the most fertile regions of Russia.

In 2014 Lada Ray wrote an extensive in-depth article The Real Truth About USSR: Golodomor and Collectivization in Ukraine, which I strongly recommend everyone to read, including the comments, and Lada’s replies to them. Here is a short fragment:

Back to collectivization and golodomor (= death from starvation): it took place in the early 1930s. It happened for several reasons: 1. Peasants sometimes didn’t care for fields and cattle that they felt wasn’t theirs after it was taken into kolkhozes. 2. Sabotage, burning and poisoning of cattle and fields by foreign agents. 3. Mistakes of authorities, both central and local. 4. Several bad years of drought and poor harvest in parts of Russia and Ukraine.

This is very important! Collectivization and golodomor were NOT Ukraine-specific phenomenons. Same exact results from collectivization happened in rich agricultural areas of Russia, such as Povolzhie and Kuban. In fact, the real hunger was in Povolzhie (the Volga region). Golodomor is a Russian word, not Ukrainian. Everyone suffered. So, making this into a Ukraine-specific issue is clearly a disgusting propaganda ploy.

There was never a secret made of golodomor in Russia – as a child I studied it in my Soviet history books. Perhaps, Russians were a little too self-punishing about it. The overall cost of golodomor was probably two hundred thousand lives, and it was a huge tragedy. I doubt more than 20,000 died in Ukraine. Much, much more died in Russia.

3 years have passed since that publication, but Washington is loath to abandon the propaganda line that brought so many dividends, and so this card is being played in the US, with the latest development of the State of Washington passing a “Golodomor” resolution… Below I am presenting a translation of an article by Ukrainian historian and political analyst in exile Rostislav Ishchenko with the title “Washington’s Genocide: USA speculates on the topic of starvation in Ukraine”.

But before we embark on reading of this article, let us keep in mind the developments in the United States of 1932-1933. During these years – the years of Great Depression – 7,5 million Americans died of hunger, while at the same time Roosevelt’s government destroyed crops and stock so as not to allow further depression of the prices on the foods market. Try to find demographic statistics for USA for 1932 – you will not be able to, as data for that year is mysteriously missing. So here we have another example of projection, so actively used in the American politics, or, simply put, a case of a teapot calling a kettle…

Incidentally, in many Ukrainianophilic publications you will see the Ukrainised term “holodomor”, which sounds stupid to the Slavic ear – “holod” means “cold”, so the derived term becomes “death from freezing”…

The Ukrainian Embassy in the USA can be congratulated with another large necrophiliac “victory.” The Senate of the State of Washington (located on the Pacific coast, not to be confused with the U.S. capital Washington, D.C. located on the Potomac river, near its confluence with the Atlantic ocean) adopted a resolution recognizing the so-called Golodomor (ukr.: Holodomor) as “genocide orchestrated by Joseph Stalin and the Soviet regime against the Ukrainian people”.

Until now a resolution which called Golodomor for a “man-made famines” was passed on 19 August 2016 by the Assembly of the State of California. There are still 48 “unstarved” States remaining and therefore, another 48 potential “victories” of Ukrainian diplomacy.

This, however, cannot change the official U.S. view on this issue. The fact is that in 1984, actively fighting against the USSR, Ronald Reagan created a Commission to study the 1932-1933 famine in Ukraine (Mace Commission, named after its President, James Mace). The Commission predictably concluded that “Stalin and his entourage committed genocide against Ukrainians in 1932-1933”.

US still occasionally refers to the opinion of the Mace Commission, but they are yet to dare to officially legalize its findings at the Federal level. Moreover, the James Mace complained that after the Commission’s findings were made public, the doors of the academic institutions in the United States became closed to him.

This reaction of the American scientific community is natural. In the 80-ies of the last century, politicians in Washington still did not have a monopoly on truth, and scientists valued their reputation. It is therefore not surprising that attempts to confirm the findings of the Mace Commission failed. The International commission created in 1988 by the initiative of the “world Congress of free Ukrainians” with the goal of investigating the famine, upset their customers, finding no evidence neither of the artificial nature of the famine nor of the intention to destroy the Ukrainian nation.

It was actually after this that the theme of famine stalled for several years. It was too difficult, without losing objectivity, to explain why in the course of the famine, ostensibly aimed at the destruction of the Ukrainians, the greatest losses were in the rural population of Kazakhstan (nearly 31% of the total) and the Volga region (23% of the total). While in the Ukraine and the Caucasus (where famine was also raging) the losses amounted to 20.5% and 20.4% respectively of the total rural population.

There is no accurate data on the victims of the Great famine of 1932-1933 in the USSR. The range of researchers’ estimates is extremely large: from 2-2.5 million to 7-8 million people in the whole Soviet Union. the figure of 6-7 million seems to be closest to reality, because, according to the official data, only on the territory of the RSFSR, excluding Ukraine and Kazakhstan, 2.5 million people died of hunger. The number of famine victims in Ukraine is estimated by the conscientious researchers to be 2-3 million (the lower limit being 1.5 million).

As we can see, the numbers are comparable. In addition, Ukraine of the 1930s was a multinational republic. Much more multinational than it is now. It is enough to note that the proportion of the Jewish population of Ukraine in the pre-war years amounted to 5-6% percent, while now it less than 0.5% of the total population. In Ukraine (in addition to the returned Crimean Tatars [translator note: here Ishchenko makes a mistake – in the 1930s of which the article is about, Crimea was not in Ukraine, so the Tatar population should be counted towards RSFSR or USSR total]) there also lived a later expelled (but never returned) large Greek, Armenian and German communities. The famine decimated all without asking nationality and not checking the passport data.

Moreover, hunger was particularly rampant in the Left-bank Ukraine, that is in regions with a high share, and even with the predominance of the Russian population. While the most vocal about the famine Western Ukraine was at that time actually a part of the Polish state, so if anyone organized an artificial famine on its territory, it not the Bolsheviks, but the civilized Europeans.

Nevertheless, after Ukraine gained its independence, starting in the mid 90-ies, the topic of the famine-genocide became more and more actively used by the Kiev authorities as political – especially international – trump card. Moreover, the subject was immediately given a Russophobic nature, even though Kiev initially denied this fact.

It is clear that if there actually was a genocide, it would imply that there was a customer (beneficiary) of this genocide, and the goal was specifically in the destruction of the nation. That is, Ukraine initially stressed that the famine was organized by Moscow and directed against Ukrainians as a nation, though in fact it mowed down peasants of all nationalities. And the reasons for it were known. It was a mix of both the “dizziness from success” in the collective construction, and crop failure, and overestimated grain procurement plans, and the inadequacy of local leadership, which for the sake of implementation of the plan, removed from the peasants even the seeding grain (as a result, the main impact of the famine came in 1933, when in some places the bread could not even be sown).

So as to prove the theory of Golodomor genocide, Kiev began to arbitrarily increase the number of famine victims in Ukraine. This was done in order to make Ukraine seemed the most affected in comparison with other localities of the USSR. Thus first appeared the figure of 6-7 million victims of the famine in Ukraine. The same political “researchers” lowered the figure for the rest of the Soviet Union down to 2.5 million.

And then Yushchenko came to power. This is where it all took off. Viktor Andrrevich Yushchenko was not satisfied with the already existing fraud. He immediately declared that Holodomor is the Ukrainian Holocaust. But by the end of the first year of his reign, Yushchenko claimed that the famine scale was greater than that of the Holocaust, and estimated the number of victims in 10 million people. A year later, Yushchenko already spoke of 10-15 million.

They had to stop at that, because the world ceased to pity Ukraine and began to laugh at her. It is easy to calculate that with 1932-1933 UkSSR’s population of 31-32 million people, every second or third inhabitant of the Republic had to die according to Yushchenko. Since the famine covered the territory unevenly, a significant portion of UkSSR would have to become a desert with abandoned cities and ghost villages. But painting up the atrocities of the Communist regime, Yushchenko did not stop at that and argued that up to ten million Ukrainians were dispossessed, exiled to Siberia where most perished.

That is, the Republic should have actually been losing population. It is unclear who then fought in the Great Patriotic War, which really killed seven or eight million inhabitants of pre-war UkSSR of all nationalities.

Currently Kiev does not operate with any approved (not even speaking of proven) number of famine victims, but voiced figures are never reduced below six or seven million, periodically returning to Yushchenko’s exorbitant eight to ten million.

In general, the history of the Ukrainian genocide is akin to the history of test-tube, which Colin Powers was shaking at the meeting of the UN Security Council, demanding international legalisation of the American invasion of Iraq. But in its extreme manifestations it is even more absurd and cynical. Bringing the number of victims to the point of absurdity in a futile attempt to prove genocide, the Ukrainian politicians and “scientists” relegated the real tragedy of millions of people to the grotesque. While the attempt to present Ukrainians as the sole victims of the famine, denying the millions of Kazakhs, Russians, representatives of the peoples of the Caucasus, who in those same years suffered this painful death, the right to memory and sympathy is beyond the bounds of morality and common sense.

Resolutions akin to that adopted by the Senate of the State of Washington are of short-term political nature. This is evidenced by the fact that of the 18 (including Ukraine) countries that recognized Golodomor as genocide of the Ukrainian people, 9 did so before the Supreme Rada of Ukraine itself enacted it as a law on 28 November 2006. Moreover, Estonia and Australia recognized Golodomor as genocide in October 1993 (13 years before Kiev). They knew better than the Ukrainians themselves.

One can be happy on behalf of the Ukrainian diplomacy, which has a virtually unlimited space for further “victories”. If they actively work with Lesotho, Swaziland, Island States of Polynesia, Melanesia and Micronesia, the number of countries, professionally recognising Golodomor as genocide, can double.