Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 6     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   Next
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,835
Reply with quote  #61 
Hmmm. Lie told for the second time in the thread in post #49, corrected with supporting detail in #51, correction affirmed in #53, lie repeated for the third time in #60 above. One more try: NO THE US WAS NOT THE FIRST COUNTRY TO RECOGNISE THE SOVIET UNION. IT WASN'T EVEN ANYWHERE NEAR THE FIRST. IT WASN'T EVEN THE FIRST COUNTRY IN THE AMERICAS TO DO IT. Sorry for the shouting, but I thought if I spoke loudly enough Dom might be able to hear me. Probably not, though.
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #62 

My friend, do not need so much emotion. Yes, we know that in the early twentieth century in Great Britain and the United States, from the Emperor Nicholas II, the newspapers were made as a "monster." We know that he was blamed for the Jewish pogroms that led to the lumpen (and the Imperial forces defended the Jews against the pogroms, for example, in Kiev, Kisheneev and Odessa). We also know the old British principle, which Churchill defined, it seems, "Britain does not have permanent friends, there are no permanent enemies, but there are permanent interests" -and we know that these permanent interests of Britain in Russia are very old, in the 17th century. It was in the 17th century that the "Moscow British Trade Company" was established, which had a monopoly on the transit of goods from Persia across the Volga and the rest of Russia to Arkhangelsk. We also know that to eliminate Emperor Paul I money for the conspirators was transferred through the British ambassador in St. Petersburg, because in London there were fears of the possibility of the union of Emperor Paul with Napoleon and the joint Russian-French seizure of India. All this has long been no secret or secret.

But all this is geopolitics: regimes can be different, and in Russia there can be either a Tsar or Bolsheviks, and in London there can be either the King or the English Bolsheviks (imagine for a second such!) - and the continents, seas, rivers and islands remain in their places. Geography can not be changed, so geopolitical interests remain constant. Nothing can be done about this.

The United Kingdom, or the United States, or Germany, is not obliged to love Rossi., As Russia is not obliged to love the UK, or the US, or Germany. In a big politics, no one is obliged to love: the partner state is not the native aunt to love her. Big politics is a game without rules, in which the smartest and most cynical wins. And there is no sense in presenting each other for what happened 100, 200 years ago: you need to know and remember about it, but to finish the war a hundred years ago is stupid: you need to look ahead and live today. From this will be more useful.

I want to say one more time: the revolution of 1917 would never have won if the Russian elite and the Russian common people were decent. But the Russian elite and especially the Russian common people were hideous, disgusting (I apologize for such a word!) Who thundered the church? who in response to Lenin's appeal went to "rob loot"? Who killed the priests? Who drowned the priests in uncleanness? who cut out the epaulettes of leather to the cadets? who did brutal torture in Cheka? ... You, probably, will say: "They were Jews." My dear friend! No "Jews" in Russia would have been enough to do all the heinousness and atrocities that the Russian muzhiks themselves arranged! During the French Revolution, France had Vendee, and there was Brittany - and in Russia there was neither "Russian Vendee" nor "Russian Brittany", in Russia there was a desire to plunder the one who is rich, who is more successful, who is smarter ... And still in Russia was the White Volunteer Army - one drop in the sea! I repeat: Emperor Nicholas II did not write in his diary in vain when he was in captivity with the Bolsheviks: "Circle of betrayal, and cowardice, and deception."

Where did the Bolsheviks come from such an army of "proletarians" who walked with the red flag and "robbed the loot"? Have you ever thought about this? I will tell you. Those who in 1917 killed the aristocracy, landlords and "bourgeois" are the same people who in 1905 took over the ax and the portrait of the Tsar, and went to smash the Jews. It's the same lumpen! "Union of the Russian People" - this is not an organization monarchical, this is an organization of criminals who are disguised as "monarchists". They did not care who to plunder: either Jews (1905), or German shopkeepers (1914), or priests, aristocrats and "bourgeois" (1917 and beyond). In 1917, in October, all the organizations of the "Union of the Russian People" had already moved to the Bolsheviks and from the "black hundred" turned into a "red guard": the Bolsheviks promised them that it would be possible to rob with impunity. Nikolai Starikoff will never write about it: this is one of the blackest, one of the most shameful secrets of Bolshevism, one of the greatest secrets that they still cherish very much.

Agree with me: if the Union of the Russian People and other organizations of the Black Hundred were like real monarchists, then after the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II in March 1917 they would oppose the republic, against the Duma, against the Provisional Government. But - there was not one such speech ... Not one. All of the Black Hundreds suddenly disappeared, like smoke. But, six months later, in the tiny and marginal party of the Bolsheviks, suddenly armed armed workers of the Red Guards appeared from nowhere. Where did they come from? And it's very simple: criminals and scoundrels do not care what banner they have - just to rob and kill.

Therefore, when they say: "The Black Hundred, the Union of the Russian People are monarchists!", I answer: "These are bandits and servants of the Bolsheviks." This monster has nothing to do with monarchists. "


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,835
Reply with quote  #63 
I'm not sure whether your opening sentence was meant for me or Dom. If me, I do tend to get exasperated by repeated lies. There is a well-known principle that the more often and loudly you lie the better your chance of being believed. Shouting back is one possible counter-technique, employed experimentally above.

Moving on, the Muscovy Company was actually established in the 16th century under Mary I, during the reign of Ivan IV in Russia. It still exists today, though its activities are now charitable rather than commercial. I hadn't previously heard the theory that there was British official support for the murder of Paul I, and couldn't find any mention of it reading around. The closest I came was that the British ambassador Lord Whitworth had a mistress who was a sister of the Zubov brothers, key members of the conspiracy, and that funds may have been misappropriated to her and thence channeled to the conspirators. However that may be, there was at the time of the murder no British ambassador in St Petersburg, Whitworth having been withdrawn (or expelled, depending on which source you read) some while before.

While there were sections of the British press that demonized Nicholas II, others were laudatory, and public attitudes towards him were in general quite mixed. Which is normal with foreign rulers, and British ones for that matter. It is itself a caricature to say that all British papers did was caricature him as a monster.
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #64 

Dear Sir Peter, I did not say that all the British newspapers made a caricature of Emperor Nicholas II. But this does not mean that there were no such sentiments in the British press at all. I'm trying to explain to Dom and I'm saying to You the same way: in Europe in general, and in Britain in particular, on the eve of the Russian revolution of 1917, there was a prejudice against Emperor Nicholas. It was not total, but it was a notable phenomenon. I think that this is an objective phenomenon: probably today in the UK and in other countries some newspapers praise Mr. Putin, while others scold? This was then. In addition, I know that in Europe and America some press put Emperor Nicholas as "anti-Semite" (although this is not true), and even accused the Tsar himself of organizing pogroms (although this is also a lie). And, unfortunately, in some left-wing societies of Europe and America this remains so far.

Now there are a few words about the murder of the Emperor Paul I. Officer The Russian Imperial Army, historian, writer and great lover of Emperor Paul I, Peter Shabelski-Bork in his book "The Pavlovsky Tapestry" gives such data: Sir Karl Winworth passed money to the Zubov brothers for organization attempt on the Emperor. Peter Shabelski-Bork cites evidence that the British yacht was waiting for the conspirators, ready to go to sea immediately, if the attempt to destroy Emperor Paul fails. This author gives very many data on this, and says that the murder of Emperor Paul I was beneficial to Great Britain, which feared the union of Emperor Paul and Napoleon Bonaparte, and a joint Russian-French campaign to India.

I do not say that it was so. I gave you the information I have. Peter Shabelsky-Bork is an officer of the Russian Imperial Army, a nobleman and participant in the White Resistance; he emigrated from Russia together with the army of Baron Wrangel, and lived in Berlin. His book was published in 1956 in San Paul, Brazil. In addition, the youth of this man passed among the officers in the garrison Oranienbaum, Pavlovsk, Tsarskoe Selo, among the old noblemen who told him old stories and who taught him to love Emperor Paul. It is possible that in his book he quoted these stories, or used such documents, which I do not have. I do not want to say: "yes, it was so"; I do not want to say: "No, this is a lie" -I speak the information I received from Peter Shabelsky-Bork's book. Apart from the other, this author was not associated with the Soviet propaganda service, he was an anti-communist and an emigrant. Believe it, or not to believe, everyone can himself.

I did not know that the Moscow British Company exists until now, thank you for the information, it's very interesting. However, I have information that in the 17th century there was a contract between the Moscow Tsar and the Moscow British Company under which the Moscow British Company obtained the right to transport all goods from Persia through the Caspian Sea and the Volga River, and further along the road and to the port of Arkhangelsk, and at the same time do not pay any fees for the transit of goods. In addition, the Moscow British Company received monopoly rights to trade Russian goods in Europe. Given that before the time of the Emperor Peter I, the Principality and the Kingdom of Moscow did not have a fleet and a developed trade network in Europe, I regard this treaty as unequal. However, let's remember that all this happened already more than 400 years in the past, and to this day has little relation. Do you agree with me, dear sir?

Among Russian monarchists there is distrust of Britain, and dissatisfaction with Great Britain: this is the "old disease" here. But I think that You are noticeable: I do not dislike Great Britain. I have a sincere respect for Queen Elizabeth II and the British Monarchy. Moreover: I already wrote that I prefer to see the Duke Michael Kent as the King of Russia. Why am I talking about this? That is why: our past, even if there were once grievances and injustice to each other, should not hinder us today; we must remember the past together to find the truth, but not to accuse each other; I am reporting this or that fact not to offend someone, but to lose information. Such an exchange of information helps a better understanding for each other. For us, there is no reason for quarrel and resentment: today in the world monarchical views are not very popular, so instead of quarrels, understanding and cooperation are necessary in order to defend our truth. Is not that so, dear sir?


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,835
Reply with quote  #65 
I certainly agree with the general thrust of your sentiments, and have no anti-Russian feeling myself. The monstrosity that was the Soviet Union is a different matter. Re Britain and the murder of Paul I, I would characterize our involvement at government level as 'possible, but unlikely' and would want to see a lot of evidence before I credited it. Unfortunately I have seen a lot of evidence of the anti-Semitic views of Nicholas II, and Alexander III and Nicholas I before him, and have no doubt that he did indeed hold and act on such views. Though I wouldn't go so far as to say that he was personally involved in pogroms, I would that he didn't do enough to stop them.

My point on the Muscovy Company was only that it was even older than you thought. Such a monopoly was indeed sought from Ivan IV and indignantly refused, causing a temporary rupture in relations. I couldn't find any reference to a monopoly being obtained during the 17th century, though I see that Tsar Alexei revoked the company's customs exemption due to its alleged support for the Parliamentarians in the English Civil War. Whatever, as you say these matters are interesting historically but are no grounds for animosity now.
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #66 

Quite right, I agree with You, dear sir. Our story is too extensive to pull out of it one particular episode, and scold each other, argue about the past. There you can find bad or good, but this should not interfere with today's dialogue.

And, by the way, when here, in Russia, accuse the UK of "betraying" Emperor Nicholas II, I always remind: His Majesty King George several times made an appeal to take Emperor Nicholas to London, but the Provisional Government said: "The king is out of danger" . The British King did what was in his power. But then it was too late.

I really like dogs, and often I save homeless dogs. And I know well that British King George did this: when Bob Wilton discovered in Ekaterinburg the dog of the murdered prince Alexei, the British King took this dog Jimm to his palace. Someone will say: "this is not serious." But for me and this is very serious and important.

I want to say some words about "anti-Semitism" Emperor Nicholas II. Here, most likely, too, there is insufficient information. His father, Emperor Alexander III, was indeed anti-Semitic. But not Emperor Nicholas. His Majesty resented the pogroms, and gave pogromists for trial and punishment. Imperial troops and Cossacks ordered Emperor Nicholas to stop the pogroms and protect the Jews. This was in his memoirs written by State Duma deputy Vasily Shulgin (the same one who then took renunciation from the Tsar). This is a very reliable source, Shulgin himself commanded a group of soldiers, when he defended the Jews against pogrom. Most likely, this book is in English translation: you need to search for the name "Days", Vasily Shulgin author.

There is another source, memories of Prince Shcherbatov. When one day someone said in the presence of the Emperor Nicholas that the Jews were beaten well, the Emperor replied: "Only a scoundrel can rejoice at the murders of innocent people." After that, that notable was permanently removed from the Emperor.

It is known that Emperor Nicholas was very frightened when Sergei Nilus and General Rachkovski showed him the book "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". Fear of the Emperor can be understood: he never specifically interested in issues of Jewish life, but suddenly he brought a document about the "conspiracy of Jews." The king was frightened, and he rewarded Nilus and Rachkovski for an "uncovered conspiracy." This story is known to all people. But fewer people know what happened next. And then it was like this: Emperor Nicholas instructs the Minister Count Peter Stolypin to check the Protocols of the Zion Sages. He was a professional smart minister, he checked everything, and installed a fake. After this, Nilus and Rachkovski were ripped off the uniform of the Order and sent away from the Court.  "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," an ominous book, was exposed as a fake just under the Emperor Nicholas, in the Russian Empire. But about it very little, who remembers. Or do not want to remember.

Once, when I was a child, I still remember many old men who once lived under Emperor Nicholas II. There were Jews among them (for example, Dr. Katz, who treated me). I never remember that old Jews talked about the Emperor badly. Well said, yes. But the bad did not say. But if the Emperor did anti-Semitism like Hitler or Stalin, then the old Jews would remember it. But it was not.


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Domhangairt

Registered:
Posts: 201
Reply with quote  #67 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_Roman_D

My friend, do not need so much emotion. Yes, we know that in the early twentieth century in Great Britain and the United States, from the Emperor Nicholas II, the newspapers were made as a "monster." We know that he was blamed for the Jewish pogroms that led to the lumpen (and the Imperial forces defended the Jews against the pogroms, for example, in Kiev, Kisheneev and Odessa). We also know the old British principle, which Churchill defined, it seems, "Britain does not have permanent friends, there are no permanent enemies, but there are permanent interests" -and we know that these permanent interests of Britain in Russia are very old, in the 17th century. It was in the 17th century that the "Moscow British Trade Company" was established, which had a monopoly on the transit of goods from Persia across the Volga and the rest of Russia to Arkhangelsk. We also know that to eliminate Emperor Paul I money for the conspirators was transferred through the British ambassador in St. Petersburg, because in London there were fears of the possibility of the union of Emperor Paul with Napoleon and the joint Russian-French seizure of India. All this has long been no secret or secret.

But all this is geopolitics: regimes can be different, and in Russia there can be either a Tsar or Bolsheviks, and in London there can be either the King or the English Bolsheviks (imagine for a second such!) - and the continents, seas, rivers and islands remain in their places. Geography can not be changed, so geopolitical interests remain constant. Nothing can be done about this.

The United Kingdom, or the United States, or Germany, is not obliged to love Rossi., As Russia is not obliged to love the UK, or the US, or Germany. In a big politics, no one is obliged to love: the partner state is not the native aunt to love her. Big politics is a game without rules, in which the smartest and most cynical wins. And there is no sense in presenting each other for what happened 100, 200 years ago: you need to know and remember about it, but to finish the war a hundred years ago is stupid: you need to look ahead and live today. From this will be more useful.

I want to say one more time: the revolution of 1917 would never have won if the Russian elite and the Russian common people were decent. But the Russian elite and especially the Russian common people were hideous, disgusting (I apologize for such a word!) Who thundered the church? who in response to Lenin's appeal went to "rob loot"? Who killed the priests? Who drowned the priests in uncleanness? who cut out the epaulettes of leather to the cadets? who did brutal torture in Cheka? ... You, probably, will say: "They were Jews." My dear friend! No "Jews" in Russia would have been enough to do all the heinousness and atrocities that the Russian muzhiks themselves arranged! During the French Revolution, France had Vendee, and there was Brittany - and in Russia there was neither "Russian Vendee" nor "Russian Brittany", in Russia there was a desire to plunder the one who is rich, who is more successful, who is smarter ... And still in Russia was the White Volunteer Army - one drop in the sea! I repeat: Emperor Nicholas II did not write in his diary in vain when he was in captivity with the Bolsheviks: "Circle of betrayal, and cowardice, and deception."

Where did the Bolsheviks come from such an army of "proletarians" who walked with the red flag and "robbed the loot"? Have you ever thought about this? I will tell you. Those who in 1917 killed the aristocracy, landlords and "bourgeois" are the same people who in 1905 took over the ax and the portrait of the Tsar, and went to smash the Jews. It's the same lumpen! "Union of the Russian People" - this is not an organization monarchical, this is an organization of criminals who are disguised as "monarchists". They did not care who to plunder: either Jews (1905), or German shopkeepers (1914), or priests, aristocrats and "bourgeois" (1917 and beyond). In 1917, in October, all the organizations of the "Union of the Russian People" had already moved to the Bolsheviks and from the "black hundred" turned into a "red guard": the Bolsheviks promised them that it would be possible to rob with impunity. Nikolai Starikoff will never write about it: this is one of the blackest, one of the most shameful secrets of Bolshevism, one of the greatest secrets that they still cherish very much.

Agree with me: if the Union of the Russian People and other organizations of the Black Hundred were like real monarchists, then after the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II in March 1917 they would oppose the republic, against the Duma, against the Provisional Government. But - there was not one such speech ... Not one. All of the Black Hundreds suddenly disappeared, like smoke. But, six months later, in the tiny and marginal party of the Bolsheviks, suddenly armed armed workers of the Red Guards appeared from nowhere. Where did they come from? And it's very simple: criminals and scoundrels do not care what banner they have - just to rob and kill.

Therefore, when they say: "The Black Hundred, the Union of the Russian People are monarchists!", I answer: "These are bandits and servants of the Bolsheviks." This monster has nothing to do with monarchists. "

I have Prof Anthony Sutton's books, but here is a filmed  interview with him for your benefit. Here he implicates  U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, Wall Street bankers,  and also the British Foreign Office in the Bolshevik Revolution. This is a very summarized account of the facts
Listen caefully to this interview. You may need Wi Fi. 
Domhangairt

Registered:
Posts: 201
Reply with quote  #68 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_Roman_D

Quite right, I agree with You, dear sir. Our story is too extensive to pull out of it one particular episode, and scold each other, argue about the past. There you can find bad or good, but this should not interfere with today's dialogue.

And, by the way, when here, in Russia, accuse the UK of "betraying" Emperor Nicholas II, I always remind: His Majesty King George several times made an appeal to take Emperor Nicholas to London, but the Provisional Government said: "The king is out of danger" . The British King did what was in his power. But then it was too late.

I really like dogs, and often I save homeless dogs. And I know well that British King George did this: when Bob Wilton discovered in Ekaterinburg the dog of the murdered prince Alexei, the British King took this dog Jimm to his palace. Someone will say: "this is not serious." But for me and this is very serious and important.

I want to say some words about "anti-Semitism" Emperor Nicholas II. Here, most likely, too, there is insufficient information. His father, Emperor Alexander III, was indeed anti-Semitic. But not Emperor Nicholas. His Majesty resented the pogroms, and gave pogromists for trial and punishment. Imperial troops and Cossacks ordered Emperor Nicholas to stop the pogroms and protect the Jews. This was in his memoirs written by State Duma deputy Vasily Shulgin (the same one who then took renunciation from the Tsar). This is a very reliable source, Shulgin himself commanded a group of soldiers, when he defended the Jews against pogrom. Most likely, this book is in English translation: you need to search for the name "Days", Vasily Shulgin author.

There is another source, memories of Prince Shcherbatov. When one day someone said in the presence of the Emperor Nicholas that the Jews were beaten well, the Emperor replied: "Only a scoundrel can rejoice at the murders of innocent people." After that, that notable was permanently removed from the Emperor.

It is known that Emperor Nicholas was very frightened when Sergei Nilus and General Rachkovski showed him the book "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". Fear of the Emperor can be understood: he never specifically interested in issues of Jewish life, but suddenly he brought a document about the "conspiracy of Jews." The king was frightened, and he rewarded Nilus and Rachkovski for an "uncovered conspiracy." This story is known to all people. But fewer people know what happened next. And then it was like this: Emperor Nicholas instructs the Minister Count Peter Stolypin to check the Protocols of the Zion Sages. He was a professional smart minister, he checked everything, and installed a fake. After this, Nilus and Rachkovski were ripped off the uniform of the Order and sent away from the Court.  "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," an ominous book, was exposed as a fake just under the Emperor Nicholas, in the Russian Empire. But about it very little, who remembers. Or do not want to remember.

Once, when I was a child, I still remember many old men who once lived under Emperor Nicholas II. There were Jews among them (for example, Dr. Katz, who treated me). I never remember that old Jews talked about the Emperor badly. Well said, yes. But the bad did not say. But if the Emperor did anti-Semitism like Hitler or Stalin, then the old Jews would remember it. But it was not.

I have Prof Anthony Sutton's books. But here is a filmed live interview with him during which he names U.S. Pres Woodrow Wilson, the British Foreign Office, and also Wall Street bankers as supporting and funding the Bolshevik Revolution. . This is a very summarized account of the facts. You may need Wi Fi to watch this.
Domhangairt

Registered:
Posts: 201
Reply with quote  #69 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_Roman_D

Quite right, I agree with You, dear sir. Our story is too extensive to pull out of it one particular episode, and scold each other, argue about the past. There you can find bad or good, but this should not interfere with today's dialogue.

And, by the way, when here, in Russia, accuse the UK of "betraying" Emperor Nicholas II, I always remind: His Majesty King George several times made an appeal to take Emperor Nicholas to London, but the Provisional Government said: "The king is out of danger" . The British King did what was in his power. But then it was too late.

I really like dogs, and often I save homeless dogs. And I know well that British King George did this: when Bob Wilton discovered in Ekaterinburg the dog of the murdered prince Alexei, the British King took this dog Jimm to his palace. Someone will say: "this is not serious." But for me and this is very serious and important.

I want to say some words about "anti-Semitism" Emperor Nicholas II. Here, most likely, too, there is insufficient information. His father, Emperor Alexander III, was indeed anti-Semitic. But not Emperor Nicholas. His Majesty resented the pogroms, and gave pogromists for trial and punishment. Imperial troops and Cossacks ordered Emperor Nicholas to stop the pogroms and protect the Jews. This was in his memoirs written by State Duma deputy Vasily Shulgin (the same one who then took renunciation from the Tsar). This is a very reliable source, Shulgin himself commanded a group of soldiers, when he defended the Jews against pogrom. Most likely, this book is in English translation: you need to search for the name "Days", Vasily Shulgin author.

There is another source, memories of Prince Shcherbatov. When one day someone said in the presence of the Emperor Nicholas that the Jews were beaten well, the Emperor replied: "Only a scoundrel can rejoice at the murders of innocent people." After that, that notable was permanently removed from the Emperor.

It is known that Emperor Nicholas was very frightened when Sergei Nilus and General Rachkovski showed him the book "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". Fear of the Emperor can be understood: he never specifically interested in issues of Jewish life, but suddenly he brought a document about the "conspiracy of Jews." The king was frightened, and he rewarded Nilus and Rachkovski for an "uncovered conspiracy." This story is known to all people. But fewer people know what happened next. And then it was like this: Emperor Nicholas instructs the Minister Count Peter Stolypin to check the Protocols of the Zion Sages. He was a professional smart minister, he checked everything, and installed a fake. After this, Nilus and Rachkovski were ripped off the uniform of the Order and sent away from the Court.  "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," an ominous book, was exposed as a fake just under the Emperor Nicholas, in the Russian Empire. But about it very little, who remembers. Or do not want to remember.

Once, when I was a child, I still remember many old men who once lived under Emperor Nicholas II. There were Jews among them (for example, Dr. Katz, who treated me). I never remember that old Jews talked about the Emperor badly. Well said, yes. But the bad did not say. But if the Emperor did anti-Semitism like Hitler or Stalin, then the old Jews would remember it. But it was not.

Further to my previous post, the United States sent U.S. Army instructors to TRAIN RED ARMY soldiers and commanders. 
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #70 

No, that's what was not, it was not, sorry, dear friend! There were no "American instructors" in the Red Army: this is either an outright lie, or someone's morbid fantasy. I have been studying the history of the revolution and the civil war in Russia for many years, three of my ancestors fought in the White Army with Admiral Kolchak, I read a lot of different memories, and nowhere has this information ever been.

The Bolsheviks had no need to invite military advisers from the United States. What for? What for??? They did much easier: they took officers and generals from the Imperial Army and forced them to serve for themselves. They forced them to work, create a red army at gunpoint. This was called the abbreviated word "military special" ("military specialist"). The families of these officers and generals were like hostages: if you do not do for the Bolsheviks, then your wife will be shot in the Cheka, your children will be shot in the Cheka, your mother will be shot in the Cheka. It was an effective method.

In addition, the Bolsheviks had many volunteer assistants from among the former cadre officers and generals of the Imperial Army. Some of these passed to the Bolsheviks because "it is necessary to serve the homeland, even the royal, though red, but - the homeland"; others treated such a service simply as a change of place of work. Still others were looking for benefits. The fourth went to serve the Bolsheviks in order to have money and feed the family. The most famous such generals are General Brusiloff and General Slaschoff.

 The latter, that is, General Slashcheff, was the White General, fought against the Bolsheviks in the army of Baron Wrangel. He was very cruel against the Bolsheviks, he hung them a lot on the cord by the neck. Then, together with Wrangel, he emigrated to Istanbul. Four years later he returned to red Russia, received from the Bolsheviks the post of teacher of the military academy, had a good salary and a small palace. He lived until the 1930s, nobody touched him. Then he was killed by some former Red Army soldier, whom Slasheff ordered to hang on the cord by the neck, but he somehow found himself alive.

There were thousands of such officers, generals too. By the end of the 1930s, all of them were killed by the NKVD (secret political police). But before that they lived in the USSR, served the Bolsheviks, created for them a red army. Why are there any other "American military advisors" here for the Bolsheviks? It was not necessary, and it was never.

Perhaps, the respected professor Sutton speaks about other experts? Not about officers, but about engineers and architects? Yes, it was: during the Great Depression, a lot of engineers from the United States and Germany came to the USSR under contracts, and worked here. So, the American engineers were engaged in the design and construction of the Turksib railway (from Turkmenistan to Siberia), they built DneproGES (a giant electric station on the Dnieper River), they built a very large iron ore plant in the city of Magnitogorsk. In the United States and Germany, unemployment was in those years, there was a crisis, so they engineers and architects came to the USSR to earn money. Stalin's regime paid for their work even with gold.

This is a real known fact: engineers from the US and Germany worked in the USSR in the late 1920s and early 1930s, with the development of the industrial (known as "Industrialization"). But there were never any "military advisors from the USA" in the USSR.


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Domhangairt

Registered:
Posts: 201
Reply with quote  #71 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_Roman_D

No, that's what was not, it was not, sorry, dear friend! There were no "American instructors" in the Red Army: this is either an outright lie, or someone's morbid fantasy. I have been studying the history of the revolution and the civil war in Russia for many years, three of my ancestors fought in the White Army with Admiral Kolchak, I read a lot of different memories, and nowhere has this information ever been.

The Bolsheviks had no need to invite military advisers from the United States. What for? What for??? They did much easier: they took officers and generals from the Imperial Army and forced them to serve for themselves. They forced them to work, create a red army at gunpoint. This was called the abbreviated word "military special" ("military specialist"). The families of these officers and generals were like hostages: if you do not do for the Bolsheviks, then your wife will be shot in the Cheka, your children will be shot in the Cheka, your mother will be shot in the Cheka. It was an effective method.

In addition, the Bolsheviks had many volunteer assistants from among the former cadre officers and generals of the Imperial Army. Some of these passed to the Bolsheviks because "it is necessary to serve the homeland, even the royal, though red, but - the homeland"; others treated such a service simply as a change of place of work. Still others were looking for benefits. The fourth went to serve the Bolsheviks in order to have money and feed the family. The most famous such generals are General Brusiloff and General Slaschoff.

 The latter, that is, General Slashcheff, was the White General, fought against the Bolsheviks in the army of Baron Wrangel. He was very cruel against the Bolsheviks, he hung them a lot on the cord by the neck. Then, together with Wrangel, he emigrated to Istanbul. Four years later he returned to red Russia, received from the Bolsheviks the post of teacher of the military academy, had a good salary and a small palace. He lived until the 1930s, nobody touched him. Then he was killed by some former Red Army soldier, whom Slasheff ordered to hang on the cord by the neck, but he somehow found himself alive.

There were thousands of such officers, generals too. By the end of the 1930s, all of them were killed by the NKVD (secret political police). But before that they lived in the USSR, served the Bolsheviks, created for them a red army. Why are there any other "American military advisors" here for the Bolsheviks? It was not necessary, and it was never.

Perhaps, the respected professor Sutton speaks about other experts? Not about officers, but about engineers and architects? Yes, it was: during the Great Depression, a lot of engineers from the United States and Germany came to the USSR under contracts, and worked here. So, the American engineers were engaged in the design and construction of the Turksib railway (from Turkmenistan to Siberia), they built DneproGES (a giant electric station on the Dnieper River), they built a very large iron ore plant in the city of Magnitogorsk. In the United States and Germany, unemployment was in those years, there was a crisis, so they engineers and architects came to the USSR to earn money. Stalin's regime paid for their work even with gold.

This is a real known fact: engineers from the US and Germany worked in the USSR in the late 1920s and early 1930s, with the development of the industrial (known as "Industrialization"). But there were never any "military advisors from the USA" in the USSR.

I respect your knowledge and research- and your own family's experience. All I ask is that you listen to Prof Sutton's interview from beginning to end. You should also get his books on the subject. You can get these under his name on Amazon.com. Like I said war & revolution is about power and money- there are no good guys, only bad guys. I will except the Emperor from this statement, because he was a devout Christian. But Nicholas should never have got involved with Serbia and the war against Germany- his father would have stayed out of war with Germany. According to Wikipedia, General Diterikhs said that the murder of the Imperial family was a Jewish ritual murder. I don't know if this is true? A lot of people in Europe and America wanted the revolution to succeed- most of these people were Free masons. I have great respect for the work of Professor Sutton- he relied on original documents. Please don't make the mistake of trusting the Americans -they look after their own interests, and nobody else's. When General Patton wanted to go after Stalin in 1945, the United States government stopped him, then he was murdered. If Patton had taken down Stalin in 1945  using German troops, the whole World could have been a better place- but the United States  killed this golden opportunity.  
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #72 

Dear friend, thank you for this video. Unfortunately, English is not my native language for me. I listened to this interview of Sutton's profession, and I did not understand everything. I did not understand which book is specific, about which you are talking. Probably, this is the book "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution," is not it? I am familiar with this book, it is translated into Russian, it is in my library.

I am not a supporter of the "conspiracy theory" and I look at the version about the "ritual murder" of Emperor Nicholas II very skeptic. In the early 1990s, when some archives were opened in Russia (not all archives!), There was a lot of talk about "ritual murder" and a lot of cheap speculation. It was special: the Communists had to go away from responsibility for all crimes in Russia. And the Communist Party, through its secret KGB police, spread this rumor, as if "the Jews ritually killed the Tsar." The Communists had to blame the crime for someone else - for example, on Jews.

Yes, we know that some people who were involved in the murder of the Emperor (Jurowski, Vojkoff, Goloshchekin) were Jewish people; but there were also Latvian people, and Russian people, and Chinese people. After all, this does not mean that the Emperor's murder was like a "Latvian ritual," or "Russian ritual," or "Chinese ritual," is not it?

The well-known fact that Pinhos Voikoff, when he came to the basement of the house of Ipatiev, where the Tsar was killed, wrote on the wall with a pencil a line from Heine: "That night, until the sun rose, the slaves killed the Tsar." Voykoff also painted four Greek letters on the wall. Based on this, in Russia, and then all over the world, they started talking about "ritual murder."

In fact, it was no "ritual murder"; it was just a crime of the Bolsheviks, a terrible crime of the Bolsheviks. This was the punishment of the plebeians over the Emperor, it was a criminal offense. It was criminal, but not mystical.

Mysticism happened only afterwards. Vojkoff was appointed Soviet Ambassador to Warsaw. There he was killed by a Russian student monarchist Boris Kaverda. When this Boris Coverd was tried in Warsaw, he said: "I avenged this red one for My Sovereign!" (Voikov was quickly released from prison, and he lived to old age). Jurowski died in 1940, in great pain, from stomach cancer; daughter of Jurowski was an active Komsomol, in 1941 she was hung by German soldiers by the neck on a rope. Peter Ermakoff, Red Army man, who himself shot the Empress, died as a beggar, from drunkenness. From the Soviet government for this "important service", he did not receive anything, and was very offended. He even wrote a letter to Leonid Brezhnev in 1965, asked for money for a pension, but Brezhnev gave him nothing and answered nothing. Here is a mystic: all the murderers received a terrible and shameful death. And the chief assassin of the Emperor, Vladimir Lenin, still has a corpse that has been gutted, but not buried ...

An interesting fact: me and many others know that the Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev was very bad about killing the Emperor and his family. He never spoke about it publicly, but among his agents Brezhnev said that this was a terrible crime, that the Bolsheviks tarnished themselves with the innocent blood of the murdered children, that this crime would still be bad for the Communists. There is information that it was Brezhnev who was in charge of creating a secret group: this secret group had to find the remains of the Emperor, the Empress, Prince Alex and the princesses, get them out of the earth, and deliver them to Moscow. Paotom Brezhnev wanted a secret burial in one of the Imperial tombs in the Cathedral of Peter and Paul, or the secret transfer of these remains to London, at the disposal of the Royal Family of Great Britain. Such information is, but it has not been confirmed by anything yet.


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,835
Reply with quote  #73 
Professor Antony (no h) Sutton had genuine academic credentials and did indeed work from original sources, which is the only way to produce genuinely new discoveries. That does not however prevent him from being a nutjob who developed a crazed conspiracy theory from his sources. Being an academic requires a certain set of skills and a reasonable amount of intellect. It is not however a guarantee of good judgement; just look at how many academics are socialists for proof of that. Another crazed conspiracy theory is that General Patton was murdered, which there is no evidence for whatsoever. He died of injuries received in an automobile accident, that is all.

The chances of a war-weary public in any of the Western powers supporting going straight from war with Germany and Japan to war with what five minutes ago was our ally Russia were nil, zip, zero, nada, nothing. Patton for all his inarguable qualities as a fighting general was seen as and was a loose cannon, and his military career was to all intents over. Not only is there no evidence he was murdered, there would have been no point in doing so, he was a spent force. Simply to say 'then he was murdered' as if that were accepted and known fact is disingenuous in the extreme.

As for the Jewish ritual murder of the Imperial family, firstly the whole idea of such is blood libel dating from medieval times, there never was any such thing as a Jewish murder ritual. Secondly the circumstances of the dreadful crime are very well known and bore no resemblance whatever to the traditional albeit wholly fictional description of the 'ritual'. Thirdly, even to mention the idea is as offensive as it is stupid. I will respond to Sir_Roman on the Nicholas II question within the next few days, I need to look some things up first.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,835
Reply with quote  #74 
Apologies if I seemed to be ignoring Sir_Roman's response to Dom above, it was just that once again we cross-posted and I hadn't seen it. I was interested by the last paragraph; it seems to me that the identification of the remains is conclusive and that therefore whatever Brezhnev may have planned for them did not happen, since they were still in the ground long after he was. What is your view on that?
sir_Roman_D

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 83
Reply with quote  #75 

Dear Sir Peter, I wrote about the same thing. There is no need to publish any additional evidence: the murder of Emperor Nicholas II and his family was that it was: the Bolsheviks' criminal punishment, a terrible crime, and nothing more.

I mentioned the inscriptions in the basement that Wojkoff did. Yes, it was. But there is no "ritual" here. In the early twentieth century, many in Russia and Europe played mysticism. Wojkoff was no exception: he just made these inscriptions to tickle his nerves. Nothing else.

The circumstances of the massacre of the Bolsheviks over the Emperor Nicholas and his family are well known throughout the world: investigator Sokoloff set everything on "hot tracks," journalist Robert Wilton was in Yekaterinburg and published his correspondence. Everything is well known, and no complications are needed.

The only party that is interested in complicating, in mystification, in the "conspiracy theory", even in the "blood libel" is that there are criminals who do not want to be responsible. That is, this is the Bolsheviks communists, nobody else. It is for the Communists that everyone should think as if there was a "ritual murder by the Jews". But this is a lie, its source and its goals are clear to all.

I'm very bad at the "conspiracy theory". But here, in Russia, there is a certain part of the "monarchists" who are obsessed with this topic. So, for example, now the deputy of the Parliament, the former prosecutor Natali Poklonsky demands a consequence to prove "ritual murder." Everyone admires this girl Natalie Poklonsky, but I consider her ... not very convenient to say ... I will say this: not quite healthy, and a little female hysterics. There is nothing good in this: the more they talk about the "conspiracy theory" and about the "ritual murder," the longer communism will be rehabilitated. What for? You need to call real criminals, and not blame the mythical "Jews, Masons, Satanists, Martians, Humanoids."

The only true mysticism of this terrible crime, which is in fact, is the terrible death of all the murderers. Neither Jurowski, Wojkoff, Goloshchekin, Ermakoff, nor Lenin left offspring, their family stopped. Once the Grand Master Jacques Molie summoned the Pope Clement and King Philip the Beautiful to God's Court ... I think that Emperor Nicholas also called on all of his murderers to God's Court.


__________________
Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam!
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.