FOR BOLSHEVISM - No 04 (145) APRIL 2015
Workers of all countries, unite!
FOR BOLSHEVISM INSIDE THE COMMUNIST AND WORKERS’ MOVEMENT
No 04 (145) APRIL 2015
INFORMATION ABOUT THE "CASE OF A.A. MAYEVSKY "
On March 25, 2015 Uzhgorod raymezhgorodskom district court the hearing
was held on the "criminal case" RCP editor Mayevsky with the agenda "On
the extension of his stay in detention." The meeting was scheduled for
11:15., but started at 1200. Characteristic was that there was no
information about the time and date of the hearing neither on the
bulletin board of the judge or the Internet page of the court. This was
done in order to misinformation readers about the time of the court
session.
At the trial, there were, as it was able to decipher two security
men of just under two metres tall and weighing in under 130 kg, from the
SBU unit "T" (terrorism). They tried to provoke supporters of Mayevsky
to make provocative responses, which were immediately recorded on their
mobile phones for their further detention and arrest.
Judge Ferens somehow came to the hearing without a judicial robe and
the badge of a judge. Apparently after the briefing, there was a
dispute and he flew out of his office, forgetting to throw on the robe.
Mayevsky in his speech asked to change the measure of restraint,
rather than the detention in jail under a written personal commitment.
He said that he himself and his fellow Communists he did not think of as
criminals, but that the criminals were those who brought down the
population of Ukrainian people from 52 million to 36 million people. The
real criminals are those, he said, who had dropped Ukraine from a top
ten most developed country in the world, to the level of the poorest
African countries.
The judge’s decision, at the insistence of prosecutor Deyak was to
extend Mayevsky’s jail term for another two months, until May 25, 2015.
On March 26 at 2pm, at Uzhgorod administrative court, a hearing was
scheduled for closure of the newspaper RCP. Judge Gavrilko, knowing that
the Code of Administrative Procedure forbids him to hear the case until
the completion of criminal proceedings, was prudently hiding behind a
hospital sick note.
Now planned is the court session to close the edition of the
newspaper "Workers' and Peasants' Truth which has been 'postponed from
March 26 to April 21, 2015.
Ukraine buro of the CC AUCPB
26 March 2015
================================
IMPRISONMENT AND PROSECUTION OF THE EDITOR OF RABOCHE-KRESTYANSKAYA
PRAVDA ("WORKERS' AND PEASANTS TRUTH") A.A. MAYEVSKY CONTINUES
Documents of the CC AUCPB
Information Ukraine Buro of the CC AUCPB
March 5, 2015
On February 27, 2015 there was to be held a preliminary hearing of
the criminal case against the editor of "Workers' and Peasants truth"
A.A. Mayevsky.
He is charged under Article 110 of the Criminal Code "violation of
territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine" and Art. 161 of the
Criminal Code "Violation of citizens' equality based on their race,
nationality or religion."
Trumped-up charges, "cooked up" by the SBU, and sewn with white
thread. Therefore, judge Ferens, who was to consider it for the third
time wisely spent it on sick leave. The date of the next hearing has
not yet been set.
On March 4, 2015, at the Uzhgorod administrative court, judge
Gavrilko, was to consider the administrative case, the claim for the
prosecutor of Uzhgorod regional prosecutor's office Stojko to close the
newspaper “Workers’ Peasants Truth”.
Characteristic of this hearing that the defendant – A.A. Mayevsky
was again for a second time not delivered to the hearing of the
Administrative Court from jail by the SBU. The judge of the
Administrative Court also "fell ill" and a session on "closing the
newspaper" was postponed to March 27.
The prosecution prosecutor Stojko asked readers who came to the
hearing: "What is your name and surname?" He began to intimidate them,
by saying "write, write, one has to finish, and we’ll get to you."
Probably, it was said not just because the other day in the town of
Lebedyn of Sumy region, the SBU searched and seized files of the
newpapers RKP, "Hammer and Sickle", "Vpeyrod" of an ordinary reader of
the newspaper, and questioned him.
Thus, here is the so-called guarantor of the Constitution that
"fully applies" Art. 15 of the Constitution, which declares that public
life in Ukraine is based on political, economic and ideological
diversity and no ideology may be recognized by the State as mandatory
and the state guarantees freedom of political activity not prohibited by
the Constitution and laws of Ukraine.
Perform your duties, Poroshenko and do not to engage in political repression!
===========================================
THE DEATH BORIS NEMTSOV
Documents CC AUCPB
Assessment of the political significance of the event
Russian society has been has stirred up by the unexpected news of
the murder of Boris Nemtsov. The media showered details of the crime
and countless guesses – of who did it? Why? What purpose did it serve
to the murderers and those who are behind them? This document is not an
obituary, but an evaluation of the political meaning of the event.
With regard to the whole social, political career of Nemtsov, one can
say in one sentence: in all parties and in all positions was one -
liberal faithful service, deeply anti-people, the exaltation of America:
and over there - it is a great! But here in Russia in "this" country -
it's not like that, and everything must be destroyed and remade!
Nemtsov was one of the closest associates of Yeltsin in his
destruction of the socialist system and the USSR. And towards Putin,
his attitude was very warm. On November 27, 1999 Nemtsov called
Vladimir Putin the most worthy person of all the candidates who intend
to participate in the presidential elections in Russia in 2000. He said
that the next president after Yeltsin, should be Putin.
Nemtsov did not determine, nor could he determine the fate of the
country. Now much more importantly is to objectively assess the place
that could take and really took place the murder of Nemtsov - one of the
leaders of the bourgeois-liberal opposition. Leave aside the personal,
financial and other business reasons for the murder. Let the
Prosecutor's Office deal with all that. Let's talk about the political
reasons. Indeed, the murder occurred in the vicinity of the Kremlin,
and even on the eve of a widely publicized march of the liberal
opposition.
The liberal action on March 1, entitled “Vesna” ("Spring") was
given the most serious importance by the liberal leadership gave the
most serious importance, considering it as a significant milestone in
the opposition to Putin and his team. In the media were suggested the
most unexpected scenarios, including shooting, "Maidan", etc.
Originally it was scheduled to hold the march in Marino - at the
periphery of Moscow. Initially it was stated there were 100 thousand
participants. But the murder Nemtsov confused all the cards from the
organizers of the march, and led, as they say, "to change one's shoes on
the go." As a result, instead of "Spring" there was a funeral march
held and a completely different route - the centre of Moscow, which was
allowed by the authorities on an emergency basis.
The event began at 15-00. One hour after the start, the Moscow
Interior Ministry reported that the procession was attended by 16,500
people. Later, the police estimated the number of participants had
grown to 20,000. Everything was quiet. Without incident. Well, well.
And what slogans and "chants" were in vogue? They talked a lot about
the war with Ukraine, remembering the dead Russian soldiers there and
demanded to "stop the Russian machine of death." "There is still time
to stop this war! No War! No War! ". Listening to this, I remember
H.G. Wells and his novel "Invisible Man." Here, perhaps, more abruptly -
soldiers and tanks are invisible and divisions are invisible. The
Russian military created all this for sure even in Stalin's time. It is
necessary to refresh the memory of Senator McCarthy - did he know about
this? The marchers carried posters of Nemtsov and the words "He died
for the future of Russia!" What future Nemtsov had for Russia, we can
clearly see now in all its glory - it was Nemtsov (working at a
considerable number government positions), Yeltsin, their liberal
"associates" who built that future Russia - the complete collapse of
everything that we see today. Very touching sounded the slogan "We do
not forget! We do not forgive!" that very same slogan which grew up in
the beginning of "perestroika", when the liberals were shouting about
Stalin: “He did not forget and did not forgive." So why are they all
suddenly all “cut up” under Stalin?
Showing a certain "shyness" in their criticism of Putin and the
Kremlin during the procession, the liberal opposition was much more open
in publications abroad. For example, political refugee Garry Kasparov
in a column in The Wall Street Journal militantly said that the killing
of Nemtsov "buries hopes for peaceful political change in Russia,"
adding that "if the changes can occur and then only by fierce mass
uprising." No less an amusing idea was expressed by the founder of
"Yabloko" Grigory Yavlinsky. He published an article in the Financial
Times, which explicitly called for the "European Union to develop a
strategy for the integration of the former Soviet Union into a united
Europe" because "the true area of military confrontation extends beyond
the Donbass and covers the whole of the former Soviet Union." Thank
you, gentlemen, for your openness.
Well, after all - what was the purpose of killing Nemtsov? Here,
perhaps, is the view outside of competition, that the murder of Nemtsov
was committed to destabilize the political situation in the country, to
give to the liberal opposition the symbol of a "martyr - a fighter for a
just cause." Most likely this simply did not happen. Figuratively
speaking, for Tefft (US Ambassador in Moscow), the deal fell through. A
crowd was gathered, something was yelled, but, on the whole, everything
remains calm. Just another stroll around the streets of Moscow by
comprador "hamsters" and by those who seriously believe them. But the
aim was clearly to create a strong spark and rapidly spreading panic, a
tough police response and beautiful photos of "victims of a murderous
regime." After that the idea would be to gather a crowd of perturbed
metropolitan public on an ongoing basis.
Has the popularity of the liberal opposition grown as a result?
No! According to the latest opinion polls trust rating: 1.3% for
ex-Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, and less than 1% - for Navalny,
Nemtsov, "Yabloko" and one of its founders, Grigory Yavlinsky, Irina
Khakamada, founder of the "Civic Platform" Mikhail Prokhorov. In
addition, the survey showed that the majority of Russians (81%) simply
did not know about the march on March 1, only 18% had heard about it.
Moscow residents were more aware of the upcoming event (27%).
Without a doubt, the bulk of the marchers were representatives of
various "groups" the capital's intelligentsia, which are characterized
by the view of the Yeltsin era not as a period of devastation and
poverty, but as a time of hope (What? The fact that I, too, will become a
millionaire tycoon? And now these hopes are dashed!?). Piercing words
of their ideological opponents: "It was, I remember, a country where all
felt sorry and all were important. But the country was destroyed.
Remind me, who? "," They have destroyed the country where I was born, my
homeland. They have condemned us to homeless wandering around the
earth, which has become a stranger to us, now owned by some that crawled
out of the ground as the new "masters of life '."
Assessing the current political situation, we, the Bolsheviks,
should have a clear ideological position on major issues: our attitude
to the Liberals, and the new "actions" in the opposition movement
calling itself the "Left", as well as the number of organizations which
multiplies almost daily. If with the liberals everything is still more
or less clear - it supports bourgeois ideology, direct and obvious
enemies of the communists, then the "Left" –are the hidden enemies, it
is, in fact, slightly "the soft" agents of the bourgeoisie, the real of
them is to "pull apart", "tear up" and so utterly weaken the communist
movement. The only reliable means of struggle against the "left" is for
the consolidation of the communists - this principle, it controls every
minute: what kind of person does he really protect, can I go along with
him? Only in this way.
CC AUCPB
=======================================
MINSK AGREEMENT - 2 AND THE SITUATION IN UKRAINE
Statement of the Central Committee of the AUCPB
On February 12, 2015 in Minsk, talks were held in so-called "Norman
format", which was attended by the leaders of Germany, France, Russia
and Ukraine. The global bourgeois media have tried to create around
these negotiations an unprecedented sensation, comparing the meeting in
Minsk almost to the historic Yalta Conference, held in Crimea 70 years
ago. The talks were covered in Minsk by five hundred journalists from
all over the world.
After a sixteen hour night sitting, the heads of the "Big Four"
announced the signing of the Declaration in support of "a packet of
measures on fulfilling the Minsk Agreement", adopted February 12, 2015.
An assessment of the agrrement in the Belarusian capital has
already been given by many media outlests and politicians. The Russian
media focusing on the current government, see the Minsk-2 agreement as a
success for Russian diplomacy and Putin himself. Europeans speak in
the sense that the agreement in Minsk gives a chance to the peaceful
settlement of the conflict and for the most part supported by the
Ukrainian side. Almost the overwhelming majority of fascist neobanderov
organizations of Ukraine were against the signing an agreement and call
for the war to continue to the bitter end and encourage their fellow
citizens towards this.
The All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks believes that the
negotiations in Minsk discussed ways to resolve the crisis, a
year-shaking Ukraine. In this case, the main issue is the political,
without which, the conflict in the South East can not be solved, and
namely this issue was not examined. Neither could it be considered at
the meeting in "Norman format" because the three participants of the
meeting in one degree or another were involved in the crisis situation
in Ukraine.
As has been noted in the materials of the AUCPB, the main cause of
the political crisis in Ukraine is a fascist coup in Kiev and the
arrival in February 2014 to power of fascist neobanderovs, resulting in
Ukraine of an established outright terrorist dictatorship of the
reactionary forces of capital, that violated democratic rights and
freedoms of citizens of Ukraine an dfirst of all Russian citizens in
South-East and throughout New Russia. At the present time it is not a
revelation that this coup ere perpetrated under the leadership of
Western governments, especially the US, seeking to maintain its unipolar
world domination, and directed against Russia with the ultimate goal of
its dismemberment and destruction. Therefore nothing was dependant on
the Kiev authorities in this negotiation process.
As for the leadership of Germany and France, it is quite obvious
that their position is also consistent with the United States that did
not participate directly in the talks in Minsk, but all the same were
there as invisibly present. But Europeans well remember how both the
First World War and the second began in Europe and the profits obtained
by the United States, securing the leading position in the world based
on human grief. We should not forget the conclusions of Stalin made in
his work "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR," in which he, by
analyzing the post-war world order, said: "What guarantee is there,
then, that Germany and Japan will not rise to their feet again, will not
attempt to break out of American bondage and live their own independent
lives? I think there is no such guarantee." Therefore, Merkel and
Hollande's visit to Minsk - is to some extent the reluctance of a
frightened Europe to have a major war on its doorstep. No wonder Merkel
in America spoke about the undesirability of supplying "lethal weapons"
to Ukraine. In addition, Merkel and Hollande also face pressure from
their national companies who are not interested in a complete break with
Russia, as they will lose their profits.
The conclusion is that due to the unresolved main political issue
of the Minsk agreement – 2, this cannot lead to sustainable peace. They
should be seen as an agreement that provides a temporary truce. The
absence of a political solution leads to the Donbas over time towards a
so-called "frozen conflict".
For these reasons, the question of the fascist essence of the Kiev
authorities, of course, did not come up, and could not be raised at this
meeting, as all the participants of the negotiations, including
President Putin, represent the interests of certain oligarchic bourgeois
circles of their countries, not in a hurry to expose contemporary
fascism. And no matter how one of the organizers of the Minsk Summit of
Heads of State, President Lukashenko, did not embrace Poroshenko, the
latter not at the negotiating table, but in the dock (and his
accomplices Turchinov, Yatsenyuk Nalyvaychenko, chop, Yarosh, Ljashko et
al.) .
Therefore, in the second edition of the Minsk Agreement, we do not
find mention of the crimes of those who bombed the city of Donbass,
fired with heavy artillery at homes, killing women and children. No
mention of the responsibility of those people who were burned alive in
Odessa, May 2, 2014, the civilians shot in Mariupol, May 9, 2014, and
destroying monuments to Lenin and Soviet soldiers - victors of fascism.
It is our political assessment of the Minsk-2 agreements, which are
not fundamentally different from the first Minsk agreements on
09.05.2014 and 19.09.2014. With regard to their specific content, the
following should be noted.
The declaration signed in Minsk by Russia, Ukraine, Germany and
France, is just a set of phrases, and noncommittal to everyone. Roughly
with the same looks are the "measures for implementing the Minsk
Agreement" signed by unknown people. It follows out of the document
that Kuchma - "the second President of Ukraine", whose powers are
unsubstantiated, and regarding Zaharchenko and Plotnitsky in general it
is not clear as to any of their official positions, assuming they have
the authority, the document is not marked. It turns out that the
"package of measures" was signed by people without authority. So,
accordingly, it has no legal power.
The paper has a mass of uncertainties, i.e. "The package of measures
..." is a FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT, reminiscent of a clean white sheet on
which each party intends to dictate in the course of negotiating their
conditions of work. If the parties fail to agree on the mentioned
points of the agreement, which is close to the truth, then their
fulfilment will be thwarted. Due to the fact that Kiev does not
recognize the DPR-LPR, it turns out that Ukraine has no one to make
peace with.
With regard to the responsibilities of the parties, it should be
noted: signing the declaration completely refutes the Ukrainian and
Western concept that in Donbas it is not a civil war, but "only" an
armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Poroshenko, Merkel and
Hollande, having signed the Minsk Declaration, thus directly signed to
the fact that Russia is not a party to the armed conflict in the
Donbass. The Russian side thus took no obligation upon itself in the
Minsk Declaration. But Germany and France have undertaken a number of
commitments. In particular, they pledged to provide technical support
for the "restoration of a segment of the banking system", which was
destroyed in Donbas, together with support for the resumption by Ukraine
of "social benefits", although in a blockade of Donbas by Kiev, these
agreements have already been thwarted. But Kiev has a lot of
obligations in the agreement, which under the current regime cannot be
implemented, and therefore, remain only on paper.
Failure to implement the Minsk accords began immediately after
their entry into force. For example, even the first point of the
cease-fire at 00 hours 00 minutes 15 February 2015, which the agreement
came into force was violated in the early hours of this date, and
continues to be violated in the present: attacks by Ukrainian security
forces have still not been completely stopped.
In the fourth paragraph is entrusted to the point to "start a
dialogue about local elections in accordance with Ukrainian legislation"
in the DPR and LPR. It is absolutely not clear who should initiate the
dialogue. Therefore, it is likely that the dialogue will not start,
because for Kiev, the DPR and LPR do not exist.
No less a problematic task is how the Verkhovna Rada will adopt
regulations specifying the territory, "which is subject to special
treatment in accordance with the Law of Ukraine "On temporary order of
local government in some regions of Donetsk and Lugansk regions", based
on the lines set out in the Minsk memorandum dated September 19, 2014".
The fact is the law legalizes the legal existence beyond the control of
the Ukrainian government of areas in Donbass. That is, the Ukrainian
neobanderovs, entrenched in the Verkhovna Rada, will have to legitimize
the special status beyond the control of Kiev of areas of the DPR and
LPR. This is extremely problematic.
The tenth paragraph provides for "the withdrawal of all foreign
armed forces, military equipment, as well as mercenaries from the
territory of Ukraine" and "disarmament of all illegal groups." Such an
event is very difficult to imagine in the current climate. If with the
withdrawal of foreign armed groups everything is clear, as their
presence on the territory of Donbass and Ukraine still has not been
proven, then in the case of disarmament of "illegal groups" then there
remains continuous uncertainty.
Disarming the militia of Donbass can only be done if the DPR and
LPR are confident that a new Ukrainian army incursion into their
territory is impossible. Other circumstances of militia disarmament are
difficult to imagine. Similarly, it is difficult to imagine
disarmament by the Ukrainian fascist volunteer punitive battalions,
which became an important element of the Kiev political system. In
these paramilitary groups are tied the interests of many oligarchic
forces in Ukraine. "Battalions" are not just war and politics, but also
business. At this point in Ukraine there is simply no one to disarm
them. And they themselves (such as "Right Sector") will not disarm.
Especially because many of them have been formally legalized.
A recent report suggests that Poroshenko had requested a
consideration on the introduction of peacekeepers in the east of the
country, which in turn generally puts an end to the implementation of
the ten points. The All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks is opposed
to the introduction of any peacekeepers since it is the path to the
occupation of Ukraine by NATO forces and the creation of a bridgehead by
the US against Russia.
A very important place in the complex of measures attached, is the
eleventh paragraph under which it stipulates "Carrying out
constitutional reform in Ukraine with the entry into force by the end of
2015, of a new constitution, proposing decentralization as a key
element..." Using the vagueness of this paragraph, the Verkhovna Rada
has already tried to push through skimpy decentralization and cosmetic
constitutional reform (their main parameters jumped over "one to one" of
the failed September agreements into the February agreement). The
militia has already stated its opposition to the planned fraud. For
example, the official website of the New Russia leadership placed the
following statement: "The sovereignty of our republics comes at a price.
It was paid for by the blood of innocent civilians, not to mention the
militia which defended them. Sovereignty for us it is not an empty
phrase, and we do not intend to exchange it for some "gingerbread" from
Kiev." And in conclusion: "The breakup of a unified Ukraine is
inevitable."
A particularly heated debate at the Minsk talks revolved around the
Debaltsovo "boiler". Debaltsevo is crucial for the DPR and LPR, so
because of that, a 16-hour "war of nerves" was conducted in the
negotiations, where President Poroshenko tried to prove that there is no
boiler, and therefore tried to fix the Minsk Agreement on this
strategically important point for the army Ukraine. The final point in
this matter was put by the heroes of the DPR and LPR militia, to
withstanding during the hours of talks in Minsk all the frenzied attacks
by armed Ukrainian security bodies. After suffering losses, the
militias survived and won, causing the army of fascist Bandera Ukraine
significant damage. These losses were a cold shower for the fascist
fighters of Kiev.
The bourgeois leaders of Russia at the Minsk talks did not take
into account the interests and desires of the working people of Donbass,
who fought bravely against the fascist punitive forces. The
above-mentioned disadvantages of Minsk Agreement - 2 will most
negatively impact on the fate of more workers of the DPR and LPR, which
in their referenda have clearly and unequivocally voted in favour of
state sovereignty.
Signed under pressure of Putin by heads of the DPR and LPR
Zaharchenko and Plotnitsky on February 12, 2015 "The package of measures
..."ignores the will of the people of Donbass, expressed in a
referendum. Misty and ornate provisions of the so-called
"decentralization", as noted above us, will not be accepted by
inhabitants of Donetsk and Lugansk, and it certainly adds fuel to the
flames of civil war in Ukraine. The absence of a clear and unequivocal
position on the recognition of the Russian language as the second state
language can and does make irreconcilable the positions of the parties.
Thus, the risk of spread of the conflict to the level of the European and wider - into a Third World War - is maintained.
In view of the above, the Central Committee of the AUCPB states:
We express our full support for the just struggle of the people of
New Russia (Novorossiya (DPR and LPR) against the occupying forces of
the Kiev punitive fascist regime.
We believe that without a political solution to the crisis in
Ukraine, involving the overthrow of the fascist neo-banderov government
in Kiev, sustainable long-term peace in the region cannot be
established.
From modern history it is well known that the pioneers of the
anti-fascist struggle in different countries have always been communists
and left-patriotic organizations. The struggle by the communists of
Ukraine against fascism in the country is extremely difficult because of
the terrorist anti-communist regime imposed on its entire territory.
We therefore call upon the communists and activists of leftist
organizations of the world to show solidarity and provide political
support to Ukrainian comrades, to hold mass protests against fascism in
Ukraine and the possibility of the spread of fascist plague in Europe
and elsewhere in the world that can turn into a disaster for mankind.
There is a need to convene a world anti-imperialist anti-fascist forum,
the basic idea of which should be the fight against the threat of a
Third World War.
We urge the leaders of the communist and leftist patriotic organizations to demand from their Governments that they:
- condemn the Kiev fascist regime and violation of human rights in Ukraine;
-To specific measures to establish an International Criminal
Tribunal for the Kiev neo-fascist regime on the territory of modern
Ukraine, Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics.
Leningrad,
February 25, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LENIN, GORBACHEV, SOBCHAK
Interview by N.A Andreeva to the television program TV-100 on 18.02.2015
Correspondant of TV 100: On February 19, 2000, Anatoly Sobchak died (now
marking the 15th anniversary of that date). Sobchak was the first
mayor of St. Petersburg. Under him the city of Leningrad was renamed
St. Petersburg. Your attitude towards the Mayor Sobchak as a business
executive and as a politician? In early March 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev
became General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. On March 13,
1988 in "Soviet Russia" your article "I cannot give up principles" was
published. Your attitude to Gorbachev after the past few years?
Nina Andreeva - Anatoly Sobchak (1937-2000, February) was the first
mayor (1991-1996) of Leningrad, a city renamed by him to St. Petersburg.
Sobchak was an active participant or, more precisely, one of the
initiators and agents of the "democrats" to destroy what had been
connected with Soviets and Soviet toponymy. Renaming the city was
conducted fraudulently, by deceiving the citizens of Leningrad.
The Lenin_v_Smolnom Referendum, which the "democrats" talk about,
as such, was not a referendum. It was in June 1991 a public opinion
poll. And the question was worded in such a way that many did not
understand where to place their "tick" on the questionnaire: "for what"
and "against what." Counting of votes was carried out by the organizers
of the survey and therefore at the end of counting, they announced that
the majority of people of Leningrad voted "in favour" of the renaming
of Leningrad to St Petersburg. (According to the "democrats", 64% of
the city citizens took part in the vote, "in favour" of renaming voted
54%, i.e., "for" a name change had taken place even if the in this scam
had only voted 34.5% of the population). When the data of the survey
were published in the press, it was met with stormy indignation of
Leningraders, an appeal was sent to Smolny, and up to Gorbachev himself.
Gorbachev reassured everyone by saying that "the poll had no legal
force." Everyone calmed down. And on 05 September, in the press
announced the official renaming of the city of Leningrad into St.
Petersburg.
Anatoly Sobchak before being elected mayor worked at the Zhdanov
State University of Leningrad (LSU), and was nominated for mayor also by
members of the LSU. Leningrad University has always been noted for its
"democratic" positions, was a hotbed of anti-Soviet ideas, and a source
of ardent conductor of counterrevolutionary trends. The vast majority
of the ruling elite in the country at different times of the period of
counter-revolution and still are LSU graduates (and in the past, members
of the (“Ozero” ("Lake") cooperative). Sobchak was a worthy
representative of the home-grown "democratic" counter-revolutionary
elite of intellectuals have revealed in the 1990 years, his hatred of
all things Soviet, having headed a counter-revolutionary coup and the
collapse of the USSR.
Now it is no secret that all these anti-Soviet "brothers" were well
fed by numerous foreign grants "to assist the establishment of
democracy and transparency" in the Soviet Union, towards which the
United States recently spent billions of dollars. In Moscow alone
during this period functioned so many anti-Soviet "democratic"
(so-called non-governmental) organizations that the list of their names
alone would not fit on five A4 pages. Today, there are no less. About
Sobchak. Criminal proceedings opened (introduced) against him for
embezzlement of funds of the city when he was mayor. The case was
initiated not by the communists, but by a prominent Democrat, political
scientist Marina Salie.
Sobchak was convicted for the "disappearance" of several million
(more than 100 million US dollars) from the budget, which was "not
found." Money was allocated for the purchase of food for the city of
Leningrad. There are other facts of fraudulent schemes by Sobchak as
mayor of Saint-Petersburg. Also known are the forced evictions by
Sobchak of several families from a high-end, located in the heart of the
city two-story mansion, formerly owned by a senior tsarist officials.
Ultimately Sobchak had taken over (for personal use) this luxury
mansion. There were court trials over this matter, but the victims, of
course, lost their case.
Sobchak only just escaped from prosecution abroad (through Finland
to France). Following the appointment of Putin as the successor to
Yeltsin in December 31, 1999 the case was closed. Sobchak decided to
return to Russia. When returning in February 2000, Sobchak died under
mysterious and unexplained circumstances. Marina Salie also somehow
quietly left the political scene ... On March 12, 2012 she died. The
funeral took place quietly and silently, not like they bury the
"democrats".
To your question – is the mayor a politician or business executive –
here is the answer. The mayor is also a politician and business
executive. As a politician, he defines and controls the psychological
situation in the city, working with the media, etc. When under Sobchak
from 1991-1993, when the "democrats" went mad with permissiveness and
plundering the country’s wealth, they screamed furiously at rallies,
calling for reprisals - "Communists to the gallows!" The mayor ... as a
business executive is responsible of course, for the use of funds
allocated from the state budget for the city. How Sobchak actually used
these city funds, has already been mentioned.
Addition to the interview:
Today, the "democratic" public continues to work on the collapse of
the country, organising in Moscow, and not only demonstrations in
support of the pro-Nazi regime in Ukraine, but shows their pro-American
solidarity. On February 18 the press service of the "democrats" of the
"Yabloko" party (leader Yavlinsky) published an article in which calls
for Russia to hand back (return) Crimea to the Kiev junta (by convening
an international conference in the Crimea), demanding that President
Putin's review his foreign policy (of course in line with U.S.
interests), puttings forward its own program (literally) the
"de-Bolshevization of Russia" (!). "Yabloka" with its strategic goal,
considers convening in the foreseeable future a Russian Constituent
Assembly with the task of twenty-first century - the "restoration of
historical continuity with pre-Bolshevik Russia through the convening of
the institution, and on this basis, a state of responsible citizens,
whose core values are freedom, law, property, social solidarity ". To
consider enemies of Soviet power and the Soviet people as "responsible
citizens" is absurd. These "responsible citizens" usurped our nation's
property, carved it up with thieves-oligarchs and stuff their own
pockets using our "privatised-stolen" public property. In the new
leadership of the country (after they remove Putin) the "democrats" have
tipped Khodorkovsky with Navalny, who are already involved on criminal
charges for fraud. Further, the proposed "Yabloka" demands for a change
of policy of the Russian leadership is not new, but a repetition to a
certain degree of the demands of the NTS, in the late 90s of the
twentieth century ordering Yeltsin to implement measures on
de-Sovietization of Soviet society. This was stated by us at the II
Congress of the AUCPB.
Correspondent. In Leningrad were many monuments to Lenin. At
present, most of them have been removed. There is a proposal for the
establishment in Razliv on the territory of Lenin museum an avenue to
which can be transferred earlier removed monuments of Lenin. And how
many monuments should there be generally?
N.A. - Relative to the monuments in general. A monument is a sign, a
symbol of a certain historical period, a certain historical period in
the life of the people. We Bolsheviks are against the demolition of any
monuments. It is necessary to preserve these symbols. It is necessary
to know and respect their history, whatever it was. A removal of
monuments is to a certain extent, vandalism, a neglect of our ancestors.
Monuments to Lenin were also created, as a rule, by the best
sculptors, and for this reason they should be maintained. Of course, in
all to a necessary measure. In Leningrad, a city of five million,
there were many monuments to Lenin (in the city, in the territory of
enterprises, institutions). Today there are only a few. Under Sobchak,
around the removal of the memorial bust of Lenin at the Moscow station
there was a whole campaign to protect the monument by the communists.
We were on guard near the monument day and night, not allowing it to be
removed. But after many days of resistance by force of militia (or any
other system) denting the defenders, the monument was removed and taken
away. Now there is a bust of Peter I.
How many monuments should there be? Just any kind of bust is
harmful and leads to the installation of monuments lacking artistic
value. The amount depends on the historical significance of the
individual.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was in the history of civilization among the
greatest thinkers and politicians and only due to his activity and
intelligence could lead to Russia stepping from one socio-economic
system (the feudal-bourgeois, capitalist) to another – to socialism. As
you know, Karl Marx believed all socio-economic formations,
socio-political systems (slave, feudal, capitalist) only the prehistory
of mankind on the road to communism - a classless society, where people
are really free where getting food and housing is not a problem at the
existing level of scientific and technical progress, where people will
be able to enjoy all the benefits of culture, sports, family, parenting,
enjoy the benefits of scientific and technological progress, where
every man really becomes a person. Karl Marx was a great theorist,
creator of the only scientific theory of the development of civilization
("Marx discovered the laws of history, has placed the proletariat at
the helm", Mayakovsky). But theory without practice is dead. Practice
without theory is blind. Vladimir Ilyich merged Marx's theory and
practice of building socialism. And in this he is head and shoulders
above all the greatest personalities in history. There are many
versatile highest evaluations of Lenin by outstanding writers,
scientists, politicians and statesmen. Lenin loved the people.
Therefore there was a sincere desire to place in their city, region, a
bust or monument of Lenin.
On the establishment of a park in Razliv at the Lenin Museum and
gathering Lenin monuments in one place - I think it is right, especially
as the whereabouts of the demolished monuments are not known and the
condition they are in one can only guess. The time will come, and they
will be returned to their places.
Correspondent. - What is your opinion about Gorbachev, 20 years later?
N.A. - Gorbachev was elected General Secretary of the CPSU Central
Committee at the extraordinary plenary session of the CPSU Central
Committee, on March 11, 1985 An interesting coincidence that three years
later almost to the day, on March 13 1988, "Sovetskaya Russia"
published my article "I cannot give up principles." This article was a
milestone in the history of the country, the party and the development
of the counter-revolution, dividing the whole of society into two
irreconcilable camps: the supporters of the counter-revolution - the
path to nowhere (these were a minority) and supporters of socialism,
which had to be saved. All the adverse events, which I warned of in my
article, have now become a reality. The publication of my article was
the beginning of the star sunset of Gorbachev in the political arena.
His status as a traitor and a traitor to the motherland was confirmed by
Gorbachev himself in 1992, speaking at a Turkish university. There, he
said that "the purpose of his life was to destroy socialism." Gorbachev
played in history a more sinister role than Hitler. Gorbachev betrayed
the Soviet people, the international working-class and national
liberation movement. Gorbachev gave away the Great Victory over
fascism, which had cost the lives of millions of Soviet people. He
betrayed the people's democracies. Gorbachev shook the faith of the
disadvantaged people in the world in that it is possible to build a
society without exploitation, without unemployment, where there is
friendship between the peoples of different nationalities and religions,
where each nation can develop their culture and speak their own
language, where everyone can get free higher education to work in
accordance with their vocation and abilities. Gorbachev historically
today is responsible for the collapse of a great country, for the blood
that is shed in Donbass. Today, many people dream about past times, are
nostalgic for socialism, the 7 or 6-hour working day and a constant
without delay payment of wages, the free quality health care, student
scholarships for all students, sufficient for life, about the great
pride of our country, defeated German fascism, through to the pride of
being a citizen of a great country the USSR, living a quiet peaceful
life.
History develops in a spiral. We Bolsheviks believe that when
raises to a new level, a return will happen towards socialist values and
the revival of socialism. We are working towards this.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.UK KOREAN FRIENDSHIP HOLD SUCCESSFUL SKYPE MEETING AND ADOPT
RESOLUTION ON US GERM WARFARE AND CIA TORTURE
The UK Korean Friendship Association hosted a meeting via Skype at
1400 hours on February 26th . Participating in the meeting were KFA
members from different parts of the country including the far north
eastern city of Newcastle Upon Tyne . Dermot Hudson KFA Official
Delegate and chair of the Juche Idea Study Group of England
participating in the meeting from the UK KFA office in London. Also
participating in the meeting was general secretary of the New
Communist Party
Andy Brooks who is also a KFA member.
Participants strongly denounced the hypocrisy of the US imperialists
for their "human rights " campaign saying in fact that the US was the
country that had committed serious crimes.
It was pointed out that during the Korean war delegations of the
British peace movement visited Korea and saw for themselves the germ
warfare committed by the US imperialists in Korea . Books
published at the time fully exposed this. The crime of US germ warfare
must be fully exposed . KFA
members pointed out that the germ warfare of the US was in violation
of international conventions and protocols such as the Geneva
convention.
Attention was also drawn to US crimes during the Vietnam war and also
in Iraq. The US were also responsible for the Bhopal disaster in India
and for massive exploitation in the third world.
The US CIA carried out torture against people in secret prisons that
were not on US soil but were in other countries but hypocritically
tried to take issue with non existent "labour camps " which were
allegedly located inside the DPRK. The KFA Official Delegate said on 9
visits to the DPRK he had never seen a labour camp. The US had carried
out illegal imprisonment and toture at Guantanamo bay on the territory
of Cuba and other places throughout the world , this was a fact.
The meeting concluded by adopting the following resolution
RESOLUTION OF UK KFA MEETING ON SKYPE-26TH 1400HRS FEBRUARY 2015
This meeting has been called to expose the phony human rights campaign
of US imperialism against the Democratic People?s Republic (DPRK) and
to expose the real ?human rights violator ?the US itself so it may be
indicted before the court of history for its crimes against humanity.
The
?Human rights ?campaign against the DPRK it is not just hypocritical
But it also serves as a smokescreen to divert attention away from real
Human rights abuses in the USA.
These are far numerous to list as the USA is known for
Invading many countries and also for racial discrimination and for
phone tapping and electronic eavesdropping . It is rightly known as a
?land barren of human rights ? . However the most serious human rights
abuses committed by the US were the use of germ warfare during the
Korean war against the DPRK and the torture carried out by the CIA in
the years 2001-2006 .
The US imperialists waged biological warfare in Korea in the 1950-1953
in violation of the Geneva Protocol. The use of biological weapons was
confirmed by an International Scientific Commission which included the
respected British scientist Professor Joseph Needham and also by
confessions of captured US personnel . In carrying out biological
warfare against the Korean people the US imperialists utilised the
services of Japanese war criminal Shiro Ishii of the notorious Unit 731.
During the Korean war the US carried out over 800 germ warfare
sorties . The death toll from the US germ warfare ran into thousands .
This was a barbaric crime that was much worse than those committed by
Hitler in the second world. We believe it is high time for the US to
stop covering this crime and come clean finally about it.
Recently, the US senate issued a report opening to the world torture
committed by the CIA over a long period . Of course the CIA had long
been infamous for assassination, terrorism, dirty tricks and
interference . It earned notoriety as the shock brigade of US
imperialism , Its role was exposed in the 1970s by a defector from the
CIA Philip Agee. However under the guise of the so-called ?war on
terror ? the CIA became a major human rights violator committing
torture and detaining suspects without trial.
The CIA operated a network of secret prisons around the world and
indulging kidnapping and ?rendition ? as part of its Detention and
Interrogation Programme and carried out torture of detainees. The
programme authorized CIA officers to use extreme interrogation
techniques, including sleep deprivation, water boarding , painful
stress positions, dietary manipulation, walling, 'rectal rehydration'
or rectal feeding, etc. These techniques were most barbaric.
Thus the US stands condemned and guilty for crimes against humanity.
We demand that the UN Committee on Human Rights and other
international bodies organise a full and proper investigation into
these crimes committed by the US. The UN must act in a fair and
impartial way and must not be afraid of the US.
ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY BE THE MEETING AT 14.50 HRS 26 FEBRUARY
(text available here
http://juche007-anglo-peopleskoreafriendship.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/resolution-on-us-germ-warfare-and-cia.htm-please
copy and distribute and get your trade union , student union or
community group to
adopt)
2. UK KFA CONDEMNS FOAL EAGLE AND KEY RESOLVE
BRIEF STATEMENT BY UK KFA CONDEMING FOAL EAGLE AND KEY RESOLVE
UK KOREAN FRIENDSHIP ASSOCIATION
London 25 February 2015
The UK Korean Friendship Association totally condemns the
planned holding of the "Key Resolve and "Foal Eagle " military
exercises by the United States imperialists and their south Korean
puppet cohorts . The exercises start on the 2nd of March and will
last untill the 24th of April .
Given the duration and scope of
the exercises plus the large amount of troops and miltiary hardware
involved , these exercises constitute a start threat to peace on the
Korean peninsula and the world as well as a severe challenge to the
sovereignty and independence of the Denocratic People's Republic of
Korea !.
Some media outlets have stated that "Australia, Canada,
Denmark, France and Britain plan to participate in the drill". This
smacks of an attempt by the US imperialists and south Korean puppets
to try and create a multi-naitonal force to overpower and stifle
People's Korea . We wholeheartedly condemn any British participation ,
however minor , in these exercises . Britain must not get mixed up in
the schemes of US imperialism nor dragged into a second Korean War. It
is time for the UK to have an independent policy on Korea and develop
relations of friendship with the DPRK . It is indeed regrettable that
this has been announced when a goodwill delegation of the DPRK, the
DPRK Para Ensemble is touring the UK .
We call for the immediate cancellation of the exercises and for the
withdrawal of any proposed British participation in these insidious
war exercises.
UK KFA
====================================
