Posted on 08/28/2005 11:55:00 AM PDT by Mazepa
23 August
Scandal - Zhirinovsky: "Yushchenko is worse than Hitler," his wife is "Banderian’s daughter" and all Ukrainians will be exiled to Siberia
Lvovskaya Gazeta reports that Vladimir Zhirinovsky the leader of Liberal-Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) made Anti-Ukrainian speech at the picket being held by his party before the Embassies of Georgia, Ukraine and Israel in Moscow.
Zhirinovsky menaced Ukraine with Apocalypses because of "Viktor Yushchenko is worse than Hitler," who was more honest than Ukrainian President and because of "his wife is the daughter of Banderian who eloped to America.
Zhirinovsky stated also that Hitler "opened Russian schools and churches," and Yushchenko "closed Russian Orthodox churches."
He strongly recommended Ukrainian politicians "not to forget Russia language because they will need it to answer the questions of Russian investigators in Lubyanka."
"We will exile all of you in Siberia, you will not be shot because Ukrainians will be used as frozen museum pieces," threatened Liberal-Democrat.
Zhirinovsky mentioned that "to study Ukrainian for Russians living in Ukraine is a flout; it does not happened in any country all over the world." Ukraine is "a part of Russian Empire. Lvov will be a capital of small Ukrainian state and let them develop their culture if any."
He warns that "all Russians of the Earth will come back to Moscow." "You have become insolent here in Ukraine, Yushchenko will be punished, it has influenced his health condition already, it was done by Ukrainian patriots," stated Zhirinovsky.
The newspaper also mentions that "Zhirinovsky is one of the ten high officials of Russian that is why it may be proposed that his voice is the voice of official Russian power."
LDPR picketers were guarded by two tens of policemen. All journalists had to pass in their Ida and the foreign ones - accreditation cards.
"On March 17, 1991, in an all-Union referendum 78% of all voters voted for the retention of the Soviet Union in a reformed form. Ukraine and the Baltics boycotted the referendum.==
Ukraine and Baltics boykotted? BHAHAHA:))))))
You proved my point that Wikipedia is just someone propaganda verison of history:).
Lizol plz note that. Wikipedia just lied about well-known fact of recent past. Now how we ca trust it with info on Suvorov?
DOn't change our subject now. We talked about who left USSR firrst Russia or Ukraine.
SO did you check my post about Ukraine Independence Day? Did you find that it is in August but Russian one in June?
You should correct yourself and say I'm uninformed about Russian Soviet history, then I'd agree- in my previous studies I just viewed Russian Communists as an outside force. I am more familiar with Ukrainian Communists like Skrypnyk, Khvylovyy and Shumsky. Professor, you've ever read Khvylovyy?
Why not such "improvement" from britons at same time or later? Why ethnic russians would need such "improvement"?
I didn't say 'improvement for Russians', but for minorities. (I even put it in the same sentence so even the kids could make a link). Ethnic Russians (RSFSR) were not effected that the Union had republics- they don't live there. It was all for the minorities.
Accually on earth why ethnic russians would need a state in which they are just biggest minority only? Do russians stupid or what?
Ukraine already separated in 1917- Russians didn't give Ukraine its republic. So when Russia reconquered Ukraine simple re-annexation by the Russians was a step back from the "democratic tradition" of the Communists.
What's with the British analogy? If India had revolted and declared independence from England, and then a British task force was sent to recapture India and in order to ease the resistance, Britain promised more freedoms to India than before, then could you make such a comparison.
to ensure that new state is NOT russian state anymore.
Whose was it? (Georgian ?:)) Soviet Constitution and the (superficial) administrative devision into the republics didn't do anything and Russians remained the nationality in control.
.Why ethnic russians wanted to compromise? They had thier own lands which bigger then of anyone else.
I'm not sure what you're saying. Russians didn't make a compromise with minorities near Moscow, but with Ukraine where Russians were an overwhelming minority and couldn't have been called 'Russian land'.
Britons when thier minorities put up same question just broke up British EMpire and leave it. They were better off.
Ah, but these are Brits. Russians held on to their empire because they're die-hard imperialists, (sing "Shiroka zemlia moya rodnaya" with me) and to Ukraine because it's Russia's younger brother.
And there I was, silly me, thinking that SU collapsed because of the Aug. 19 putch. Russian Independence Day- quite a curious holiday- who did it set itself free from?
Ukraine and Baltics boykotted? BHAHAHA:))))))You proved my point that Wikipedia is just someone propaganda verison of history:).
That's what I also know. Baltics and Ukraine didn't attend and didn't sign the new agreement. Share the russian version with me.
DOn't change our subject now. We talked about who left USSR firrst Russia or Ukraine.
There was also something in 1990, can't recall at the moment.
Who are you kidding? Even now majority of Russians want Russia to be with Ukraine. (BTW 90% of Ukrainians said no) I've read Kravchuk's memoirs some months ago about the events leading to the breakup and him signing the CIS agreement which was to make CIS a pointless organization, exactly what Ukrainian side insisted on.
There it is, I found the 1990 event I mentioned before. July 16, 1990.
Enjoy: http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/2000/290014.shtml
http://www.iwrp.org/CEDAW/ukraine.pdf#search='Ukraine%201990%20July%2016'
to ensure that new state is NOT russian state anymore.
Whose was it? (Georgian ?:)) Soviet Constitution and the (superficial) administrative devision into the republics didn't do anything and Russians remained the nationality in control.==
Yeah yeah.:) Before 1917, there was Russian Empire the state with no minority regions at all. Which was run by russian czar administration with russians at frist roles.
After Civil war 1917-22 which russians lost.
There become SOVIET Union instead of RUSSIAN Empire. New state where goverment included jews and ukranians in majority where georgian Dzhugashvilli(STalin) run political power. Where pole Dzerzginskii run secret police. Where jew Trotskii was military minister and head of staff.
And his goverment you call "russian"?!!!!!
I know that even for russophobes is not logic to call such goverment with 1 or 2 ethnic russians between 20-30 ministers as "russian goverment".
So they do mental trick: they just start to ignore ethnicities of bolshevick ministers and call them all as "russian". Or they call thier govement is "russian" since they sat in Moscow' Kremlin and conviniently to ingnore the fact that Moscow was sieged and occupied in 1918 by Lathvian Rifle division.
FYI lathvians were from Latvia, baltic state. They are NOT russians. And thier rifles surved bolshevicks well. They was pretorian guards of Red power.
Britons when thier minorities put up same question just broke up British EMpire and leave it. They were better off.
Ah, but these are Brits. Russians held on to their empire because they're die-hard imperialists, (sing "Shiroka zemlia moya rodnaya" with me) and to Ukraine because it's Russia's younger brother.==
Do you beleive in it?:))) I regret if you do so.
It is no damage to anyone else then you if you think that way.
Because since you are mistaken and your mistakes will take on you not russians:).
I will try to tell you some sense.
1. Russians are pragmatics same way as anybody else. If some enterprise bring pfofits then russians stick to it. If not then russians don't need it anymore.
2. So russians held to Empire till it was RUSSIAN Empire. The state which was run by russians andf for sake of russian prosperity.
Russians are not fools. So russians do not need state which worked away of russian interests.
3. Red power was non-russian at core since it is internationalists (proclaims no favor to no ethnicity). Why russians would trust internationalists who want to stop thier domination in thier own profounded state? Who of russians in sane minds will submit the new power which wants to stop russian domination in Russin Empire?
4. I admit that russians dominated in Russian Empire and now in Russian Federation. And maybe some minorities don't like it then and today.
BUT Soviet Union was run NON russians and against interest of russian power. Hence russian White movement fought with red power 4 year long Civil war.
Even now majority of Russians want Russia to be with Ukraine.==
WHat do you mean "To be with"? It is very fine question isn' it?
As far as I know no majority of russians wants united state with Ukraine.
Because it means the subsidies to Ukraine.
No russians want to support ukranian ecomonics by russian resources.
Every russian today for equal europian prices for oil and gas for Ukraine and everybodies else. Because it is profitable for russin economics. It is money works sir.
Russia much better buy cheaper chinese products then expensive ukranian products for money which Ukraine will pay Russia for oil and gas.
So you are very mistaken if you think that russins want "to be with Ukraine" in common state. No way:)).
But of cause russians want to hold good relations with Uraine wince they are brothers. That is all.
Russians are pragmatics same way as anybody else. If some enterprise bring pfofits then russians stick to it.
I could also be the biggest pragmatic- if conquering others is good for business i'll stick to it. Both imperialist and pragmatic.:)
Red power was non-russian at core since it is internationalists (proclaims no favor to no ethnicity).
Let's talk about practical things. For one, I noticed that while you grew up in an 'internationalist' regime, you had no idea who Ukrainian Communists like Scrypnyk or Khvylovyy were. Also while I can remember a passage from "Borodino" or Pushkin, you couldn't do so with Shevchenko. That's not very internationalist from the Soviet education. I think it was Dziuba (you of course as a Russian wouldn't know this Ukrainian) who wrote an essay in 60's "Internationalism or Russification"- subject is clear from title. He got in huge trouble with Comm.Party.
Also for some unknown reason, as a result of the Soviet era, HALF of the Ukrainians call Russian language as their primary language. Interesting that it's Russian langauge, not Latvian, Georgian or Hebrew. Prior to the revolution, the only language that the Ukrainian peasant knew was Ukrainian.
P.S. I'm very glad that as the result of these last presidential elections Ukraine and Russia began normalizing their relations.
Also for some unknown reason, as a result of the Soviet era, HALF of the Ukrainians call Russian language as their primary language. Interesting that it's Russian langauge, not Latvian, Georgian or Hebrew. Prior to the revolution, the only language that the Ukrainian peasant knew was Ukrainian.==
I red reminicences of Vladimir Shulgin. Who was ethnic ukranian deputy of Russian DUMA BEFORE October Revolt.
He wrote that those ukranians who was under rule of Austria and Poland of cause didn't know russian language.
But those who lived in Empire knew it. Because thier ukranian was different and very near russian then from Austrian and Poland territories.
Why bolshevicks kept russian language?
I think just because the biggest ehthical group spoke that languge and in same time russian was the language for inter-ethnical dialogs in Empire.
So soviets simply couldn't interchange it for hebrew or lathvian or ukranian. Or experanto for example.
Accualy bolshevicks has that idea to make the official languge of USSR the experanto. But they dropped that idea.
Before 1917, there was Russian Empire the state with no minority regions at all. Which was run by russian czar administration with russians at frist roles.
And that was a crime which earned Russians the resentment from the minorities. Do you regret what happened since? Don't tell me you're like Zhirinovsky who also wants to restore the Russian Empire. ===
Yes I regret what happened. At same time I know that all minorities and russians too are guilty that they couldn't find agreement and went to Civil war. But I have to emphasize that the majority of russian forces was on side of White Movement AGAINST majority of united minorities who were on side of international reds.
Sametime I admit that some smaller russian group fought on side of Reds and in same time some of minorities group fought on one side with White Movement.
So I don't blame minorities of Russian Empire for communism alone. I think that russians are guilty too.
But I completely against some of former minorities of RE today try to put all blames for commies on russians and to embelish themselves sumultaniously.
When they try to ignore the commie past of thier own people and thier own participation in soviet power. I think it is just manipulative dishonesty and fraud of history.
So we ALL guilty for commies won. Minorities and russians and vise versa.
Russians - for they fought not strong enough against them. But minorities - for they succumb Red propaganda about national independences and supported bolshevicks to get power and to accquire thier independences form bolshevick hands.
As some of them did. But later bolshevicks took thier word back and baltics for example payed thier price. As we all know - they were "compelled" to join Soviet Union.
But since thier rifles helped to bolshevicks got power in first place, so those grim consequances are on them.
About Zhrinosvkii.
I think Zhirik is just clown who just teases those of foreigners who stuck with old stereotypes of thinking.
I beleive he perfectly understand as majority that today status quo is most profitable for Russia.
Why on earth russians need those bands of alien people in thier neiborhoods? Why Russia needs that burden which Russia will have to feed, to give up her resource for free?
Sametime today just same people pay good money for russian products and everyone around hopes that it will continue forever.
I pray God no more Empire anymore! No more subsidies and preferences. No more free russian resource for any "friend" or "brother" ever.
Just trade relationship with strict payments for delivered goods - that is all what Russia needs.
But Zhirik (Vlad Zhirinovskii) just teases you since you succumb to his teasings:)).
He just teases russophobes:).
I think it is his first intention since I like to do this too:). I like to tease russophobes on this boards:).
So Zhrik by his public stunts keeps all russophobes busy:). Thier brains are boiling and thier all thoughts all dedicated to understand if Zhirik expresses his own opinion or Putin'?:)) And so on and on. If they rest for some times he adds them more clues again:).
But while russophobes spend time to solve Zhrik's clues, they couldn't do dirties to Russia:). That is all about and he good in it:).
Russia sametimes continues to build houses and factories, to sell oil and gas and her weaponry for good money, to research, to design new spaceships and at the end to enrich her people step by step.
I'm afraid Zhirinovsky lost it long, long ago assuming he ever had it.
I'm certainly against making Russians as an ethnic or ethno-cultural group as the scapegoats for the Communism. However, it's wrong when you say that majority of Russians supported White Guard. In Fact, initially majority of Russians (esp. Peasantry) supported Bolsheviks with their promises of "lands to peasantry, factories to workers". However, after Bolshevism showed its teeth with forceful requisition of food, harvest and other necessities from the countryside to feed the nascent Red Army and summary execution of peasantry, the Russian peasantry started to rebel. The Antonov rebellion of 1921-1922 in Tambov province was probably the most known and it was taking place after White Guard was largely defeated. It was Marshal Tukhachevsky, Red Army top Officer and Russian Nobleman with Polish Roots, who put down Antonov Rebellion with utmost sadism by burning villages with villagers to the ground and using gas against rebel remnants. Don't forget that a significant number of Russian Imperial army and Navy officers joined Bolsheviks. Many of them joined under duress--their relatives were taken by VChK as hostages. However, there were a number of officers who joined the Red Army voluntarily. In other words, I believe it's important not to invent new myths, but to look honestly in each and everyone else path to see what actually happened.
But I have to emphasize that the majority of russian forces was on side of White Movement AGAINST majority of united minorities who were on side of international reds.
Majority of the Ukrainian population were with anarchists (like Makhno).
But Zhirik (Vlad Zhirinovskii) just teases you since you succumb to his teasings:)). He just teases russophobes:).
Well, no, he's not like a matador waving the red cloth.
You'd probably know that a large part of Ukraine are pro-Russian. It is my and other russophobes' hope that there are more Russians like him who would turn that portion of the Ukrainian population away from Russia. So it's an internal Ukrainian thing. I'm not observing what Russia is doing- for example I don't know the names of your ministers or leaders of your lesser parties. Russian internal political situation rarely makes the Ukrainian news.
In Fact, initially majority of Russians (esp. Peasantry) supported Bolsheviks with their promises of "lands to peasantry, factories to workers". ==
No sergey it is not really true. My ansestors who was peasnts in Sibiria fought in White army. Many of those russians who were in Red army was forcefully mobilized.
Accually today all archives are open and we cann now better the history of Civil war.
Don't forget that a significant number of Russian Imperial army and Navy officers joined Bolsheviks. ==
Not significant number and many of those was forcefully mobilized with arrest of thier relatives as hostages.
Serge I see taht you have some stereotypes. Please throw them away. It is your ansestors history after all.
But I have to emphasize that the majority of russian forces was on side of White Movement AGAINST majority of united minorities who were on side of international reds.
Majority of the Ukrainian population were with anarchists (like Makhno). ==
Mahno was ally of Red amrmy. He sieged Crimea together with Red army.
It is my and other russophobes' hope that there are more Russians like him who would turn that portion of the Ukrainian population away from Russia. ==
If you rely on Zhirik in this task you will lose.
Because Zhirik uses special words and special justures just to agitate more those who don't know russian language and culture. But most russophobes don't know it.
Those from Ukraine who as you say pro-russians are people of russin culture and they easy recognise that Zhirik just play games and he is not serious.
That his estapades just target foreign russophobes only:)).
It is well-seen situation between russians and only foreign russophobes may fall in his traps:)).
I'm not observing what Russia is doing- for example I don't know the names of your ministers or leaders of your lesser parties.==
Yes yes it is what I thought myself:). Less you know about Russia then more Zhirik's stunts will infuence your brains:))).
"Less you know about Russia then more Zhirik's stunts will infuence your brains:)))."
Stunts? - He is in charge of one of the biggest political parties in Russia.
Stop denying that a majority of Russians don't sympathize with most of his positions.
I didn't think Antonio Banderas' daughter was so old.
To settle the dispute about Zhirinovsky, let's take a look at the numbers of the last Duma Elections in December 2003. The voter turn out was 54%.
Putin's United Russia 37%
Communists:12.7%
Zhirinovsky party: 11.6%
Motherland (Rodina):9%
The rest of 29.7% were largely pro-Putin allies, although anti-Putin candidates got through too, like Vladimir Ryzhkov.
These elections were likely skewed by manipulations of electoral commission heavily in Putin's party favor to give him nearly 2/3rds of Duma quorum to change the constitution to allow him to run for the third term.
As for Zhirinovsky party, if we assume that 11.6% more or less reflect an accurate picture, it's still a frightening number, but fortunately not a majority. Also keep in mind that whatever Zhirinovsky may utter in public, he usually always votes in accordance to Putin's party.
Also some historical records of Zhirinovsky so called "Liberal Democratic" Party showing in 1990's duma elections during Yeltsin era.
1993: 22.92% (The highest showing so far)
1999: 5.98%
My Conclusion--Zhirinovsky whose party started likely as KGB creature in 1990-1991 to run against Yeltsin when Russian Federation was still part of USSR, is apparently morphed into another Putin ally--a scarecrow for the world to make Putin look like an angel.
Because Zhirik uses special words and special justures just to agitate more those who don't know russian language and culture. But most russophobes don't know it.
With all confidence I can say I'm familiar with the Russian culture- until 91 Ukraine and Russia were together. There's nothing subliminar or deeply strategic in his "technique". At best, you could say he's scaring foreigners so as to make Putin look like Gandhi. However he's not being a buffoon just with us russophones :)- there's that infamous on-air fighting some years ago.
Those from Ukraine who as you say pro-russians are people of russin culture and they easy recognise that Zhirik just play games and he is not serious.
Ukrainians of Russian culture- that's what you mean?
Well perhaps you're right, I don't know, we'll have to ask an Eastern Ukrainian if he's bothered if Zh. calls him a "mierzaviets". But again, from what you're saying I gather you Russians don't seem to be bothered if you call each other, your parents and your kids #^%$&!*$% and *-/$%!!. .
:-)
(a joke, right?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.