Litvinenko: the Questions

The treatment meted out by the western Press over the Litvinenko case is utterly predictable and a shocking and chilling example of how anti-Russian those responsible for perpetuating the Cold War myth remain. When the West needed Russia in two World Wars, Russia gave up the blood of 32,350,000 of her sons and daughters. And now we are speaking about London and Moscow, what about the terrorist Zakaev, walking free in London while the parents of Beslan mourn their children?

Russia shed her blood for what? To earn a constant barrage of anti-Russian stories, whipping up sentiment to serve as a ploy to create the “them” to justify the “us”. However old and worn the “Russians under your beds” story is, it still works for a gullible reading public which laps up “Spanking Sarah” stories and then curls up giggling to the sound of farts and belches on the Simpsons.

The reaction to the health crisis of ex-FSB Coronel Aleksandr Litvinenko is a classic case of anti-Russian hysteria. This man fled from Russia after compromising his own side by revealing sentitive material, so sensitive that the US authorities had asked their counterparts in Britain, where Litvinenko is hiding, for data on how much material he revealed.

Nobody likes to see Mr. Litvinenko ill. But to blame Vladimir Putin... how about the fairies at the end of the garden, or Saddam Hussein’s WMD?

Curious about an Englishman who writes this dreck for Pravda, I googled this tidbit from a website called "The Daily Ablution" about Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey. A couple of amusing quotes from his earlier stories are cited.

Friday Fun

I have just discovered the wonderful Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey of the pravda.ru editorial staff. I really must take readers to task for not having previously informed me of this luminary's work.

Mr. Bancroft-Hinchey, who feels that "the main trait that journalists must have is modesty," describes himself as "one of the leading English song-writers of the 1980s." Presumably disenchanted with the glamour of "three Eurovision contests, three albums, two maxi-singles and five singles," he turned to journalism to satisfy his "need to talk and tell."

A native English speaker with a degree from Leeds University, he has unusually powerful writing skills - most notably a rare grasp of the comma, as evidenced in this extract from a piece published earlier this month:

"If such behaviour is considered as good fun in the United States, which apparently it does [sic], since this is the excuse being given by Lynndie England's lawyers, it is certainly not considered as normal anywhere else on the planet, where for good fun families go out into the countryside for a picnic, or go to the woods to collect mushrooms, or play a game of soccer, or have a swim on the beach, or just sit and chat together."

In July, 2004 Bancroft-Hinchey published an extraordinary scoop with his tour de force "This is not Saddam":
" ... the real Saddam Hussein had a fine set of teeth, completely even, in which the upper jaw closed over the lower (overbite). The figure paraded in court, as it is easy to see, has highly irregular lower teeth and a condition called "underbite", when the lower teeth close in front of the upper.

"Touche. Dental records cannot lie. The set of teeth of the President of Iraq and the set of teeth of the man paraded before the cameras pretending to be Saddam Hussein are wholly and totally different.

"The man they have in court is not the real Saddam Hussein. Yet another lie by this Bush administration is exposed. How much lower can this clique of criminals sink?"

Interestingly, the clique of criminals - led by Dick Cheney, "the scar-mouthed, hard-faced, thin-lipped, short-snouted influence behind the throne, the face of corporate America, the face of the oil and arms industries behind US foreign policy" - was able to dupe even the keen-eyed editors of Pravda until at least last February:

"A portrait of Gerge [sic] W. Bush of an unknown origin also neatly hangs on the wall. This fact can be interpreted as another evidence of Hussein"s insanity. Had he been well, the former Iraqi leader would not have hung a picture of his enemy. And in case the portrait had been hung by someone other than Hussein, perhaps, the captive has gone crazy as a result of constantly staring at Bush' intellectual face."

32 million? What were they fighting with? pick up sticks.

Actually, from a slightly different historical perspective: WW I may not have started had not Nikolai II mobilized the Russian Army in the face of the German and Austro-Hungarian demands made on Serbia, and Hitler and his Nazis may not have been able make such showings in the 1932 Reichstag elections if not for the Soviet Comintern-financed Bolshevik strikes and murders going in Germany during the late 1920s and early 1930s.

In other words, Russia pissed away tens of millions in wars they themselves helped to start.

Vis-a-vis the coming conflagration, they once again have chosen unwisely. Then again, they wouldn't be Russian if they were to get something right.

Hey Russia- when we needed you,you signed a deal with the Nazis

Ah yes, a timely reminder indeed. I at once went to GOOGLE. I put in one David Low- cartoonist. I believe he was a New Zealander. Two cartoons very succinct. Uniformed Hitler and Uniformed Stalin both in jackboots. They are raising their caps. In between is a dead body- Poland. Hitler says to Stalin " The scum of the earth, I believe? Stalin says back "The bloody assassin of the workers, I presume?

Yes, August 23rd 1939. The non-agression pact was signed between Germany and Russia. Scant days later Poland was attacked. History records Hitler could hardly believe a weak kneed Chamberlain would declare an ultimatum and then war.

Poland then was subjected to Russian domination, as you know.

Rest in peace Litvinenko.

That's just my opinion, worth very little. Historically, the Russian and Soviet armies fought long and hard, but - in the beginning years - not very smart. After huge losses in WW I, the rank and file soldiers and sailors revolted, and deserted en masse, one of many events leading to the Russian revolutions.

WW II for the Soviets was similarly screwed up in the beginning. At first, Stalin wouldn't believe his buddy Hitler was actually attacking (they were allies AGAINST England, France, and Poland for almost 2 years). Until the Germans were 41 km from Moscow, it was one defeat after another.

Many of the Soviet loses could be summarized as political in nature - such as 100,000 killed and wounded in order to take Berlin in time for a Politburo speech.

When Russians are arguing their "sacrifices" in terms of KIAs, I like to point out that England fought ALONE for almost 2 years, while the USSR HELPED Hitler. To their argument that the Allies "waited" for the Germans to get beaten down by the Red Army before invading France, I like to point out that the Allies fought ALL OVER THE WORLD, North and South Atlantic, much of the Pacific, China, Indochina, North Africa, Mideast, and Russia squandered 10 million on a single front with short, direct supply lines. They could not even provide air cover or destroyer escort for our supply convoys EVEN AT THE DOCKS IN MURMANSK.

Regarding Japan, they waited until AFTER Japan sued for peace to attack Japan, and seize several islands that they continue to hold to this day.

White crosses are often the price of victory, but not the measure of it.

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.