Aaare youuu readyy for the new episode of Russia&Ukraine dissension!

Ladies and gentlemen, this match is scheduled for one fall and for the Holy Churches Championship! Introducing first from Russian Orthodox Church on the red corner, in heavyweight. And, introducing the challenger from Ukranian Orthodox Church on blue corner, in middleweight! Please welcome both! Are you ready for Holy Glory!

The incident occurred in 06.12.2018 in the village of Vinyantintsi in the Ternopil Province of Ukraine. The fight broke out when “Archbishop” Tikhon Petranyuk of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church entered the church during a service to read out a decree banning the “priest” John Boikoof the Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate from serving. The clergymen who cannot share the church have fought and punched with each other in the front of the citizens who came for worship to the church.

The Archbishop who began to read the decision about the Priest Boikoof by entering the church even though the people closed the door on him, faced the reaction of the people. When the Archbishop’s wand was broken, the trouble was stired up in church. The priest who had concussion of the brain and fractured his rib was taken to hospital.

The incident took place before the unifying council meeting in Ukraine on December 15th, with representatives of all Orthodox churches.

When you have read the first lines of this post, you have thought probably “Our extraterrestrial friend Migo is making humor again.” 😃 But I did not make my earthling friends; when everything was so clear, it was not need to, haha! While there is a fight, a broken rib and brain concussion in the middle, the scenes are not different from boxing ring. Even we can say that boxing ring is more fair than these. Already we all know that after the last moment in the boxing ring, there is a winner of the match. But in this events, so in the churches’ events there are many politic conflicts and unknown things in background. We can only filter some of them in our views. However, we can still use the similarities to evaluate the fighting of churches in terms of boxing.

Is Russian Orthodox Church on the ropes?

The quotes from Turkish journalist Deniz Berktay’s article dated in August 8, 2018:

“This year, perhaps the largest crisis of the Orthodox world, the Patriarchate of Constantinople (also known as Fener Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul) and the Moscow Patriarchate, is expected to break out. The Patriarchate of Constantinople is preparing to officially recognize the Kiev Patriarchate, which was founded by nationalist monks who left the Russian Church in Ukraine, which has great importance by both the Russian administration and the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) by declaring in its own spiritual sphere. In this regard, News were reported suggesting that the United States has actively supported the Patriarchate of Constantinople and nationalist monks in Ukraine. Initially, the Patriarchate of Constantinople was expected to take this decision at the end of July (before the celebration of the 1030th anniversary of the acceptance of the Christianity of the Russians and Ukrainians)…

In orthodox societies, if it is remembered how the church has an important place in the construction of national identity, the people who want to gain independence and the majority of the population of the Orthodox countries are trying to have independent national church before the independent state (like the Bulgarians), it would be understood more clear that the struggle is not an ordinary religious conflict. In a way, this struggle is a matter of tearing Ukraine’s ties with Russia in every sense. On the other hand, there have been severe tensions between the Patriarchate of Constantinople (the Fener Greek Patriarchate) and the Moscow Patriarchate since the Cold War. Recalling that the Moscow Patriarchate implemented policies in parallel to the Kremlin administration, it is understood that this struggle also formed the religious pillar of the US-Russian conflict…”

Who tries to throw his hat into the ring?

Bartholomew ‘hopes’ for independent Ukrainian Church

Patriarch Bartholomew (right) with Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kirill

September 24, 2018. Istanbul Fener Greek Orthodox Patriarch Dimitri Bartholomew said on Sept. 23 that he hoped for an independent Ukrainian Church soon “despite the current opposition.”

“I hope that despite the current opposition, the Ukrainian Church gets its independence status, which is their right, soon,” Bartholomew said in a speech he made following the Sunday church service held at the Saint Fokas Orthodox Church in Istanbul’s Ortakoy neighborhood.

Bartholomew said that the Istanbul-based Patriarchate granted independence status initially to the Russian Church in the 16th century and then lastly to the Orthodox churches of the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1998, state-run Anadolu Agency reported.

He said the Istanbul-based Patriarchate provides spiritual protection and love for these churches, adding they would not be “scared of threats.”

The Ukrainian Church wants to have “ecclesiastic independence” from the Church of Moscow and all of Russia but needs the approval of Bartholomew, since he is recognized as ecumenical by all other Orthodox churches.

The Ukrainian Church is split between a branch whose clerics pledge loyalty to Moscow and one that is overseen by the unrecognized Kiev-based Patriarch Filaret.

The fracture has deepened following a four-year conflict between Kiev and Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine and the Russian annexation of Crimea.

Earlier this month, Bartholomew sent two representatives to Ukraine, leading an incensed Russian Orthodox Church to cut ties with the spiritual leader of the world’s Orthodox Christians at an emergency meeting on Sept. 14.

(Additional information:
The Patriarchate of Constantinople, also known as Fener Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul, is Ecumenical Patriarchate. It is an honorary priority among the headman and equal Orthodox churches. It tries to achieve the unity of the Orthodox churches. It was equated with the Roman Patriarchate in 451 AD by the decisions of the 4th Ecumenical Council gathered in Kadikoy, Istanbul. The Orthodox Church was separated from the Catholic Church in the 5th century. After the conquest of Istanbul, Fatih Sultan Mehmet, for Gennadios, who was elected as the Patriarch of Constantinople, issued a decree in Turkish and Islamic law, which showed the duties and powers of the patriarch, giving him some privileges. )

As it is understood, whereas it needs to be the Patriarch of Constantinople should be unifying all the orthodox churches, on the other side he is making statements to Ukranian church such as “seperate from Russia, I support you”. I think he wants this merger “under its own roof”. 😎 He could envy the Pope, the spiritual leader of the Catholics? Of course, Pope is almost a movie star! Even he has a profession where he earns a lot of money more than the Hollywood stars in every his steps on the planet. And all the shimmering gigantic outfits! Yeah, that could be jealousy, haha!

Can Russia roll with the punches?

“I am your pastor and your spiritual father in here.”

14.12.2018. The Fener Greek Patriarch Bartholomew, evaluated the decision of the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill’s decision to send a Russian priest to serve in the church of the Consulate General of Russia in Istanbul with the following words:

“This concern into the Russian community in Istanbul and Turkey in general and this dilemma, Russian saints church, brother of the Moscow Patriarchate Ecumenical Patriarchate, ie in the direction of cutting ties with it’s mother church, which stems from the extreme decision. We may have different perspectives on the various problems that the Orthodox church deals with. It’s completely human and democratic. However, it is unacceptable to use the interruption of relations as a means of oppression and imposition to make others agree with their views. “I’m sure the Russian sister church will regret this extreme decision.”

According to Sputnik news, Bartholomew, who accused the Russian Orthodox Church of interfering with the works of the Fener Greek Patriarchate, said, “The priest from Moscow was sent to serve in the church at the Consulate General of Russia in Istanbul. It is illegal, because this church is spiritual and belongs to legal Fener Greek Patriarchate”.

He also said the Russians in Turkey not to listen to Moscow Patriarchate, and added, “I am your pastor and your spiritual father in here.”

“-I am your father, not him!” “-No, I am the father of all of you, not him! “-No, no, I am”, “-Nooo, I am,” and goes on like that. 🙂 I think someone needs to make paternity test, and all world can be relief, haha!

Which one will lead with its chin?

Ukraine announces creation of independent church, selects leader

December 15, 2018. Ukrainian Orthodox leaders have agreed on the creation of a new national Orthodox church and elected a leader to head that church, a move that Ukraine’s leaders say is vital to the country’s security and independence but could raise tensions further with Moscow.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said 39-year-old Metropolitan Epifaniy of the Kyiv Patriarchate church had been chosen as head of the church by a council, comparing the move to Ukraine’s referendum for independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.

“This day will go into history as a sacred day…the day of the final independence from Russia,” Poroshenko told thousands of supporters in central Kyiv on December 15.

“And Ukraine will no longer drink, in the words of Taras Shevchenko, ‘Moscow’s poison from Moscow’s cup,'” he said, quoting the country’s national poet.

Poroshenko said Ukrainians finally had their own Orthodox church.

“What is this church? This is a church without [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. What is this church? This church is without [Russian Orthodox Patriarch] Kirill. What is this church? This is a church without prayers for the Russian authorities and Russian troops, because they kill Ukrainians. But this is a church with God and Ukraine!”

Preemptive maneuver…

Canonical Ukrainian Church refuses to recognise ‘New Church’ created by Kiev

16.12.2018, MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP), the only canonical Orthodox church in Ukraine, refuses to recognize the structure created on Saturday in Kiev at the “unification council”, Archpriest Mykolay Danylevych said.

“The schismatics remained schismatics, and the Church remained the Church. It was joyful and gratifying that the bishops, clergy and believers remained loyal to the Church. The Church has manifested its unity. It is regrettable that there were few ones that went into schism, and also that this schism was supported by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. But no matter how hard they tried to proclaim the schism as the Church, and non-canonical as canonical, the Body of the Church of Christ will not accept this, because the structure that was created yesterday was and is an extraneous body that is rejected and not accepted by the Body of the Church,” Archpriest Mykolay Danylevych, the deputy chairman of the UOC-MP Department for External Church Relations (DECR), wrote on Facebook Sunday.

Following the unification council, the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (EOC-MP) also did not recognize its results. Metropolitan of Kiev and All Ukraine Onufriy was and remains the legitimate head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, despite the creation of the “new church” in Kiev, spokesman for the EOC-MP Archpriest Daniel Lepisk said.

“Metropolitan Onufriy as he was and remained for us the legitimate head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and in this respect, nothing has changed for us. These ‘churches’ [organizers of the ‘council’] were considered schismatic even before that. From the fact that instead of two old churches they created one new, the essence has not changed,” Lepisk noted.

Is there a way of one of them would throw in the towel?

I do not think so, my earthling friends. These are big issues. Even if the audience of the match is waiting for the result with excitement, this match will take longer. I do not expect any physical conflict on the field until the weather gets warmer and the season terms are better in the region. 🙂 Of course, I don’t think either the parties are going to idle around in the meantime. There will be bargains in the background. They will do what they can corner the opponent. We can assume until that time what will happen in politic future between west and Russia by following churches’ movements. Like “follow the money”, haha!

As an atheist extraterrestrial, religious issues have always been unnecessary to me. But such conflicts like in here are exciting even enough to attract the attention of aliens. And I, like everyone else, wonder when the outcome of the match will be. On the other hand, I suppose this match will continue as long as humanity has left its footprint on this planet. 😎

Advertisements

“How George H.W. Bush Made Guantanamo a Prison, Starting with Haitians” by Kim Ives

The second of two articles

Guantanamo-Haitian refugees
Haitian refugees being held at Guantanamo’s Camp McCalla on Dec. 31, 1991, three months after the coup d’état against Pres. Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Credit: Carol Halebian

(First part)

After George Herbert Walker Bush died on Nov. 30 at age 94, the mainstream press favorably contrasted him to Donald Trump, portraying the former Republican president as “kinder” and “gentler,” two watchwords from his inaugural speech.

But, Trump’s signature aggressivity towards immigrants is epitomized through extra-territorial interception and imprisonment and separation of families, brutal policies which were, in fact, pioneered by Bush I during the Haitian refugee exodus following the Sep. 30, 1991 coup d’état in Haiti.

Haitian-refugees-lined-up-in-cots-in-the-McCalla-hangar-in-Guantanamo-Bay-Naval-Base-on-Dec-5-1991-AP-Photo-Chris-OMeara
A hangar at Guantanamo Naval Base where Haitian refugees were housed on cots in late 1991 through May 1992. Credit: Chris O’Meara/AP

As we saw in this series’ first article, George H.W. Bush’s administration gave manifest and tacit support to dictator Prosper Avril (1988-1990) and to the first coup d’état against democratically-elected Pres. Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

As a result of that putsch, tens of thousands of Haitians took to the high seas in small boats, many fleeing for their lives. In the first year after the coup, the U.S. Coast Guard intercepted some 38,000 Haitians in international waters.

U.S. interdiction of Haitian refugees had begun in September 1981 under Pres. Ronald Reagan, for whom George H.W. Bush was vice-president. Under the rules laid out by Reagan’s Executive Order 12324 titled “Interdiction of Illegal Aliens,” Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agents on board U.S. Coast Guard cutters were supposed to interview and “identify candidates for asylum as political refugees under United States and international law,” explains University of Miami law professor Irwin Stotzky in his new book Send Them Back, about the efforts of crusading lawyers (including himself) on behalf of Haitian refugees during the 1980s.

The screening process was laughable, with interviews which were not private and as short as five minutes, while the snatched-up “boat-people” were often hungry, thirsty, scared, and confused.

Tents-on-runways-at-Guantanamo
Haitians lived in hundreds of tents at Camp McCalla at Guantanamo under the George H.W. Bush administration.

“As a result of these defective procedures, only 28 of the approximately 23,000 Haitians on vessels interdicted by the Coast Guard from the inception of the interdiction program in 1981 until mid-1991 were identified by INS officials as potential asylees,” Stotzky writes.

During Aristide’s eight months in office in 1991 (Feb to Sep), there was a net human influx back to Haiti, as thousands of joyful expatriate Haitians returned to their homeland to take part in a new democratic experiment after three decades of dictatorship.

But the 1991 military coup cruelly cut short that hope-filled period and provoked a new refugee wave which overwhelmed the U.S. Coast Guard ships stationed off Haiti’s coast. As a result, the Coast Guard began transporting Haitians to the U.S. Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, housing them in giant hangars and Camp McCalla, a makeshift city of hundreds of tents set up on Guantanamo’s paved runways and loading docks. At its peak, there were over 12,500 Haitians detained there.

After eight months, the Bush I administration finally dropped all pretense of giving Haitians any due process and discarded the Reagan-era screening protocols, as imperfect as they were. “On May 24, 1992, claiming there were too many Haitians coming, Bush ordered the Coast Guard to intercept all Haitians fleeing in boats and immediately return them to Haiti, without interviews to determine if they were at risk of persecution or death,” Stotzky explained to Haïti Liberté. 

Refugees filling up water buckets at Camp McCalla, 12.31.91
Haitians at Guantanamo’s Camp McCalla on Dec. 31, 1991, three months after the coup d’état which ousted Pres. Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Credit: Carol Halebian

Beginning in 1991, “when the U.S. detained Haitian refugees indefinitely, it set a precedent,” concluded Prof. A. Naomi Paik in a comprehensive article last June about Haitians at Guantanamo on the website The Conversation.

This was the beginning of Guantanamo being used as a prison, for which it would become even more famous in the early 2000s after it was used to hold, in legal limbo, prisoners swept up in George W. Bush’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Guantanamo’s HIV Prison, Camp Bulkeley

Perhaps the least kind and gentle feature of the senior Bush’s internment of Haitian refugees was Camp Bulkeley, a God-forsaken collection of sun-baked buildings where close to 300 possibly HIV-positive Haitians were held until June 1993. U.S. Judge Sterling Johnson, who ruled in favor of allowing the refugees to finally come to the U.S., said that Camp Bulkeley was “nothing more than an HIV prison camp.”

These Haitians had been found to have plausible claims for political asylum, but they were barred from entering the U.S. because of their HIV status. Hundreds of children were interned in the larger Camp McCalla, and at least 25 children went through Camp Bulkeley.

George H.W. Bush’s Attorney General William Barr presided over what has been called “the world’s first HIV detention camp.” Today, not ironically, President Donald Trump has nominated Barr to be Attorney General once again.

On Dec. 10, CBS News ran an article on Barr’s role in overseeing the first use of Guantanamo as a prison camp. Although an immigrant rights leader called the way Haitian refugees were treated “a stain on United States history,” Barr defended his policies at Guantanamo as late as 2001…

For full article please continue

 

 

The claims based on non-facts of history, and hatred are sign of Fascism!

The inspiration for this title is the banner below.

p.g. yuruyus

At the Greek capital, Athens, held a ceremony marking the “May 19th, genocide of the Pontian Greeks”. Syriza and the Independent Greeks took the high level of participation from the coalition government. Government spokesman Gavrila Sakellaridis, asked recognition “political murder and persecution of Pontian Greeks’ from Turkey.

It is being claimed 353.000 Pontian Greeks people were killed by Turks in 1914-1922. (In fact, the organizers of the memorial day acted merciful. According to some web sites, this figure reaches up to 1 million!)

Is it surprise? Nooo! As I have said in one of my old posts:

Even the dinosaurs were wiped out by the Turks on Earth! Haha!

In fact, imperialists, who cause all kinds of dirty history and massacre, create enmity among other peoples to cover their own sinners by creating scapegoat. The Turks are the best example of the scapegoat in human history!

And in some countries like Greece, some fascists are being used for this creation. And this post is adressing these fascists, not the other Greeks!

At the meeting on May 19, that banner was seen, like the many others. It is writing on it:

“The non recognition of the genocide is a sign of Nazisim.”

As you can see, the 3 historical people on the banner. Second one is Ataturk, third one is Lenin. And I guess the first one is Tsar Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov, but I am not sure he is tsar or not.

Now, in this equation, if we remove tsar from the equation, the remaining two people have made their own countries independent, saved the people from the tsar and the sultan, and one of signed and created the Soviet revolution, the other one the Turkish revolution. And these people are included as two elements under a banner as an example of Nazism!

(I do not know what kind of brains of those who prepare this banner? What they drunk or ate? But, it needs to be very solid substance to be stoned like that. To get high like them, I want to same what they drunk or ate. Haha!)

In the meantime, those who accused persons who would not be the fascist with Nazism, resorted to violence.

Yiannis Boutaris, age 75, the mayor of Greece’s second-largest city Thessaloniki has been treated in hospital after being beaten up by about a dozen people.

He was attending an event commemorating too, but the right extremists forced him to the ground, punching and kicking him.

101647251_fc71e3b2-f104-4a85-89f3-8cf89e07029e

He is Thessaloniki mayor. And Thessaloniki is called “Selanik” by Turks. This city is also the city where Mustafa Kemal Ataturk borned in 1881. So many Turks visit the Ataturk’s house in the city for many years. The mayor as known as a person, who tries to give the effort to establish a peaceful dialogue between the Turks and the Greeks. Yiannis Boutaris received intense criticism after being elected mayor in 2012, because of his words “Turks are my brother”. Against the accusations, he had said that his aim “is not to be liked but to be useful.”

Now, when thinking, what can do these fascists who even can not bear the words of the peaceful people in their own when they see a peaceful Turk tomorrow?

It’s a very dangerous way! There have been those who have gone this way before!

Like, the Armenian terrorist organization Asala has killed 38 Turkish consul generals and diplomats in many different countries between 1973 and 1984, backed by the French government. These Turkish diplomats were in many different cities of countries, from Paris to Los Angeles. Some Asala killers of them were punished, others were free.

If 38 diplomats of US or Britain or France had been killed by an terror organization, then the boms would have rain to that country of terrorists. But when Turkish diplomats are killed, all western imperialists play three monkeys. Of course they will not see the terror they created themselves.

Why the Republic of Turkey and Ataturk are always the target?

Why did I say that. In many ways I can explain this historically. However in here, there is a fact that has been put into the eyes of people especially in the Armenian genocide allegations and in the Pontian genocide allegations that the planned hatred behind these claims is obviously created by the western imperialists.

Each country has important historical memorial or important days. Like 4th of July in America.

There are 3 important days of the Republic of Turkey. Every year the celebrations and festivities are being held for these 3 days.

19 May – The begining of the independence war of Turkey, the day which Ataturk started to path of independence, 19 May 1919

April 23 – The day of the opening of the first parliament of the Republic of Turkey April 23, 1920

October 29 – The Republic was declared, October 29, 1923

This three day in Turkey, are celebrated as

May 19
The commemoration of Ataturk, youth and sports day

April 23
The national sovereignty and children’s day

October 29
Republic day

And let’s see, which days are being commemorated of Armenian genocide and Pontian genocide by some countries including Greece and Armenia.

May 19

Every year Greecks and the some counties commemorate 19 May as Pontian Greeks genocide. Into the supporting web pages of Pontian Greeks genocide claims, the events’ begining day is November 1914 and ends to 1922. But they chose the 19 May day to commemoration.

April 24

Every year Armenians and the some countries commemorate 24 April as Armenian genocide. Into the supporting web pages of the Armenian genocide claims, the events’ begining date is February 25, 1915 and ends in 1920’s. But they chose the 24 April day to commemoration.

October 29

Surprisingly there is not any commemoration genocide on this day yet. But I am sure one day, October 29 will be remembered as another country’s people genocide day which made by Turks. I do not thinks so, the imperialists will pass this day over, haha!

When I look to the especially selected days, I see Turkish revolution which was started by Ataturk and the Republic of Turkey where he led the build, caused distress to western imperialists. What about you?

I also believe that the fascists of every country are always condemned to return to the dark holes they come from. I believe that the Greeks do not/will not support the actions of these fascists and they always want to live in peace. (Please also read my post “έλα my brother” I wrote earlier.)

The two sides of the Aegean Sea are always close together. Even when you think you are farthest away!

 

Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union — Mario Sousa | Northstar Compass — Taking Sides

It is really good article my Earthling friend, thank you for sharing with us. Below the post I made a comment, I hope it would be axplanatory about my thoughts 🙂

“Today books have appeared on the matter written by the above-named researchers or by others from the same research team. Before going any further, I want to make clear, so that no confusion arises in the future, that none of the scientists involved in this research has a socialist world outlook. On the contrary their outlook is bourgeois and anti-socialist. Indeed many of them are quite reactionary. This is said so that the reader should not imagine that what is to be set out below is the product of some ‘communist conspiracy’. What has happened is that the above-named researchers have thoroughly exposed the lies of Conquest, Solzhenitsyn, Medvedev and others, which they have done purely by reason of the fact that they place their professional integrity in first place and will not allow themselves to be bought for propaganda purposes.”

for full reading;

by Norman Pillon

Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union — Mario Sousa | Northstar Compass

 

The Armenian Question

I know, it is a long article. But, if you want to learn what are the truths, please read. When you read, you will see imperialists games and lies over Anatolian people. And you will see anything is not the same as described by the mainstream media and imperialism with big balloons. And after reading the article, please consider one more time. “What are the aims of these lies owners?” And thank you this very detailed and enlightening article Dr. Pat Walsh!

Pat Walsh

How did Britain’s “Armenian Question” of the 1870s become what it did in 1915? Was it simply a diabolical genocidal plan of the Turks that the Armenians be eradicated from eastern Anatolia? Or were there a series of actions instigated by external forces which altered things in such a way that the tragedy of 1915 became almost inevitable?

It is the view here that what happened in 1915 to the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire was almost entirely the result of Imperialism and Western influence. Without this there would most probably still be an Islamic State of the former kind and a substantial Armenian community within it.

View original post 4,883 more words

But history is a science and if you are serious about it, it cannot be rewritten

Vladimir Putin met with young academics and history teachers at the Museum of Modern Russian History.  November 5, 2014

Representatives of leading Russian universities and institutes under the Russian Academy of Sciences, in particular, the Institute of Russian History, Institute of General History and the Archaeology Institute, took part in the meeting.

Some titles from Putin speech

….I keep doing so because this really is needed today and is so very important for our people and country. We see the attempts being made to recode society in many countries, and such attempts are being made to recode our society too. This always goes hand-in-hand with attempts to rewrite history and shape it to particular geopolitical interests. But history is a science and if you are serious about it, it cannot be rewritten….

….Yes, we won the Great Patriotic War; we were winners in World War II. This was also likely no accident, because those who took part in World War I – they were essentially the people leading the main operations, supervising the fronts and the general staff. Who were those leaders? Military experts who fought in the First World War. There were some new commanders as well, an entirely new generation so to speak, especially after the 1937 repression. But the military experts who had made it through the furnace of World War I were at the forefront. And this also played a certain role. The cruelty of the leadership likely played a certain role as well.

We could, of course, argue about this and give political assessments. It’s just hard to say whether we could have won the war if the leaders had not been so cruel, if they were more like those in Nicholas II’s time. It’s very hard to say. And what would the consequences have been if we’d lost? The consequences would have been simply catastrophic. They were going to physically exterminate the Slavic people, and not just ethnic Russians, but many other peoples, including the Jews, the Gypsies and the Poles. In other words, if you weigh it, it is hard to say what is worse. We must study it and assess it, but those assessments must be as objective as possible….

…You are right. But here’s the issue. The issue is that researchers in the United Kingdom write about what is interesting to them. I have not seen this book, but as you yourself said, it focuses on the study of relations between Great Britain and Germany. In 1939 through 1941, right?…

….So that is what he focused on. Why are you offended by it? He is an Englishman and you are a Russian; you are interested in our Russian history. This is normal. If there is some kind of distortion there, if there are lies in there, that’s another issue. But if he is simply researching certain relations during a certain period, and is not concerned about others… After all, he is not talking about, say, relations between the United States and Germany during that period of time, he is not studying them. That is not the subject of his study. His subject is different in this case. So there is no reason to feel offended.

But I completely agree with you that we need to fully study this period, as well as others. Why? That period is also interesting. Because before that, we had the so-called Munich Agreement in 1938. And what is it? Incidentally, your colleagues in western nations hush it up. Chamberlain arrived, shook his paper and said, “I brought you peace” when he returned to London after the talks. To which Churchill, I believe, in private, stated, “Well, now the war is inevitable.” Because appeasement of the aggressor, which Nazi Germany was, would clearly lead to a major future military conflict, and some people understood that. There should be a deep multilateral study of what was happening before World War II.

Or, for example, there are still arguments about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, and the Soviet Union is blamed for dividing Poland. But what did Poland itself do, when the Germans invaded Czechoslovakia? It took part of Czechoslovakia. It did this itself. And then, in turn, the same thing happened to Poland.

I do not want to blame anyone here, but serious studies should show that these were the foreign policy methods at the time. The Soviet Union signed a non-aggression agreement with Germany. They say, “Oh, how bad.” But what is so bad about it, if the Soviet Union did not want to fight? What is so bad?

Moreover, even knowing about the inevitability of war, supposing that it could happen, the Soviet Union desperately needed time to modernise its army. We needed to implement a new weapons system. Each month had significance because the number of Katyusha rocket launchers or T-34 tanks in the Soviet army was in the single digits, whereas thousands were needed. Each day had significance. So idle thoughts and chatter on this matter on a political level may have a purpose, in order to shape public opinion, but this must be countered with serious, deep, objective research.

As for the role of the Soviet Union and our allies in World War II, all this is also highly important. We cannot deny the enormous input of our allies into the victory over Nazi Germany. But we must compare the victims sacrificed at the altar of this common victory, the efforts and significance. And to do this, we simply need to restore some information: how many German divisions were on the Eastern Front, and how many fought on the Western Front? Simply the number of tanks, artillery, planes on the Eastern Front and the Western Front. Everything immediately becomes clear. We simply need to talk about this, to repeat it again, to count. But to do this, of course, we must work in the archives.

How many victims where there? How many people died in World War II in Great Britain? How many, 350,000? The US lost about half a million, somewhere between 350,000 and half a million, that’s it. Yes, that is an enormous number, it is terrible, but you see, it is not the 25 million victims lost from the Soviet Union. We simply must talk about this. But of course, in order to talk about it, we need good, deep research.

It is very interesting to show the real events of World War I. This is exceedingly important in understanding the relationship between nations, peoples and governments. After all, the allies were playing the game, they were competing against one another, but they also helped one another. For example, at the time, everyone knew and said, and nobody denies it today, that Russia saved Paris with its offense. We must give credit to the allies that in 1915, when the Russian army suffered a defeat, the allies gathered and began offensive actions at the cost of enormous losses – granted, they did not achieve a result, but they did it. And all of this ought to be discussed, but in order to discuss it, it must be researched.

source and for full speech:

http://eng.news.kremlin.ru/transcripts/23185