Monthly Archives: October 2006

>USSR2 File: CPSU Red Youth Vanguard announces "Day of the Revolution," leftist demo slated for November 7, 89th anniversary of Bolshevik Revolution

>Since the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union intends to reassert itself openly across the Not-So-Former Soviet republics in order to install its chairman into the presidency of the Russian Federation in 2008, the Red Youth Vanguard demo planned below will be the first of many pro-communist, “anti”-Chekist provocations.

7 November (Tuesday) Moscow

Demonstration of the left-wing forces
Day of the revolution

Do not await favor from the authorities!
Rise to the fight!

Beginning – 16.30,
Triumphal area
(m. “Mayakovskaya”).
Info – 8 (926) 526-60-09

Link: Red Youth Vanguard Official Website

>EU File: "Ex"-communist President of Slovakia calls for Russia’s entrance into European Union, Gorbachev’s "new European Soviet"

>East-West convergence ala Golitsyn par excellence! Now imagine Oleg Shenin and the restored Communist Party of the Soviet Union winning the 2008 Russian Federation presidential election . . . Moscow to West: “Checkmate!” “Ex”-communist Slovak President Ivan Gasparovic is serving his masters in the Kremlin well by supporting the Soviet communist plans for regional and world government, about which we have blogged extensively in the last two months.

Slovak President Calls for Russia’s EU Entry to Counter U.S. Influence

President of Slovakia has called in an exclusive interview with Itar-Tass for Russia’ s entry into the European Union, the ITAR-TASS news agency reported on Friday.

“The European Union will fulfil its task and confirm its purpose only when all European states join it, certainly including Russia,” Ivan Gasparovic stressed.

Russia is a component and one of the most important parts of the European continent and “old countries of Europe will need it more and more,” the Slovakian leader pointed out.

“The inclusion of all European countries in the organization will create for it’s a healthy competition with other regional organizations and the United States. The EU will acquire a new political and economic quality,” Gasparovic said.

The Slovakian president will pay an official visit to Russia on November 6 to 10. According to him, he would like to hold talks with the Russian leadership not only on trade-economic matters, but also on the whole complex of relations of Russia with the EU and Slovakia.

In the course of the visit the Slovakian president will meet, in particular, officials of the Russian government, parliament, Moscow mayor and visit Russian cities of Omsk and Krasnoyarsk.

The Slovakian head of state will be accompanied during the visit by a major delegation of the republic’s business community. The entrepreneurs are interested in establishing direct contacts with the Russian colleagues.

In the view of the Slovakian leader, the Omsk region serves as an excellent example of bilateral cooperation. During the visit to Omsk the Slovakian leader will attend the opening ceremony of the Omskshina JV that will manufacture automobile tires using Slovakian technology.

The president of Slovakia intends to discuss in Russia prospects for cooperation in the energy sphere. The term of agreements on the supply to the republic of Russian energy resources expires next year. The sides have prepared new documents that are to be signed in the course of the visit.

Ivan Gasparovic also called for the simplification of the visa regime between Russia and the European Union. “Contacts between citizens form a base for the development of good relations between the two states. It is well realised in Bratislava, Moscow and Brussels — the centre of the European Union the organic component of which is Slovakia,” stressed Gasparovic.

Link: Moscow News

>Final Phase Backgrounder: CPSU message at 2005 International Communist Seminar vindicates Golitsyn on normalization of relations within Communist Bloc

>In New Lies for Old (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1984) KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn writes regarding the “final phase” of communism’s strategy to first deceive and then conquer the West, in preparation for East-West convergence and world government: “Soviet-Albanian, Soviet-Yugoslav, and Soviet-Romanian disputes and differences would be resolved in the wake, or possibly in advance of, Sino-Soviet reconciliation. The political, economic, military, diplomatic, and ideological cooperation between all the communist states, at present partially concealed, would become clearly visible” (page 346).

Between May 2 and 4, 2005, A. Baryshev, Secretary of the Central Committee of the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union, delivered the following message to the 14th International Communist Seminar, sponsored by the Workers’ Party of Belgium: “Internationalist Experiences and Tasks of Communists in the Struggle against Imperialism.” Baryshev concluded his message by affirming the commitment of the CPSU to normalizing relations with the communist parties of China and Albania:

At this moment, the Chinese Communist Party maintain officially more or less developed relations with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, but has only brief and limited contacts with other communist parties in Russia.

During the Plenum of the CC of the CPSU (24/07/2004), the Chairman of the CC of the CPSU O.S. Shenin declared that the CPSU should already long ago have given its evaluation of the Soviet Chinese and Soviet Albanian conflicts and taken its part of responsibility for the reasons of these conflicts, and for their tragic consequences. The goal was formulated to re-establish the links of the CPSU with the Communist parties of China and of Albania.

Taking this into consideration, and based on this information, we could discuss at the upcoming Plenum of the CC of the CPSU in March of this year the following 2 points:

1) The Plenum of the CC of the CPSU declares that from now on the CPSU takes its own share of responsibility for the causes of these conflicts with the Chinese and Albanian communists and for their tragic consequences.

2) The Plenum of the CC of the CPSU delegates to the Secretariat of the CC of the CPSU to inform the leaderships of the Communist parties of China and Albania of this decision in writing, stressing that the CPSU is fully prepared to re-establish the relations with both parties.

We could add to this letter the information provided here above that for this reason should be approved at the Plenum.

Golitsyn also writes in the same place: “There might even be public acknowledgment that the splits and disputes were long-term disinformation operations that had successfully deceived the ‘imperialist’ powers. The effect on Western morale can be imagined.” In view of the fact that CPSU chairman Oleg Shenin is running for the Russian Federation presidency in 2008, we might very well be approaching a fulfillment of this prediction.

The continuing CPSU, as we have blogged before, is the previously hidden but now open power behind the potemkin Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF), which Soviet communists created before they dismantled the old Soviet Union and which is now considered expendable. This was evident at the July 3, 2004 congress of the CPRF, which witnessed the election of two chairs, Gennady Zyuganov, the long-time leader, and Vladimir Tikhonov, a rival, who proceded to establish another, rump party under the same name.

Several weeks later, the CPSU, which was restored earlier that year in February, held its own congress, in which disillusioned CPRF member and State Duma deputy T.G. Avaliani declared: “On 3 July, 2004, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation as the Communist Party, ended its existence. This is the result of prolonged, for a period of 13 years of work . . . I arrived at the deep belief, that spontaneously nothing it occurred. Everything was prepared and consistently was achieved.” Avaliani’s observation offers a remarkable and generally unacknowledged insight into the Leninist deception emanating from the Russian Federation’s bogus multi-party system.

>Communism with Canadian Characteristics: "Red Dawn" in Whitecourt, Alberta: Russian helicopter crew to support Canadian oil and gas company


And over in my neck of the woods . . . “Red Dawn” arrives in Western Canada.

Russia is a major energy producer and, hence, the Kremlin’s attempt earlier this year to hold Western Europe, Ukraine, and Georgia hostage by cutting off natural gas supplies. This current project in Canada will provide the Russian helicopter crew with great intelligence re. Alberta’s booming oil and gas industry, locations of operations, output capacities, technology, etc.

More specs and pics of the Russian-made heavy-lift Mi-26, the largest helicopter in the world, can be found here. The NATO reporting name for the Mi-26 is “Halo.”

The only one found in North America
West Country Extra, Tuesday, October 17, 2006, page 51
Bowes Publishers Ltd.

The heavy-lift MIR-26, according to Airborne Energy Solutions chief executive officer Tony Hunley, was brought in from Russia to service the oil and gas sector in Northern parts of Canada.

“With the several challenges we face, there are usually only 90 to 100 days of access,” said Hunley. “What we’re able to do with this aircraft is gain access 365 days of the year.”

Hunley said there are roughly 70 of these aircraft used worldwide, and the largest user of it is the United nations, which is called in after a catastrophe.
“These aircraft are dispatched because of their heavy lift capacity as well as the amount of cargo they can hold,” he said.

Magnat Babaev is the navigator of the giant helicopter and said the MIR-26 truly is incredible. “In pounds, 38,000, externally or internally,” he said, referring to how much cargo weight the aircraft can hold.

Babaev, who was making his first trip to Whitecourt, is a 15-year veteran as a navigator, said there are 11 members of the crew from Russia, with six flight crew and fiver personnel on the ground. He also said that when transporting an oil rig from the aircraft, it could be done externally or internally.

“This has been a three-year process,” adds Hunley. “Because of the background of our company, 90 per cent of our business is employed through the oil and gas sector.”

Hunley said it’s also been a three-year process in order to be given an exemption by Transport Canada to bring in the aircraft.

“To see how agile the aircraft is, but also see the carrying capacity is something to behold,” he said.

The MIR-26 will be based at the Whitecourt Airport until next June.

The West Country Extra is distributed in eastern British Columbia and western Alberta. No link.

>Feature: Robert Pastor’s Center for North American Studies and North American Forum on Integration advance Soviet agenda of world government

>At Once Upon a Time in the West we have endeavored to tie together the separate strands of communism’s ultimate objective–a world federation of socialist republics ala Vladimir Lenin and the “old” Communist International–with the impending restoration of a “new” friendlier(?) Soviet Union under the leadership of the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the European Union as Mike (“I’ll Always Be a Communist”) Gorbachev’s “new European Soviet,” and the North American Union under the guise of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. The CPSU, as this blogsite has demonstrated, is alive and well in the 21st century, to wit chairman Oleg Shenin’s visit in May 2004 with President Igor Smirnov of the internationally unrecognized Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic:

In the afternoon the President [Igor Smirnov] met with Oleg Shenin, the Chairman of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The goals of the communist movements of the Russian Federation, PMR and RM [Republic of Moldova] were discussed in the course of the meeting with the guest from Moscow. In Oleg Shenin’s opinion, they should combat the expansion of imperialism on the post-Soviet territory retaining the best ideas of communists of the Soviet Union and increasing the prestige of the party among people. (Official Press Release, Government of PMR, May 28, 2004. See News/News in Brief/May 2004.)

The Soviet communists are waiting to hijack the formation of a North American Union, just as Moscow and the Eurocommunists hijacked the European Common Market and transformed it into the EU. The SPP, like the United Nations, was spawned by the communist-friendly Council on Foreign Relations, as well as the Center for North American Studies and the North American Forum on Integration, both under the directorship/codirectorship of Robert Pastor, the “father of North American union” (pictured above). The mission statement of the CNAS, published at the CNAS homepage, lends credibility to this linkage:

The Center for North American Studies (CNAS) at American University aims to educate a new generation of students to begin a North American journey comparable to that begun in Europe five decades ago. The center examines the differences and shared characteristics of Canada, Mexico, and the United States; compares the North American experiment with Europe’s; and challenges students and faculty to imagine a continental future.

Here Pastor et. al. advocates that North Americans embark on a “journey comparable to that begun in Europe five decades ago.” Where, indeed, do Europeans presently find themselves after that 50-year trek? Why, sitting in the maw of a soon-to-be resurrected Soviet bear!

New links to NAU-related sites are found in this blogsite’s right column under “Red World Order.” One of these links is to the Minuteman Project’s Stop the Security and Prosperity Partnership site. There Jerome Corsi and Jim Gilchrist contend that the White House’s disinterest in defending the US-Mexican border against the illegal alien invasion is a direct result of the Bush Administration’s covert support for North American integration. Is this contention correct? We prefer to approach the subject of treason amongst our government officials cautiously. However, the old axiom runs: actions speak louder than words. Watch what they do and not what they say!

In addition to the globalist assault on the sovereignty of nations, the in-your-face, on-the-ground leftist rabble is violently agitating for the downfall of the “American Empire” via uncontrolled immigration. On October 5 Corsi and Gilchrist spoke at Columbia University, where their presence was opposed by communists, such as the representatives of the Trotskyist Internationalist Group (pictured above), and other protesters who support the illegal alien invasion and dismemberment of the USA.

>Feature: Dispatches from the Red International

>Linkages between the world’s communist parties did not dissolve following the “collapse” of communism in Eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991. The world’s “proletarian vanguard” still actively plots the demise of Western Civilization.

During the 15th International Communist Seminar (ICS), sponsored by the Workers’ Party of Belgium in May 2006, communists from the Russian Federation, Czech Republic, Venezuela, Cuba, and many other countries attended. The US-based Workers’ World Party dispatched a reporter to cover the seminar. From Comrade Bill Cecil’s write-up we learn of these continuing linkages:

Dispatch No. 1: The Communist Party of Venezuela backs the Chavez dictatorship

The Communist Party of Venezuela wholeheartedly supports President Hugo Chavez’s socialist “Bolivarian Revolution.” The CPV website, for example, is plastered with pics of Comrade Hugo, including the CPV poster with the party’s rooster logo and Chavez’s mugshot above. Any doubt that Venezuela is not under communist domination, with a little help from Comrade Fidel in Cuba, will be dispelled by visiting communist websites. Cecil reports the speech of Venezuela’s communist delegate to the ICS:

Juan Piedra of the Communist Party of Venezuela described the impressive achieve ments of the Hugo Chávez government in bringing health care and housing to the poor, with the help of socialist Cuba. He announced that on May 25-27 a congress would be held to found a new National Union of Workers to support the revolutionary process.

Be assured, Venezuelan communists would not support Chavez if he was not doing their bidding.

Dispatch No. 2: The continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union condemns the dissolution by Prague’s (Moscow-controlled) “bourgeois” regime of the Communist Youth Union of the Czech Republic:

19/10/06 Thursday

Today communication entered from the Czech comrades, that site KSM and electronic mail of organization were blocked. However, in spite of repression, KSM declares, that the encounter of European Komsomol organizations, planned to the end of October in Prague, not will be abolished and it will pass in the normal mode. Meanwhile the wave of solidarity grows. Thus far it did not splash out to the streets, but it ripens in the Internet, where is organized the collection of signatures in support KSM. about its support KSM and with the decisive censure of the actions of the bourgeois authorities of Czechia already came out the Komsomol organizations of Greece, Canada, Russia, etc. it is probable, the current situation will be reflected, also, in the solutions OF VFDM. Editorial staff To rKSMb.Ru issues a call all our readers to make a feasible contribution to the cause of support KSM. Place your signature in the support of the komsomol of Czechia!

The Communist Party of the Soviet Union supports the Komsomol members of Czechia!

Cecil reports the presence of the continuing CPSU at the 15th ICS and its support for the Lukashenko regime in Belarus:

Representatives from Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia spoke of the devastating effects of capitalist restoration on the working class in East Europe and the former Soviet Union. Leonid Shkolnikov of the Belarus branch of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union described U.S. and Western European attempts to intervene in the Belarus elections. He called for critical defense of the Lukashenko government against Western imperialism.

Again, it cannot be emphasized enough, communists will not support a government unless it is doing their bidding.

>Feature: Kremlin spin doctors put Putin’s rape joke through extra rinse cycle

>Pictured here Vlad and Tony swap “the fish that got away” stories. But seriously, folks . . .

At Publius Pundit, La Russophobe blogger Kim Zigfeld dissected Comrade Czar Vladimir Putin’s off-the-record quip to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, in which the Russian Federation president apparently extolled the “sexual vigor” of the Israeli President Moshe Katsav, who is facing charges of rape and assault.

Not too surprisingly, Kremlin spin doctors are putting this laundry through an extra rinse cycle, to wit Dmitry Peskov’s attempt to flush the comment down the world media’s memory hole: “In no way can (it) be considered as an approval of raping women or an appreciation of such a potential action. Sometimes translation from Russian into English does not reflect the essence of a joke.” We read you loud and clear, Dmitry. The Kremlin must either pay you well, or there’s a bullet in the Lubyanka with your name on it.

Until proven otherwise, Vlad, your comment’s staying at the top of the stack on this blogsite.

>Blogger’s Note: This blogsite joins Blogs Coligados

>Here at Once Upon a Time in the West we are pleased to join the “mega-blog” Blogs Coligados, which unites freedom-loving bloggers throughout the Western Hemisphere.

>Blogger’s Note: Head of Belarus section of continuing CPSU holds important state post

>We have confirmed through our own research that Leonid Shkolnikov, First Secretary of the Belarus Section of the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union–which operates under the leadership of August 1991 coup plotter and 2008 Russian Federation presidential candidate Oleg Shenin–occupies an important post in the Republic of Belarus state apparatus, namely as Deputy Head of the National Emergency Management and Response Center. In response to local flooding in 2005, Shkolnikov was interviewed in his official capacity by Belarusian state television. Prior to the restoration of the CPSU, Shkolnikov was manager of the Central Committee of the pro-Lukashenko Communist Party of Belarus. A quote from Shkolnikov’s message to the 15th International Communist Seminar in Brussels, May 5-7, 2006, is found in this blogsite’s right column.

Here is one of no doubt many examples where Soviet communists who are poised to overthrow the Putinist regime hold important positions in the republics of the Not-So-Former Soviet Union.

Coincidentally, or not, Russian Federation official Sergei Shoigu, is married to the niece of Shenin’s wife. Shoigu holds a post in Moscow similar to that of Shkolnikov in Minsk: Minister of Civil Defence, Emergency Situations and Disasters.

>USSR2 File: Putinist regime implements new law against foreign NGOs, Azeri government bans foreign broadcasters

>The Information Curtain continues its descent throughout the republics of the Not-So-Former Soviet Union.

In Azerbaijan the dominant New Azerbaijan Party of President Ilham Aliyev is little more than a front for the old Soviet apparatchik.

Russia Halts Activities of Many Groups From Abroad
By Peter FinnWashington Post Foreign ServiceFriday, October 20, 2006; A01

MOSCOW, Oct. 19 — Russia on Thursday suspended the activities of Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the International Republican Institute and more than 90 other foreign nongovernmental organizations, saying they failed to meet the registration requirements of a controversial new law designed to bring activists here under much closer government scrutiny.

Across the country, foreign grass-roots organizations that investigate human rights abuses, promote democracy and work with refugees folded their tents until further notice, informing staff that all operations must cease immediately. The only work officially authorized was the paying of staff and bills.

The law, signed by President Vladimir Putin at the start of the year, drew broad criticism as part of a general rollback of democratic freedoms in Russia. Activists said it was intended to rein in one of the last areas of independent civic life here; Putin called it necessary to prevent foreigners from interfering in the country’s political process.

On Thursday, officials said the suspensions resulted simply from the failure of private groups to meet the law’s requirements, not from a political decision on the part of the state. The groups would be allowed to resume work once their registrations are completed, they said.

“No political order has been given . . . to tighten the screws,” said Vladimir Lukin, Russia’s federal ombudsman, speaking at a Moscow forum hosted by the Council of Europe, a 46-country human rights organization based in Strasbourg, France. “Colleagues from international NGOs are not in the habit of keeping their affairs and documents in order.”

Many nongovernmental organizations fear that the current bureaucratic tangle might be the beginning of a larger crackdown on activism that is not controlled by the Kremlin. They note too that successful registration would not end their dealings with the Justice Ministry. After that, they would have to report on planned activities for the year, and they worry that officials could reject their plans or penalize the groups if they deviate from the plans because of unexpected events.

Many of the suspended organizations are American, including adoption agencies, the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute. The latter two are funded by the U.S. Congress but act independently to promote democracy.

Other suspended groups include two branches of Doctors Without Borders, the Danish Refugee Council and the Netherlands-based Russian Justice Initiative, which helps Russians bring cases to the European Court of Human Rights.

Under the law, Russian nongovernmental organizations are also subject to new regulation. But a Wednesday deadline to meet the paperwork requirements or stop operation applied only to foreign groups.

Russian officials stressed that the suspensions, which went into effect at midnight Wednesday, are temporary. “We are not speaking about closing organizations; that is out of the question,” said a senior Justice Ministry official, Natalia Vishnyakova, in a telephone interview. Concerning the registration process, she said: “We are working properly, and put all our efforts into making it even faster. It is not at all complicated, believe me, absolutely not. It’s really their own headache. On our part, we provided all necessary conditions.”

Activists complained, however, that the requirements of the law are so vague and cumbersome that meeting the deadline was extremely difficult. Russian officials, they said, nitpicked their way through the submitted documents.

The local Human Rights Watch operation, for instance, called itself the “Representative Office of the Non-Governmental Organization Human Rights Watch in the Russian Federation.” Officials at the registration office rejected that description and said the group should call itself the “Representative Office of the Corporation Human Rights Watch Inc. (USA) in the Russian Federation.”

That change, among others, required Human Rights Watch to send its submission back to its headquarters in New York to have the document revised and re-notarized, then retranslated into Russian and re-notarized in Russia.

Officials at the Human Rights Watch office in Moscow said they could not speak on the record to a reporter because they interpreted the strictures of the suspension to extend to news media interviews. The law says that suspended groups can do nothing that would advance the aims and goals of their offices in Russia.

“We are registering, and we are complying with the law,” said Carroll Bogert, associate director of Human Rights Watch, in a telephone interview from New York. “But we have been really distracted from our work by the onerous burdens that this law imposes. But this is not particular to us. It’s a hassle for everyone.”

Other groups, however, said they found the registration office helpful. The American Chamber of Commerce, for instance, said Russian officials there pointed out errors before the organization formally submitted its documents, allowing it to correct them and expedite the registration. In all, the office accepted the registrations of 99 foreign organizations, freeing them to continue their work, officials at the Justice Ministry said. The American groups included the chamber, the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Moscow Center.

Amnesty International said it was exploring whether it could continue field research in Russia by flying in researchers from its London headquarters. “We are seeking clarification,” said Lydia Aroyo, a spokeswoman based in London. “But we are very unhappy. There were no clear guidelines as to what documents were required or how to fill them out. The process was very cumbersome and very time-consuming.”

Link: Washington Post

Musavat Party criticizes authorities for pressure on electronic media
17.10.2006 20:36 MSK
AZERBAIJAN, Baku. (Our Correspondent.)

The opposition party “Musavat” has criticized the authorities in connection with pressure on the electronic media. On October 16, at a party council session, a question was introduced into the agenda concerning the situation of the first independent television network, ANS, and three western radio stations – “BBC”, the “Voice of America”, and “Freedom”.

It is the third year in which ANS cannot prolong its license, and the three western radio stations have been warned to stop broadcasting on Azerbaijani radio stations.

The Chairman of the National Council of Azerbaijan on Television and Radio Broadcasting Nushiravan Magerramli stated at a press conference that the discussion does not concern closing these radio stations, but the curtailment of transmitting programming.

“Musavat” considers the situation as pressure on freedom of speech, and a limitation on the right to obtain information.

Translated by OM Kenney
PRIMА-News Agency [2006-10-16-Azer-30]

Link: Prima-News

>Red Terror File: Body count of Russian businessmen and journalists spikes as anniversary of Bolshevik Revolution nears

>Late summer and fall are often busy months for FSB agents, GRU operatives, and garden variety assassins in Russia. The current spate of dead businessmen and journalists should remind us that that the Russian Mafia, consisting of not-so-former KGB agents per President Putin’s reminder, and Soviet communists do not like competition, in more ways than one . . .

Russian News Agency Itar-Tass Executive Killed in Moscow
By Sebastian Alison

Oct. 16 (Bloomberg) — The business chief of Russian news agency Itar-Tass, Anatoly Voronin, was killed last night in his apartment in central Moscow, the agency reported.

Death was the result of multiple knife wounds, according to police, Itar-Tass reported. Several theories are being investigated, the agency said.

The body of 55-year-old Voronin was found at his home by his driver, the news agency said. He had worked at the agency for 23 years. His death is the latest in a spate of high-profile killings in Russia in little over a month.

Deputy Central Bank governor Andrei Kozlov was shot dead with his driver on Sept. 13 as he left a football match in Moscow. Russian officials arrested an unspecified number of people involved in the killing, the Prosecutor General’s office said today.

Journalist Anna Politkovskaya, a critic of President Vladimir Putin, was shot at the entrance to her apartment block on Oct. 7. Leaders from around the world including U.S. President George W. Bush called on the Russian government to carry out a thorough investigation to find her killers. No arrests have yet been made.

Another banker, Alexander Plokhin, was killed by a gunshot wound to the head on Oct. 10. He was a branch head at VTB-24, the retail unit of Russia’s second largest bank, Vneshtorgbank.

A day later Furtanbek Akhidov, from the Chechen capital Grozny, was shot dead in the courtyard of the Moscow building where he lived, Interfax reported.

Outside Moscow, Enver Ziganshin, chief engineer of BP Plc’s Russian gas unit, OAO Rusia Petroleum, was gunned down in Irkutsk in Siberia on Sept. 30.

(Itar-Tass 10-16)

To contact the reporter on this story: Sebastian Alison in Moscow at .
Last Updated: October 16, 2006 10:33 EDT

Link: Bloomberg

>Useful Idiots Bin: Crypto-leftist Justin Raimondo rushes to defend neo-Soviet regime against accusations that Putin ordered Politkovskaya’s murder

>Justin Raimondo personifies an American “red-brown” alliance, like the one that surfaced briefly in the 1930s when Communists and Nazis combined forces to bring down the Weimar Republic. This alliance was revived after the fall of Russian Communism, when Stalinists and fascists around the world united on an old platform – war against the Jews . . .
— Stephen Schwartz, “Justin Raimondo: An American Neo-Fascist,”, March 15, 2005

In a recent attempt to remove the blood of independent journalist Anna Politkovskaya from the hands of Comrade Czar Vladimir (“There’s No Such Thing as a Former KGB Man”) Putin, American crypto-leftist agent provocateur Justin Raimondo whines: “There’s no evidence that he ordered the murder of Anna Politkovskaya.” Does any well-informed observer of Russian politics think Putin, Patrushev, Zyuganov, and Shenin would leave any evidence of the infamous “FSB trace”? columnist Raimondo must be proud of the link he has at the Russian socialist website Left Russia, which also sports a link to the neo-Stalinist website of the International Council of Friendship and Solidarity with Soviet People, which provides overseas propaganda support for the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union, under the leadership of August 1991 coup plotter Oleg Shenin. In 2001 attempted to establish a working relationship with the organ of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Pravda, which details the short-lived tryst here. “Many visitors of reported at the time that they discovered the site only after reading about it in Pravda.Ru,” wrote the mouthpiece for Soviet communism. “Some of the authors with stopped by our office when they were visiting Moscow. They told us that their articles posted on Pravda.Ru made them popular.” Pravda noted that Raimondo “hated” the USA.

Raimondo’s fraternization with Russian communists who are committed to rebuilding the Soviet Union is not surprising. Consider’s mission statement: “This site is devoted to the cause of non-interventionism and is read by libertarians, pacifists, leftists, “greens,” and independents alike, as well as many on the Right who agree with our opposition to imperialism.” ‘Nuff said.

An excellent expose of Raimondo’s America/Israel-loathing left-fascism can be found at FrontPage Magazine.

>Red Terror File: FSB enlisted "racist students" to perpetrate August 21 bombing of Moscow’s Cherkizovsky market

>The Federal Security Service is still blowing up Russia . . . Nikolai Patrushev, FSB director and chief goon, is pictured here. The BBC’s original coverage of the bombing can be viewed here.

FSB noncom lined students to blow up Moscow Cherkizovsky market
Eurasian Secret Services Daily Review

Investigators believe that the students who arranged a bomb blast at the Cherkizovsky market in Moscow were lined on the crime by the hand-to-hand fight coach, FSB warrant-officer, Sergei Klimuk, daily Vremya novostei writes today. According to a source close to investigation, Klimuk had been a very authoritative person in the youth circles: he was able to convince and “spoke the teenagers what they wished to hear”. In particular, Klimuk told them that was had fought in the Chechen Republic and saw how Chechens scoff at Russians, and told others that he had very good contacts both, in the FSB and among “big gangsters”.

When the noncom was asked why he together with students who had later put the explosives used to go to the market (several times Klimuk was noticed near the site of the future bomb blast), he began to tell that he was engaged in “marketing research”. Meanwhile it was found out that Klimuk had some relation to the International Fund of Slavic Writing and Culture, and personally knew its founder and president, the known sculptor Vyacheslav Klykov. The employees of fund considered that in business about on Klimuk was “simply slandered” concerning the explosion in the market, the paper writes. The students suspected in arranging the bomb blast have already changed their evidence a few times, dumping fault against each other. The source of the Vremya novostei says that investigation considers a question of expansion of the list of charges to three student-suspects. They are also suspected of the whole series of similar actions in Moscow and Moscow suburbs, though, without heavy consequences.

The students had blown up the street kiosks that belonged to traders from the Caucasus. After the explosion at Cherkizovsky market August 21, killing 12 people and wounding 50 other, student of the Mendeleyev Chemistry and Technical College Oleg Kostyrev, student of the Moscow Social Institute (university) Ilya Tikhomirov and first-year student of the Moscow Transport Institute (university) Valery Zhukovtsov were detained. During the first interrogations they told that had arranged the explosion due to hatred towards Asians and that they were participating in a certain nationalist organization. As a result of investigation, secret services revealed their ties with a military-patriotic club Spas; first the head of the club, Nikolay Korolev, then the coach and the FSB noncom Sergey Klimuk was also detained.

Link: Axis Information and Analysis

>Breaking News/Red Terror File: United Russia mayoral candidate in Russian Far East assassinated

>In the wake of the Andrei Kozlov and Anna Politkovskaya assassinations we predicted a bloody 2007-2008 political season in Russia. Now this . . .

City Mayoral Candidate Assassinated in Russia’s Far East

A mayoral candidate in the Russian city of Dalnegorsk has died after being shot with an assault rifle near his electoral headquarters, RIA Novosti news agency reported on Thursday.

Dmitriy Fotyanov, a member of the pro-Kremlin United Rusia party and a candidate in the mayoral elections scheduled for Sunday was exiting his electoral headquarters on Thursday morning when an undentified person shot him with a Kalashnikov rifle. Police has failed to detain the killer.

The second tour of elections, in which Dmitriy Fotyanov and his rival Alexandr Terebilov were to compete for the first post in the city, was scheduled on October 22. According to the preliminary information, in the first tour of the elections Fotyanov and Terebilov got 9486 and 9850 votes respectively.

Regional electoral commission said that the Sunday elections would be held as planned despite of the death of one of the candidates.

Link: Moscow News

>EU File: Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia denounces banning of youth wing

>The banning of the Communist Youth Union of the Czech Republic–which is the youth wing of the Communist Party of Bohemia and Morava which, in turn, holds the third largest number of seats in the Czech parliament–is a farce since the Czech Republic remains firmly in the orbit of Moscow. In like fashion, in 2005 the “rightist” regime of Comrade Czar Vladimir (“There’s No Such Thing as a Former KGB Man”) Putin banned the youth-oriented, pseudo-communist National Bolshevik Party, which still maintains a website and engages in public protests, such as “Anticapitalism-2006.” The Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM) is to the continuing Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (KSC) as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF/KPRF) is to the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU/KPSS). Both the KSCM and KPRF are potemkin parties, formed before the “collapse” of communism in and dismemberment of their respective countries, and designed to hide the Leninist/Stalinist cliques that maintain their grip on Eastern Europe.

Communists denounce ban on far-left youth movement
[19-10-2006] By Rob Cameron

The interior ministry announced it was banning a small far-left group on Wednesday, saying its manifesto violated the Czech constitution. An interior ministry spokeswoman said the group – the Communist Youth Association – was striving to replace the private ownership of the means of production with nationalisation, which, she said, was unconstitutional. So was the ban fair? Dr Josef Skala is a foreign policy adviser to the Communist Party.

“I think it’s a shameful witch-hunt. Any democrat, not only a Marxist, should ask the question what sort of danger these 600 young girls and guys represent for democracy in the Czech Republic. Only for claiming what the original Christians were claiming. The question is how democratic the right-wing forces in this country can be. What is their relation to democracy?”

You say democracy, but there’s also something called the constitution. The interior ministry says the movement was banned because it was trying to replace the system of private ownership of the means of production and replace it with nationalisation. And that goes against the Czech constitution.

“First of all, could you show me one civilised country where people with an alternative opinion, people without a single drop of blood on their hands, no violence, nothing similar, are banned simply for their opinions? Secondly, it’s very doubtful that this is against the constitution. The constitution ensures everybody the freedom of speech, the freedom of opinion and so on. Did these youngsters make a single practical deed which would violate anything? Can anybody show me one practical deed and compare it with the right-wing rowdies who apply violence in the streets of the Czech Republic, with fascist symbols and so on? And they survive, no-one bans them. That’s a very interesting comparison, isn’t it?”

The Communist Youth Association was warned by the ministry last year that they were violating the constitution. Surely the fact they’ve been banned is no fault but their own?

“No, they provided explanations, I don’t know to what extent you are informed. The youngsters paid a visit to the deputy minister of the interior, there was even quite a satisfactory preliminary reaction from the interior minister, and everyone was feeling that even the authorities somehow understood that it would be better to retreat from this shameful story.”

Are you not worried that this case could be a prelude to a ban on the Communist Party itself, which many people are calling for?

“I will tell you something. Now, with the stalemate on the Czech political scene, believe me all the political parties – including the most right-wing parliamentary parties – are seeking a reasonable compromise with the Communists. So this is a double face, this is Janus. They’re shouting one thing on the TV screens, and behind the scenes they’re seeking our support. I know what I’m talking about, believe me.”

Link: Radio Prague

>Red Terror File: Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and National Liberation Army maintain websites on Russian servers

>Two major communist insurgent armies operate in Colombia: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN). The FARC maintains a website here, while the ELN maintains a website here. Both groups also maintain Russian-language websites. The FARC’s Russian site is located here, while the ELN’s Russian site is located here. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation has reciprocated the courtesy of these Latin American revolutionaries by operating a Portuguese version of Pravda, apparently in support of Brazil’s neo-communist government.

The Russian FARC site is also linked to the Information Centre of the Russian Communist Workers’ Party-Revolutionary Party of Communists. Although the RCWP-RPC, a founding member of the UCP-CPSU in 1993, declined to join the restored CPSU in 2004, CPSU chair Oleg Shenin has expressed his admiration for that party. Red birds of a feather . . .

>Red Terror File: Putin pledges to investigate murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya, only two weeks after slaying of Central Bank deputy chairman

>“If it [my assassination] happens, it happens. People sometimes pay with their lives for saying out loud what they think.”
— Anna Politkovskaya, The Daily Telegraph, Summer 2006

Another independent journalist who opposed the Russian war in Chechnya bit the dust on October 7, two weeks after the September 13/14 murder of Andrei Kozlov, first deputy chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

Anna Politkovskaya’s employer at Novaya Gazeta included Mike (“I’ll Always Be a Communist”) Gorbachev.

The leftist ZNet’s eulogy for Politkovskaya can be read here.

The Telegraph notes that Politkovskaya made many enemies in the Russian Federation’s Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the KGB’s domestic component. Ironically, or perhaps not, Politkovskaya’s father was a high-ranking KGB officer. In September 2004 the FSB/KGB poisoned Politkovskaya on a flight to Rostov, as she made her way to North Ossetia to cover the Kremlin-contrived Beslan school hostage taking. Looks like one of Comrade Patrushev’s hitmen decided to use two bullets this time. Adrian Blomfield observes: “But the killing of so famous a figure, two weeks after the murder of the reforming deputy head of the central bank, Andrei Kozlov, has convinced some that hard-liners in the Kremlin have begun to act with impunity as 2008 presidential elections draw closer.”

Russia’s journalist body count, which stretches back into the 1990s, alone should be sufficient grounds to expel the neo-Soviet state from the G-8. The murders of Kozlov and Politkovskaya, furthermore, may only be the beginning of a bloody political season as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union openly reasserts itself across the Not-So-Former Soviet republics. The restoration of the continuing CPSU is worthy of considerable media coverage, but has yet to register on the radar screens of the benighted MSM, more than two years after the event.

Russia’s Putin pledges thorough inquiry into journalist murder
19:04 10/ 10/ 2006

DRESDEN, October 10 (RIA Novosti) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday he would see to it that a thorough inquiry is carried out into the recent murder of a prominent investigative journalist.

Speaking to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Putin described the killing of Anna Politkovskaya as an “abominable crime,” and said he would do his best to bring those behind it to justice.

“Whoever committed the crime and whatever motives those people were guided by, this is a crime abominable in its cruelty, and it must not go unpunished,” Putin said.

Politkovskaya, 48, known for her staunch criticism of Russia’s military campaign in Chechnya, was gunned down in her apartment block in Moscow last Saturday.

The Russian Prosecutor General is overseeing an official investigation, with the main theory linking the murder to the journalist’s work.

Link: Novosti

Journalist Anna Politkovskaya murdered in Moscow
18:51 07/ 10/ 2006

MOSCOW, October 7 (RIA Novosti) – Novaya Gazeta journalist Anna Politkovskaya was murdered in central Moscow, and a Makarov pistol and four cases were discovered at the scene, the city prosecutors said Saturday.

Vitaly Tretyakov, a Public Chamber member and chief editor of Moskovskie Novosti newspaper, said the murder was connected with Politkovskaya’s professional activities.

“It’s clear that the first and only version everyone can think about is the one connected with professional activity,” he said, adding that Politkovskaya wrote articles on North Caucasus problems, including Chechnya.

Prosecutors said an unknown person clad in black opened fire on Politkovskaya at 17.15 Moscow time (1:15 p.m. GMT).

The chief prosecutor of Moscow, Yury Syomin, and Deputy Prosecutor General Viktor Grin have left for the crime scene.

An investigation is underway.

Link: Novosti

>USSR2 File: Continuing CPSU CC endorses Shenin’s 2008 candidacy, vilifies USA as "center of robbery, aggression and international terrorism"

>Today in the country there is no political figure equal to Oleg Semenovich Shenin, with his enormous experience of economic, state, and political management . . .

Thus, for the last 20 years the Soviet people and all of humanity throughout the entire world have lived in the fog of a lie that emanates from the clique of Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin!
— Central Committee, Communist Party of the Soviet Union, September 23, 2006

The Soviet Union will be recreated within two to three years of Oleg Shenin’s ascension to the Russian Federation presidency in 2008. Thus saith the Central Committee of the restored Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which hid behind the facade of the CPRF-dominated Union of Communist Parties-CPSU between 1993 and 2004.

Shenin’s resume bears close scrutiny by those very few Kremlinologists who have not been duped by Moscow’s agitprop since 1991: concurrent chair of the UCP-CPSU, Communist Party of the Union (of Russia and Belarus), and restored CPSU; unrepentant Stalinist; August 1991 coup plotter; key player in the Kremlin’s long-range deception strategy, formulated in 1960; close friend of the leadership of the Korean Workers’ Party, which test detonated North Korea’s first nuclear weapon on October 9; and very possibly the first president of the resurrected Soviet Union . . .

Lifting a page from their fascist stalking horses, the continuing CPSU denounces the “Zionist-Masonic-bourgeois occupation” of the USSR, and identifies “social democrats” like Mike (“I’ll Always Be a Communist”) Gorbachev, “capitalists” like Boris (“New Economic Policy Version 2.0”) Yeltsin and Comrade Czar Vladimir (“There’s No Such Thing as a Former KGB Man”) Putin, and “reformist” communist leader Gennady Zyuganov as the source of Russia’s woes. Be assured, however, Oleg, Mike, Boris, Vlad, Gennady, et al. are all on the Red Team. The “Russian Right” is a fiction, as Julia Duchovny at The Moscow News insists: “Russia’s political scene today is lacking a legitimate right-wing base of the European or American variety.”

The restoration of the Soviet Union was predicted by KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn in an August 19, 1991 memorandum to the US Central Intelligence Agency, published in The Perestroika Deception (London: Edward Harle, 1995, 1998). In this memorandum Golitsyn spells out the CPSU’s strategy behind the fake “hardline” communist coup that occurred on that day:

The “coup” was proposed in accordance with the requirements of the Soviet strategy of [political] convergence [between East and West] leading to eventual World Government. This strategy and its moves, like the present Soviet “coup,” can only be understood in the light of the theories of one of the principal Soviet agents of influence, namely Sakharov, and his timetable for convergence. According to Sakharov, during the first phase the Leninist realists (i.e. Gorbachev and other “liberals”) will expand and strengthen “democracy” and economic reform in the USSR and other socialist countries.

As we know, this has already happended.

Further on in his missive, Golitsyn writes:

The main purpose of the “coup” is to reverse an unfavourable situation for potential Soviet allies in the United States and to create favourable conditions for the implementation of the convergence strategy. The second objective is to secure the non-violent creation of the new Soviet Federation of Republics. The third objective is to provide any potential adventurers there may be in the Soviet military with a lesson and thereby to eliminate any possibility of a genuine coup in the future.

Potential Soviet allies in the USA are numerous: US Senator Hillary Clinton; the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Progressive Democrats of America, which represent the socialist and pacifist wing of the Democratic Party; politically correct faux rightists such as the sodomite lobby group Log Cabin Republicans; the Communist Party USA; the Revolutionary Communist Party USA; the Communist League; the Workers’ World Party; the Workers’ Party USA; the Socialist Workers’ Party; the Socialist Party USA; the Socialist Labor Party; the Socialist Equality Party, which publishes the well-known World Socialist Web Site; Socialist Action; Socialist Alternative; the American Nazi Party; the pro-Russian, pro-Palestinian “white nationalist” racist David Duke (pictured here, visiting Russia in 2006); and a host of other interrelated leftist, fascist, and subversive organizations, including FSB/KGB fronts, such as the Institute for Policy Studies. As used by the left wing of the US Democratic Party, mentioned above, “progressive” is a code word for communism.

In past blogs we have implied that the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) represents the “new Soviet Federation of Republics.” Strictly speaking, this is not true. The CIS, rather, has provided the collective leadership of the CPSU, which includes Shenin, a rationale for restoring the Soviet Union in its fullest sense: “Western-supported oligarchical, KGB-gangster capitalism under Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin has proven disastrous for Russia and its satellites, and must now be liquidated.”

The convergence of the remnants of the “Free World” and the Soviet Bloc are to be implemented through the United Nations, Golitsyn explains in a memorandum to the CIA, dated August 20, 1991: “They [the CPSU leadership] will do this because they regard the United Nations as a stepping stone to a future World Government.”

Below, the CPSU CC lays out its plan for the nationalization (communization) of the restored Soviet Union’s industry and agriculture. Toward the end of this manifesto, the Central Committee alludes to the advance of the world revolution by restoring the communist vision to Russia’s interrelations with the USA and the European Union. Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, it should be stressed, contends that the “new European Soviet” was formulated by the CPSU in collaboration with Eurocommunists and other leftists.

Translation courtesy Babelfish.


Comrades, Soviet patriots, the citizens of the Soviet Union! The central committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet OF THE USSR in this heavy for the fates of our native land time issue a call you to join their numbers in the fight for the fulfillment of the sacred will of Soviet people, expressed on the All-Union referendum on 17 March, 1991, to the “Soviet Union – to be”!

In 2008 in the Russian Federation must they take place the presidential elections, which can become truly sud’bonosnymi. This time in the fight are intended to enter the chairman of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, one of the acknowledged leaders of international Communist movement Oleg semenovich Shenin. Today in the country there is no political figure of the equal of Oleg semenovich sheninu with his enormous experience of economic, state and political management. It, as real soldier for the interests of working people consecutively it carries out into the life of the solution OF KHKHKHSH of the Party Congress, which restored united CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION, strictly goes by the course of Lenin and Stalin, uncompromisingly it fights for the ideals of good, happiness and validity.

The CC CPSU and the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet OF THE USSR support the intention O.S. Of shenina to advance their candidature to the post of the President RF in the selections 2008 and they will in every possible way contribute to his victory.

What did impel O.S. Of shenina to accept this direction of political fight?

1. against our native land is perfected the unannounced, large-scale, information- psychological aggression, purpose of which is the destruction of Soviet people. It is present the occupation OF THE USSR by both the external enemy and by secret – “fifth column” of internal degenerates and traitors.

2. the Soviet Union is forcibly dismembered, but Soviet people not of their own free will became the divided people. In the republics, the now “independent states”, (with exception of Belorussia) guide comprador regimes headed by pro-Western, pro-American marionettes. The solutions, which are concerned the life of entire peoples, start now not in the capitals of these states, but in Washington – the military-political and financial center of world globalizma – center of robbery, aggression and international terrorism.

3. using principle “divide and rule”, external and internal enemies tear up already Russian Federation. Autonomous Republics RF unofficially became “states”, after extending national sovereignties to its territories. They all have constitutions, Presidents, parliaments, governments, with exception of the Russian people, to which they reject their nationality, self-determination, authority, government, nation- cultural institutes. Under the conditions of the total discrimination of great people, which comprises it is more than 90; populations, natural lift of self-consciousness of Russian people attempt to declare “Russian fascism”, “ksenofobiyey”. The forcing of international hostility and hatred became in the authority the weapon, directed against its people.

4. Belovezhskiy agreement of 8 December, 1991, – this is the criminal report of high treason of Yeltsin -Kravcuka-Wuwkevica, not had authorities to a similar step, which so did not enter the force of law. The session of the Supreme Soviet OF THE RSFSR of 12 December, 1991, in which, allegedly are legislatively affirmed the acts of three podpisantov, was illegitimate. Of 250 members of the Supreme Soviet OF THE RSFSR at the session was present 147 (on the regulations must be 167). The Soviet Union de jure continues to exist, but all present regimes in RF and union republics are illegitimate and are the dictatorship of the brutal force of the bourgeoisie, which has no legal authorities from the peoples.

5. not one union republic in the legal order left the composition of the union OF SSR. During September 1991 the unconstitutional “Gossoviet OF THE USSR” in the disturbance of constitution decided to cut off the republics of the Baltic States. The taken authority national clans in the union republics became the Fascist juntas, which reject the option free to the peoples of autonomies, which led to the bloody conflicts, not regulated, until now, to the manifestation of “unacknowledged states”: Dniester Moldavian Republic, Abkhaziya, South Osetia, Highland Karabakh. Ripens serious mezhetnicheskiy conflict in the Autonomous Republic the Crimea.

The latter-day authorities of union republics by self-engagement took under their control the property, find on their territories, including all-Union, never by it belonged, after destroying existing law “about the order of the permission of questions in connection with the output of one republic of the union” of 3 April, 1990. Thus, all of the last 20 years Soviet people and entire world humanity live in the fog of the lie, which emanates from the clique of Gorbachev-Yeltsin- Putin!

6. time of the administration of the antinational Presidents – this is the period of the catastrophe, such as did not know the country from the times of Fascist-German occupation. “we then will conquer Russia, when Ukrainians and belorussy believe, what they not Russians”, blew fascists in 1941. Home-grown “Democrats” everything did in order to realize this commandment of fascists. In the years of counterrevolution human losses in the territory OF THE USSR composed 45-48 million people. Are destroyed industry, agriculture, defense of the countries, compiled work in 70 years with heroic work of several generations of Soviet people. Not in one union republic, which became the “independent state”, its citizens more are masters. New masters – foreign “investors” and all riches of republics belong to them.

7. destruction BY THE USSR as the subject of international law led to the crash of the bipolarity of world order. Political authority and military power of the Soviet Union were reliable obstacle to the aggressive and hegemonistic ambitions OF THE USA. Today there is no serious counterforce to their folly, and this means that following the tragedy, postigshey the peoples OF THE USSR of Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq will follow and other countries, which defend sovereignty, independence, its way of development.

Conclusion asserts itself by itself – it is time to change authority! Ordeals will be sufficient to us from the Presidents – the servants of the world bourgeoisie, united by hatred for THE USSR, to socialism and to Soviet people. Are the possibility to peacefully change situation in the country, mobilizuya people masses around Soviet candidate- Communist o.S.Shenin.

The problem of restoring the unity of the country, Soviet people, bases of socialism is posed. The first step for achievement of these purposes will become filling with the real content of the union of Belorussia and Russia. On the succession of policy with respect to external it is debt, capital export for the boundary, the export from the country of the enormous volumes of gas, oil, forests, metals, other raw material – there can be no discussion.

Must be restored dictatorship of the proletariat in the form of the Soviet regime, planned system of managing national economy. Most important and nadezhneyshaya support of this – the inviolable union of working class, peasantry and working intelligentsia.

I Authority and the responsibility

1. first of all, will be legalized the penal responsibility of the President, members of government, deputies of all levels, officials in authority before the people for worsening in the life of people. Will be created conditions, with which for the political adventurers, who stand in authority, it will become impossible to grow rich, to undertake that, what they do not know how and do not want to make, dooming millions of people to the misery and sufferings.

2. in the working associations of the extractive, industrial, operational, transport fields, the agriculture will be legislatively allotted the functions of control for the produced product of labor and its distribution by direct producers and by participants in the production processes.

In proportion to the restoration of the national economy of the country, rise in productivity of labor and real socialization of production authority in the working associations it will be legislatively transferred to the advice of workers – critical organs of self-guidance, which prevent the absence of individual responsibility of property, which give space to the authentic creation of the associations.

3. collective control and responsibility of citizens for the content of living-space fund and adjacent territory on the place of residence with the gradual passage to the complete self-guidance of citizens will be legislatively introduced. To scientific, educational, medical, sport, cultural establishments it will be given right collective conducting and order by cadre and material- financial resources.

II Social and economic conversions

1. in order to return to people all social achievements of socialism, will be realized the nationalization of the earth, depths, forests, sources of water, financial- credit system, connection and information, fuel-energy complex, rail, air, truck, sea and river transport, heavy and the lung of machine building, military industrial complex. Base for the development of industry and agriculture of the country will be created thus.

These measures:

a) will put an end to unemployment and by the so-called market for labor – the fundamentals of the exploitation of works;

b) they will neglect the process of the integration of fraternal peoples, which in 2-3 years will be completed by the recreation of the united country, since public ownership of the means of production joins all nations and national character, and quotient separates them;

c) they will make it possible to create the public fund for the development of science, free educations, medical service, of social welfare of students, who study, pensioners and invalids;

d) they will ensure the entire population with free gas, electricity, water and heat;

e) they will lower the payment of dwelling to 3-5 % from the family income as this it was in the Soviet time;

f) they will help to begin the state building of Cossack and other settlings, first of all along the state border for the purpose of strengthening its protection.

2. to restore agriculture – means to ensure food national safety, to give to population traditional, ecologically clean food products.

In this case:

a) preference will be returned to large-scale, highly remunerative farms;

b) the quick ascent of village is impossible without the formation of the machine-and-tractor stations, which will become a constant aid of state village;

d) is in prospect to anew create the destroyed social sphere of village;

e) not there will be obstacles for creating the small family economies, which prevent hired labor.

III Army, the police, the state security

One must, actually, anew create draftable army, people police, something different, than now, security services for the reliable protection of the socialist achievements of people, settling of its interests, retention of the people basis of statehood.

IV. Humanism and the morals

Socialism – this is the society, in which all people on the earth, on their moral qualities approach love, friendship, comradely mutual assistance. Social relations exclude any violence and exploitation of man by man. The standard of daily life will become public- useful labor and respect for each other independently of the nationality, the religion and the racial belonging. Socialist order within its short historical period advanced whole pleiad of the Leader- revolutionaries of different peoples from Lenin and Stalin to those now living of Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro. In THE XIX century the communism by the works of Marx and Engels became the scientific theory, for the first time successfully realized in the Soviet Union By v.I.Leninym and I.V.Stalinym.

Conscious high(ly)-spiritual personality is the center of Communist civilization. Training new in the man- personality is our highest purpose.

2. not one human association can live without the ideology. A question in what ideology predominates: the ideology, which asserts the priority of labor and which raises man of labor, the creator of all material, cultural and spiritual values, or the ideology of the parasite, that kills, it takes away, exploits man, growing rich on his perspiration and blood, disguising in this case its crimes by lie about the “freedom, democracy, the rights of man”.

3. ideology of Communists – this is the priority of man of labor. Therefore barrier will be set to financial swindle, in the Party spirit- trade-union, nation- clan, high-ranking- bureaucratic swagger. Pride and honor of Soviet person must be restored fully.

4. great friendship of peoples, molding of new historical generality – Soviet people, the main reaching of Soviet epoch, the cornerstone of Communist civilization. It is necessary to take care these achievements as the pupil of eye, in every possible way to strengthen, suppressing any attempts at their destruction.

5. social reconstruction of society is impossible without the most active participation of young people, for which one must in it live and work. Youths and girl! Tear away base entertainments, cheap flattery, cynicism, mass lewdness and other defects. Seize knowledge, you learn cause of the Revolution, you be worthy the glorious working and combat traditions of its ancestors. Enlarge the front of resistance to the regimes, which deprive you future. Your Native land – Soviet Union; neustanno fight for its revival and prosperity.

6. in the international sphere in the first place will be set collaboration with the countries, which construct socialism, and which carry on fight for the social and national release. Will be restored course on settling of our own national interests, including in the interrelations with THE USA and the European Union. Not will more than no one another order about by the country and our people.


Is understandable the tendency of people to change life via selections, but they never are “honest and clean” under the conditions of bourgeois plutocracy. Thus far from the so-called design opposition there were only sly speeches, obscure programs, yes imitation of political fight. Now for the first time in these years of authority is intended to defy Soviet Communist! For the first time he openly declares about the restoration of socialism and deprivatizatsii of national economy.

Soviet patriots! The dark night of occupation and dictatorship is not eternal, will arrive the bright day of our victory. Each will accelerate its approximation, if chokes apathy, disbelief into itself, shyness and cowardice. Only in this case we will become indestructible force and let us raise from the elbows our torn to pieces native land. The police violence of liberal- occupiers let us answer by the solid force of working people.

The mobilization of entire people into the name of our victory declares!

Workers of the world, unite!


Presidium of the Supreme Soviet OF THE USSR

23 September 2006

>Final Phase Backgrounder: Ex-head of CPSU International Dept. admits 1991 coup was feint to scare West, warns of US-backed color revolution in Russia

>When Gorbachev was contacted on August 17 and 18 [1991] and a report was presented to him that everything [for the coup] was ready, he said: “Well, boys, you do whatever you think fit. I won’t play your games any longer.”
— Valentin Falin, Former Head, International Department, Central Committee, Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU)

Among other revelations in a 2005 interview Valentin Falin admits that the CPSU planned to divide itself into a multitude of parties to confuse the West ala Golitsyn. (Type “Reagan Provoked Us to Slam the Door” in search function at Kommersant site to pull up interview.) The interviewer prompted Falin by stating: “It is said that at first Gorbachev wanted to use the social-democratic idea in order to strengthen our positions in Europe not by military, but political means.” Note Falin’s reference to Oleg Shenin’s role in the 1991 State Emergency Committee, located toward the end of the interview.

Falin is the co-author of a report that was distributed in September to the Russian Federation State Duma in which this old communist asserts that the USA will attempt to affect a pro-Western “color revolution” in Russia during the 2007 parliamentary election and 2008 presidential election. Among other groundless assertions, Falin states that “The US will put its main hopes in 2007-2008 on an attempt to initiate . . . a quiet Russian version of the ‘orange revolution'” and “a hidden realignment of forces among the highest echelons of the Russian leadership, the business and political elite.” (We first mentioned this report on September 21.) What a fantastic opportunity for the continuing CPSU under the leadership of Shenin, who is running for president, to step forward as Russia’s savior!

“Reagan Provoked Us to Slam the Door”
April 11, 2005

[Kommersant] “Vlast” magazine continues to publish interviews with people who shaped the Soviet Union’s foreign policy in the years of ‘perestroika’. Valentin Falin who at that time headed the international department of the CC CPSU, told the “Vlast” correspondent Marina Kalashnikova about the emergence of the “new political thinking”.

“Americans carried out the operation to deprive the USSR of currency”

How did you get to Gorbachev’s team?

In December 1985 he invited me, through Shevardnadze, to join his team. At first I refused. I said I was quite happy with my present work and was not going to change it. In January Yakovlev phoned me and asked whether I wasn’t tired of my holiday-making. He had in mind my research work at the Institute of US and Canada Studies and journalist work in the “Izvestia”. He invited me to come to his country house. I agreed. It turned out that Yakovlev set up a group of authors of the foreign-policy section of Gorbachev’s report to the 27th CPSU congress. He said to me that I was completely free to write anything I think fit to change our foreign-policy doctrine and course in all directions. I insisted that a passage on China be included. Another point of mine was to mention Reagan who provoked us to slam the door, but, as I said, “we will not please him with this act.” Instead we will work out a doctrine of defence sufficiency. Yakovlev looked through my text and added something. That was how the new political thinking came into being.

How was the main task of perestroika’ in foreign policy formulated?

The task was to build a wall between the period of Gromyko and the new period. Shevardnadze was appointed Foreign Minister, although he didn’t know the history of the problem, what was to follow what, and in general, didn’t want to know. He was not a professional diplomat. Just remember the Decembrist Lunin who would say: “Politics is the same profession as, say, medicine.” Especially foreign policy.

And what was the international department like, where you landed in the heat of perestroika’?

I was appointed there in November 1988. Work was built on the principle of partnership, as it were. We had about 200 partners, most of them the so-called Marxist communist parties and parties of socialist orientation. The rest were bourgeois-democratic, social-democratic and liberal parties. For some reason or other, representatives of Judaism were favourably disposed toward me and asked me either to help the Moscow synagogue, or build synagogues on the territory of Ukraine and Byelorussia, or do something somewhere. I was given an assignment to reduce the number of jobs at three departments: international, on connections with the socialst countries and on the personnel working abroad, and merge them in one department. Now we should have a new questionnaire for people going abroad for work or on a visit on just one page. The only reason for refusal was access to classified information with a limitation period from three to five years.

It’s intertesting to note that the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Abe, didn’t want to deal with our Foreign Ministry, but wished to get in touch with me personally. He talked on the subject of the northern territories, and there emerged an interesting model of solving the problem. I suggested that Gorbachev use it during his visit to Japan in April 1991. But he didn’t, the favourable moment was missed and everything crumbled.

My first proposal as the head of the international department (and one of the first clashes with Shevardnadze) was one on the establishment of trade relations with South Korea. The Foreign Ministry objected, fearing a conflict with North Korea. With Yakovlev’s help we managed to persuade Shevardnadze to agree and he, with Gorbachev’s consent, assured the leadership of North Korea that our relations would not be spoilt. My model was simple: to recognize the status quo of the two Korean states, just as we did with regard of the status quo of the two German states. Otherwise, it would have been impossible to talk of the normalization of the situation on the Korean Peninsula.

And what did you suggest for foreign policy toward Europe?

I had an argument with the Minister of Defence, Dmitry Yazov. “What’s the purpose of having 60,00 tanks. If there’s going to be a war in Europe, it’ll be nuclear.” And he answered: “Honestly, I don’t know the reason myself. Recently I arrived to a tank corps at night unawares and ordered ready for action’. One-third of the tanks couldn’t start their engines.” The inertia of thinking is a bad thing. When we had no nuclear weapons or very few of them, tanks were the most effective means for crossing atomic fields after explosion. The United States built a mine belt along the eastern border of the Federal Republic of Germany, and our tanks were supposed to cross it. Our industry manufactured 3,000 tanks annually, and they were the world’s best. Thus euphoria came into being: we shall go in the direction where we’re ahead of the entire planet.

In 1984 plans were published of the occupation of West Berlin by the Warsaw Treaty countries. What can you say on the subject?

That was in case NATO started a war. The US biggest intelligence centre was there, directing the entire intelligence and subversive infrastructure created by the Americans in the German Democratic Republic, the Warsaw Treaty countries and partially in western regions of the USSR. They should have been neutralized in case of war.

Then why did the plan envisage special internment places for hostile elements and the organization of life after the war?

Don’t compare it: as if we had, and they didn’t have.

But Nato had a defence strategy in Europe.

Don’t talk rubbish. The NATO strategy was initially offensive, never defensive. The United States was not going to wait passively until we strike. There were reliable documents on the score obtained by our East German friends.

It appears that in 1985 when we were in Europe we knew everything about our enemy and were strong as never before. And only two years later we rapidly flee from there. What was the reason?

We fled due to another reason. The agony of the USSR began in the latter half of the 1970s. President Carter initiated 12 new military programmes in the United States and we answered it with something, too. But we had bad agricultural years and economic shortages. Then the United States carried out a strategic operation aimed at depriving the Soviet Union of currency, by making oil prices drop to $5-6 per barrel. Our cost was $11-14. The situation that emerged at the time called for the appearance of Gorbachev. But he came without any programme or concrete idea. Thanks to his rule the country faced the situation when there were no means to buy food. He squandered all gold reserves. In short, as far as the external reasons for the crisis were concerned, everything was made intentionally. As for the domestic reasons, it was due to the lack of elementary knowledge. As a result, there was nothing to finance perestroika’.

“The Real Plan Was to Split the Communist party”

Was the slogan of acceleration removed due to s drop in the price of oil?

Yes, partly. Because we were simply unable to compete with the West. Gorbachev put the question of changes in the military industry, for which it was necessary to revise the foreign-policy doctrine. Thus, the “new political thinking” appeared.

But the Soviet people could get along with food shortages endlessly, whereas their leaders had enough of everything.

All this empty talk about the nomenklatura has nothing to do with reality. Perhaps, there were cases of embezzlement and abuse of power, but they concern a group of several hundred persons for the entire Soviet Union. I worked at the Foreign Ministry at the time and had no normal holiday for years on end. When I left work there I learnt that the ministry had a forest retreat for hunting, and some high officials visited it, but I had never been there.

What prompted Gorbachev to take extreme decisions?

Gorbachev believed that the main quality of a politician was his ability to improvize, that it was not necessary to have a system, a programme when coming to power. For instance, he heeded the advice of Ligachev or somebody else concerning, say, the anti-alcohol campaign, and we lost not only the incomes from oil export, but also tax incomes from selling vodka and wine. Moreover, we destroyed our vineyards and closed down distilleries and encouraged boot-legging. We didn’t take into acount the American experience, and our own, when Nicholas II introduced prohibition in 1914.

As to international affairs, Gorbachev was ready to give “My kingdom for a horse.” This was why he asked Chancellor Helmut Kohl for a credit of 4.5 billion marks, otherwise there would be nothing to feed people with. “If you give me this credit, you’ll get whatever you wish.” This explains the capitulation in Arkhyz at a meeting with Kohl in 1990, behind the back of our Warsaw Treaty partners.

He was annoyed when his actions were underestimated by the West. Once he invited Yazov, Kryuchkov, Shevardnadze and the head of the General Staff and said: “We reduce the number of our divisions, the numerical strength of our grouping in the German Democratic Republic, and carry out other measures, yet the western press and statesmen call us expansionists, potential aggressors, and what not… It’s nonsense. But if the Americans do anything, this is always in the interests of peace and in accordance with the defence concept of NATO.”

Who did you have to deal with in Gorbachev’s entourage on questions of foreign policy?

His aides Shahnazarov and Cherniayev were quite intelligent men. But they had a strange concept, to say the least: to surrender everything in exchange for even a minimal compensation. At a meeting of the Crisis Headquarters formed after the downfall of the Berlin Wall Shahnazarov once said: “At the present military-technical level military blocs have lost their former significance. This is why it’s not important whether the GDR is in NATO or outside it.” And I continued his thesis: “Then let the FRG leave NATO, if this is unimportant.” Shahnazarov was also the main theorist in the field of creating political organizations. But the quintessence of his ideas was as follows: the price of freedom is the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

Did you try to argue with him?

Shahnazarov, Cherniayev and Yakovlev, aware of my position, did not acquaint me with the details of their plans, especially one to split the communist party and set up a social-democratic party. Once I drew Yakovlev’s attention to the fact that certain theses in Gorbachev’s speech had actually much in common with what we could find in Trotsky’s works. Yakovlev said that he was neither surprised nor shocked by this.

It is said that at first Gorbachev wanted to use the social-democratic idea in order to strengthen our positions in Europe not by military, but political means.

As to the social-democratic idea, he hesitated whether to become a left Christian democrat or social-democrat. I explained it by saying that he simply looked for someone to betray next. By 1990 he became absolutely indifferent to social democracy.

The military assert that political decisions were worked out and adopted at the Central Committee exclusively, but they implemented the will of the communist party.

The ideas and proposals of the military were discussed in a very narrow circle, we at the international relations department were not advised about them. The top brass had direct access to the general secretary. Sometimes Gorbachev invited me to such discussions. There was also Zaikov’s commission which examined how the directives of the CC and the Security Council were fulfilled at the negotiations on arms control with the Americans. At the commission’s meetings heated arguments were going on between the head of the General Staff Moiseyev and Shevardnadze. Great efforts were made to coordinate their absolutely different positions and report the proceedings to Gorbachev. Once a complaint was made to Gorbachev that Shevardnadze had deviated from the agreed-on directives and promised the American side more than it was in our interests. Gorbachev’s reaction to this was surprisingly soft.

How would you explain this softness

When Marshal Akhromeyev and I were about to leave for holidays in July 1991, he said to me: “Previously I thought that Gorbachev acted that way in the questions of disarmament because he was not well-versed in the problem. But now I am convinced of his conscious intention to destroy our defence potential.”

It is said that Margaret Thatcher sympathized with Gorbachev and he agreed with her views on many matters. Did it influence his course in international affairs?

He highly respected Mrs. Thatcher, but agreed with her only until the end of 1989. She believed that Gorbachev made a grave mistake by following Kohl’s line in the German question, which violated Britain’s interests. She suggested, just like Mitterand, that Gorbachev coordinate his course with Britain and France, so that the model of Germany’s reunification correspond to the interests of the three powers. That is, there should be a confederation which would make it possible to leave the FRG in NATO and the GDR in the Warsaw Pact. From 1990 onwards Gorbachev began to receive everybody, from American schoolchildren and teachers to American clergymen. But he didn’t receive Willi Brandt or Neil Kinnock, the head of the Socialist International, because the latter opposed his too close contacts with Kohl. Gorbachev heeded the advice of Ambassador Kvitsinsky and made a one-sided choice. In general, his thinking knew no alternatives. He centered his attention on Kohl whom he regarded the most reliable and intelligent political figure, although the latter compared him with Goebbels at one time. And no arguments could influence Gorbachev.

There Was No Coup. It Was a Feint

Whose view did Gorbachev heed?

He thought that there should be only one architect of perestroika’, this was why he didn’t heed the opinion even of Premier Ryzhkov. The latter often objected Gorbachev at politburo meetings, particularly on financial matters, but he insisted on his views and decisions. As a result, many blunders were made in the economy, which adversely influenced the population’s living standards.

What was the reason for staging the coup in 1991 and who needed it?

There was no coup, it was a feint. Before leaving for holidays Gorbachev gave instructions for preparing extraordinary measures and working out models. These questions were discussed for a very long time. In December 1990 I spoke at a politburo meeting of the need to adopt extraordinary measures to cope with the grave economic situation in the country. It was necessary to introduce price control and demonopolization.

If it was a feint, what aims did it pursue?

It was planned to have a demonstration of force in February 1991. At that time tanks had no shells and soldiers had no cartriges for tommy-guns. This should have been a warning to those who intended to dismember the Soviet Union. Yeltsin wanted to turn the USSR into a confederation. The supreme authorities with Gorbachev at the head would have only representative functions, while all power would be concentrated in Yeltsin’s hands in Moscow. And the regions would be ruled by the local heads. Yeltsin’s main argument was as follows: Russia will cease to be the “milch cow” for all others, and will now look after itself properly.

In other words, it was intended to scare the West and our own separatists with the help of GKChP…

In a way, yes. But as a result, they have gone too far. There were plans to isolate all those who opposed the suggested measures.

What part did the Central Committee play in the preparation of that scheme?

There was only Shenin from the CC. Nobody from the politburo members knew about these plans. Only one head of a CC department was informed. I didn’t know either. When I came to the CC from a country house where I spent Saturdays and Sundays and met Shenin, I asked him about all this. He didn’t give me an elaborate answer, but said that it was a pity that they hadn’t included me in their team. And he is still cross with me for my refusal to support GKChP.

When did Gorbachev feel that it was necessary to distance himself from the putschists?

When Gorbachev was contacted on August 17 and 18 and a report was presented to him that everything was ready, he said: “Well, boys, you do whatever you think fit. I won’t play your games any longer.” In other words, he simply became frightened. Or he realized that their team was somewhat strange, to say the least, with two heavy drinkers, Yanayev and Pavlov.

Valentin Falin. Born April 3, 1926, in Leningrad. After graduating from the Moscow Institute of International Relations in 1950 he worked at the Soviet Control Commission in Berlin. In 1951 – 1958 he worked at the USSR Foreign Ministry, in 1958 – 59 at the CC CPSU and in 1959 – 1978 at the Foreign Ministry again. In 1971 – 78 he was the Ambassador of the USSR to the German Federal Republic. In 1978 – 1982 he worked at the CC CPSU as the deputy head of the foreign policy department. In 1982 – 86 he was a political observer in the newspaper “Izvestia”. In 1986 – 1988 he was the head of the NOVOSTI Press Agency. In 1988 – 91 he was the head of the international department of the CC CPSU and one of its secretaries. From 1992 until 1999 he worked at the Institute on problems of security and disarmament in Germany, at Hamburg University and at Hamburg Higher School of economics and politics. At present he is a professor at the Academy of State Service under the presidential administration of the Russian Federation.

>USSR2 File: Demise of Putinist regime, formation of "combat guards" spelled out in documents of Red Youth Vanguard, the continuing CPSU’s youth wing

>Oath of the AKM Soldier

The soldier of the advance guard of red young people,
Recognizing the provision of the manuals of organization,
I swear to the last drop of my blood,
To battle for the high Communist ideals,
To fight for the restoration of my great native land –
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
By all forces to draw near the establishment,
Authorities of working people!
In this minute I feel the unity,
with all soldiers of the advance guard of red young people.
But if I destroy this oath,
let me be overtaken by the anger and contempt of my comrades.
Our native land – USSR!
The future belongs to us!

Pictured here, a “soldier” of the Red Youth Vanguard (AKM), the youth wing of the “restored”/continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU)–to be distinguished from the potemkin Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF)–marches in the anti-Putin, anti-globalization “Anticapitalism-2006” parade, on October 1. The Union of Communist Youth of the Russian Federation (affiliated with the CPRF), the Revolutionary Komsomol (affiliated with the Russian Communist Workers’ Party-Revolutionary Party of Communists, RCWP-RPC), and the pseudo-communist, red-brown National Bolsheviks also participated in the demonstration. The assault rifle in the AKM logo, it can be safely surmised, has the imprimatur of the CPSU leadership and offers some insight into the direction of post-Putin Russian politics.

Oleg Shenin, August 1991 coup plotter and chair of the continuing CPSU, appeared before the sixth congress of the Red Youth Vanguard in January 2005 and delineated the role of the CPSU’s new youth wing in the impending communist-scripted dramas called “The Overthrow of the Putinist Regime and Its Western Capitalist Lackeys” and its immediate segue into “The Restoration of the USSR.” As blogged earlier, Shenin is running on the CPSU ticket in Russia’s 2008 presidential election, a political development that totally validates the Golitsynian thesis regarding the bogus demise of Soviet communism. Like most communists, Shenin is long-winded in his address to the AKM congress:

The respected comrades are delegates! The welcome guests of congress!

Impressions from the first part of the work of congress show that the organization confidently dvi-zhetsya forward, it grows and is developed. It is today accepted, without the exaggeration, the historical solution – the “advance guard of red young people” it is preobrazovan in the All-Union Communist youth organization. I congratulate all on this truly major event!

We are satisfied by record in the regulations about the fact that AKM works under the political leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and it prepares its members for the entrance in CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION. The basis of our interrelations is complete ideological accord and the organizational independence of youth organization.

CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION will pay special attention to education, to explanatory work among the young people. As it was recorded in the resolution OF THE XIII party conference (16-18 January of 1924 the correctness of party leadership it means that “the party cannot allow flattery to young people, but it must not allow also the system of shouts and bureaucratic guardianship. The patient explanation of the bases of leninism one only can reach purpose “.

This it is possible to dostich’ only by persistent study of Marxism-Leninism, by training conscious proletarian discipline in the organization, based on the class estimation of events and phenomena of public life. It is necessary to attempt to be a maximally educated and cultural young person. Entire this you will not reach without the studies and the fight for our common purposes. The best benefit for AKM, than Lenin’s speech V.I. at THE III congress of the union of young people on 2 October, 1920, you will not devise.

In the present, rapidly mature for the revolution situation, first priority is the task of structuring AKM, overgrowth active membership, attraction to its side of entire very best, foremost, socially living. It follows to expect the fast course of events in Russia and in the Ukraine, attempts at the realization of the new wave of colonial counterrevolution in Moldavia and Dniester republic, Kirghizia and Kazakhstan. Will not remain aside and Belorussia, which the American imperialism by Bush’s mouths was included in the “five” of its bitten enemies (country of “tyranny” and “oppression”!) Should be strengthened the union of Russia and Belorussia and preserved the remainders of socialism in this sister republic.

Komsomol “is genetically” inclined to the concrete matter. This indicates penetration from within and work:

– in the working associations, the trade unions, the strike and strike committees. The organization of the protest actions (100 years ago, into the very peak of the first Russian revolution, during the December armed riot the average age of the members OF RSDRP – RUSSIAN SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC WORKERS’ PARTY in Moscow it was 23 years);

– in the organs of local self-guidance, the house committees, “turning” them in the side of the restoration of mass councils – basic organizational form of the dictatorship of the proletariat and socialist state;

– on the creation of working, combat guards;

– in the “legal” organizations of the type of young scientists and specialists, sport and physical culture, amateur artistic activity, female, veteranskikh and so forth and the like it is especially important to fix contact and interaction with the formed by “secret” order organizations of ograblenykh veterans, your grand-dads and grandmothers, in essence. Not have there positions will be incorrect;

– in the schools, PTU and technical schools (colleges).

To in no way not manage without the work in the primary structures, for the class reorientation of soldiers, soldier, sailors, militiamen, junior officers, fight for their human dignity and active stand in life. Vital is the protection of political prisoners, those, whom for regimes it was possible to hide for the lattice, the support of their relatives and close ones – these are our the holy matter and responsibility.

Are necessary the breakthrough of information blockade, work in THE MEDIA (especially on the television), with comparatively progressive journalists. Should be arranged attack, raised the widespread scandal around such avenue, “yellow” publications as “Komsomol truth” and “Moscow Komsomol member” on the unconditional withdrawal from their name, in the essence of commodity “brand”, “Komsomol” designation how they unscrupulously deal, earning on this of money.

Finally, the international duty requires the development of international communication service with the related youth organizations, in the first place, in the states of real socialism (Cuba, PDRK – PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF KOREA, C.P.R. – CHINESE PEOPLES’ REPUBLIC, Laos, Vietnam).

One should separately dwell on a question about the “national idea”, which “search for” and in no way can find criminal- bureaucratic vendible regime, and “right”, both socialists and centrists. It seems that this idea itself logically escapes from the creation of the people genius of Pushkin. It is symbolic, that tomorrow meeting is conducted on Puskinskaya area. Specifically, its creation reflects people spirit, its socialist, humanistic aspirations, it is pierced by fight for the freedom from any servitude, the oppression and the operations. And not only. In the youth this excellent feeling as love blooms. Read or again re-read the amorous lyric poetry of Pushkin, and you will understand that she can be maximally tender and infantile clean, knightly- elevated and carnal- passionate, mischievous and even frivolous, but never – banal and dirty.

However, capital is attempted to bring up in the young people, besides extreme selfishness and individualism, vsedozvolennost’ and lewdness, propagandizes all conceivable and unthinkable defects and unnatural inclinations (for which, by the way, with the primitive communal system was assumed death, together with the cowardice and the treachery). Consequently, fight against the injustice, the greediness and the money grubbing, for the moral cleanliness, simplicity and modesty in the contact, as this is recorded in the regulations – is also the important application of force of Communist young people.

As wrote the Soviet philosopher OF E.V. Of il’enkov of the millstone of world capital thus far “they continue to revolve with the gnashing, the squeak and the crash, breaking young lives, mutilating fates, imperiously making it necessary young people to reflect and to search for output from the tragic situation. Only checked and theoretically adjusted way – Marxist- Leninist study, scientific communism “. It is difficult for the understanding and the understanding, but it does not have alternatives. Our future – dictatorship of the proletariat, realized through the Soviet regime and its Communist political organization, socialism, the Soviet Union! It is worthwhile to live and to fight in this name!

Thanks for the attention and the enormous to all of successes!

29 January 2005

In the Western media AKM has registered only as a small blip on the radar screen of anti- globalization activism. AKM, however, has sponsored the “Anticapitalism” marches that have paraded through Moscow annually for at least five years. A number of photos from the 2002 march can be found at the National Bolshevik Party website. Nothing whatsoever has been said in the Western media about AKM comprising the continuing CPSU’s youth wing. Pictured here, AKM members trample the pro-Putin United Russia party flag during the Anticapitalism-2006 parade.

The CPRF, the co-founders of which were Shenin, Gennady Zyuganov and other hardliners from the “old” CPSU, has apparently served–to use communist lingo–its “historic mission” of deceiving the West and flushing out revisionists, reformists, opportunists, “rightists,” “Gorbachevists,” and counter-revolutionaries in Russia. Notwithstanding all of the neo-Stalinist blather about “Gorbachevists,” Mike (“I’ll Always Be a Communist”) Gorbachev–who recently penned a sequel to his famous introduction to perestroika called Understanding Perestroika–is executing his scripted part well in Moscow’s long-range play. Incidentally, during an October 2005 meeting of United Russia’s Komsomol-like youth wing, the Young Guards, AKM leader Sergei Udaltsov, who was present, contemptuously splashed a glass of water in the face of Gorbachev, who was also present.

The “tactical missions” of the AKM are described in a resolution of the youth wing’s fifth congress, which occured in April 2004 when the CPSU–which was “restored” on February 29 of that year–adopted AKM as its youth wing. The reference below to physical training as one component in the AKM indoctrination process indicates that the CPSU leadership expects its youth wing to be engaged in street fighting. Futhermore, one of the tactical missions of the AKM is to prepare young citizens of the Not-So-Former Soviet Union for admission into the continuing CPSU.

The 5th congress OF AKM, being guided by the report of central staff AKM, notes that the Communist motion in Russia and republic ofs THE USSR survives serious crisis. The tactics of exceptionally parliamentary fight with the bourgeois authority finally proved its inaccuracy and insolvency. Overcoming the crisis is possible only under the leadership of the united, revolutionary Communist Party, which will become real alternative the opportunists of all colors.

In the prevailing situation the congress OF AKM declares, that for activating the Communist motion in the territory OF THE USSR, for the mass attraction of young people in the ranks of left opposition AKM in the period 2004-2005 it is necessary to pay primary attention to the realization of the following tactical missions:

1. to propagandize among all are layer population the restored united Communist Party of the Soviet Union, her program and regulations, tselenapravlenno to prepare members AKM for the entrance in CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION.

2. together with CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION to attain the creation of the revolutionary front of oppositional forces in the territory OF THE USSR, purpose of which is removal from the authority of the police regime of Putin in Russia and the pro-Western regimes in the republic ofs THE USSR, restoration of the Soviet regime, socialism and step by step revival of the Soviet Union on the basis of the results of the All-Union referendum on 17 March, 1991.

3. to regularly carry out bright protest actions under the general slogan “Russia without Putin. You give civil insubordination!”.

4. to constantly develop contacts with the friendly Communist and patriotic organizations of Russia within the framework of Molodezhnaya left Front. To strengthen contacts with the foreign Communist organizations.

5. to establish close contacts with the Komsomol organizations, which support CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION in the republic ofs THE USSR, for the purpose of the subsequent revival of united komsomol on the territory of the Soviet Union.

6. to strengthen interaction of central staff AKM with the regional and local departments AKM. To appoint from the number of members of the central staff AKM of regional coordinators. To regional departments AKM to achieve planned departures into the adjacent regions for the purpose of shaping of new departments AKM.

7. to strengthen agitation and propaganda work among the working young people, students and schoolboys for the purpose of the popularization of Communist idea, attraction of new members in AKM and CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION.

8. to increase the level of the theoretical preparation of terms AKM. To organize the participation of members AKM in the work of Marxist-Leninist universities on the base OF CPSU – COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION.

9. to constantly increase the qualitative level of newspaper and Internet site AKM. To increase the periodicity of the output of the newspaper OF AKM “zero shot” to two times per month with a simultaneous increase in the print run.

10. Tselenapravlenno to strengthen the physical training of terms AKM, to regularly carry out the training collections of terms AKM in the regions. In the period the years- autumn of 2004 to conduct the All-Union collections of terms AKM.

11. actively to work within the framework of the committee of the protection of political prisoners – champions for socialism. To carry out the planned collection of cash resources for rendering aid to the political prisoner in Russia and republic ofs THE USSR.

12. to contribute to the development of the activity of anti-fascist movement in the territory OF THE USSR.

13. to constantly accomplish ideological and organizational strengthening AKM from below upward.

the 5th congress OF AKM declares about the invariability of our course of fight for the restoration of the authority of workers, for socialism, for the step by step revival of the union of fraternal peoples – USSR.

Down police regime of Putin! Socialism or death!
Our Native land – USSR!

17 April 2004

During the seventh congress of AKM, held in April 2006, the CPSU’s youth wing resolved to carry out a number of “basic directives” for the 2006-2007 period. Among those priorities will be to support Shenin’s bid for the Russian Federation presidency.

– conducting wide agitation and propaganda campaign on the total boycott of bourgeois state.
– organization and active participation in the protest appearances of citizens against the antisocial policy of the acting authority of all levels.
– active participation in the selections of all levels (in the form of the support of candidates from the left-wing forces or the boycott of selections) for the purpose of the propaganda of Communist idea, and also program and practical activity AKM. Assistance in the advancement of united oppositional candidate at the Presidential elections RF in 2008.
– direct participation in the formation of the extrasystemic united left opposition.
– creation of circumferential regional is center AKM in the territory of the activity of organization.
– organization and conducting action “anti-capitalism” together with the allies.
– creation of the All-Union center of antifascist resistance.
– formation in the regional departments AKM of analytical groups with further output to the creation of All-Union analytical center.

Meanwhile, the shopping mall regimes of the West lurch along in their sleepwalk. I can see the gears slowly grinding in the minds of many non-communists as they struggle to understand how anyone can still believe in communism. If that is so, then you really and truly don’t understand communism . . . to the advantage of the communists.

KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn, who would be 80 years old at this point and who has been living under deep cover for over 40 years, must be watching events in the Not-So-Former Soviet Union with intense interest.

>Useful Idiots Bin: FSB-financed Institute of Globalization Studies rallies Russian anti-globalists, advocates infiltration of religious groups

>Pictured here at Russia’s First Social Forum (2005) are “retired” Colonel Anton Surikov, “former” agent of the GRU (looking at camera), and “retired” Major General of State Security Aleksey Kondaurov, Fifth Political Directorate of the KGB and later head of oil giant Yukos’ security department (to the immediate left of Surikov, looking away from camera). Socialist online publication Left Russia asks: “These people and those behind them are sponsoring the “new left” in Russia. What are their intentions?”

The Russian Security and Intelligence Apparatus Manipulates the “New Left”

“Authorities expose KGB-funded think tank with links to Communist Party.” Sound like a newspaper headline from the Cold War? Probably, but it’s just as applicable now in 2006. The Institute of Globalization Studies (IPROG) in Moscow is an important component in the global anti-globalization movement, which is little more than warmed-over neo-communism. Anti-globalists, it should be emphasized, are not opposed to world and regional government. They merely reject the concept that capitalists should control such institutions. One can find departments of globalization studies at multitudes of Western universities where professors of whatever continue their monotonous harangues against capitalism in our “post”-communist world.

Prolific socialist writer Boris Kagarlitsky directs IPROG and is a big gun in the Russian anti-globalization movement. Kagarlitsky replaced Mikhail Delyagin, who transferred laterally into the post of chairman of Rodina’s policy program committee, a left-nationalist party that defected from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) and which Left Russia classifies as “right-wing.” Kagarlitsky, who was jailed for anti-Soviet political activities between 1982 and 1983, appears to fall into KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn’s category of “controlled dissident.” The CPRF, the reader should be reminded, is little more than a front for the continuing Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Kagarlitsky’s peers in North America include Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Michel Chossudovsky, professor of economics at the University of Ottawa and founder of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Chossudovksy is referred to as the “Canadian Chomsky.” His father Evgeny, according to a eulogy at the CRG website, was a Russian Jewish émigré who maintained a “patriotic attachment” to Russia and a “sympathy for socialist ideas.” The elder Chossudovksy died on January 4, 2006. One would be inclined to lump the younger Chossudovksy into the “red diaper baby” brigade, along with anti-communist Front Page Magazine founder David Horowitz, who finally “saw the light” and abandoned leftism in favor of reality.

Globetrotting Hugo Chavez, the neo-communist dictator of Venezuela, approvingly flourished a copy of Chomsky’s book Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance (2003) during his September 20 “Bush is the Devil” tirade at the United Nations. Not surprisingly, after this dubious endorsement, sales of Chomsky’s book rocketed on, jumping to #1 on paperback and #6 hardcover in only several days.

According to Left Russia, an apparently independent publication by self-described “socialist intelligentsia,” Kagarlitsky owes his current position at IPROG to Anton Surikov, the GRU agent who—in a stunning nexus of communist manipulation–organized the summer 1999 rendezvous between deceased GRU asset Shamil Basayev and Yeltsin chief of staff Alexander Voloshin in Nice, France. In a 2002 Financial Sense Online article, American geopolitical analyst Jeff Nyquist refers to this furtive meeting, citing Kagarlitsky, which was apparently foundational in setting up Basayev as the Kremlin’s whipping boy for “Chechen terrorism.”

Surikov is currently on the staff of IPROG. As such, we do not hesitate labeling this Russian think tank a combined FSB/GRU front. If that fact is not intriguing enough, consider the fact that retired FSB General Alexei Kondaurov has been financing the activities of IPROG during Kagarlitsky’s tenure. For those benighted “Russia experts” who would have us believe that the “post”-communist Russian security and intelligence apparatus is no longer motivated by ideology but rather by sheer power, think again. The Suirikov case exposes a continuing nexus between the FSB, Russian communists in particular, and the Russian left in general. During the days of overt communism in the Soviet Union, the Committee for State Security (KGB) served as the sword of the CPSU. Since the CPSU continues to rule the neo-Soviet state, we can only conclude that the guiding ideology of the FSB in 2006 is still Marxism.

Left Russia contains links to Northstar Compass, which is published by the Toronto-based International Council of Friendship and Solidarity with Soviet People, which is “dedicated to the re-establishment of the Soviet Union as a socialist state.” The Northstar Compass regularly reprints statements from Oleg Shenin, chair of the continuing CPSU. Left Russia also contains a link to Justin Raimondo’s, which is one of several reasons why we do not hesitate to classify Raimondo as a leftist.

Kagarlitsky’s Appointed Director of IPROG on Surikov’s Request

According to Anton Suirikov’s latest revelation, he was the one who requested that Boris Kagarlitsky was appointed the director of the Moscow Institute for Globalization Studies (IPROG) in 2002 when Mikhail Deliagin, the founder of the Institute and its first director, had accepted a position in Mikhail Kasianov’s government. Deliagin, a long-time associate of Surikov, is also a prominent member of the right-wing “Rodina” party, banned from running in the last Moscow elections for a racist video aired for its electoral campaign.

Surikov latest revelations come from his public correspondence with Oleg Grechenevskii, a long-time dissident and human-rights activist from St. Petersburg, who has been writing extensively on “Filin’s gang” – the group led by the military oligarch Vladimir Filin, allegedly involved in narcotrafficking, illegal arms trade, and money laundering.

In Surikov’s words, he asked Deliagin to appoint Kagarlitsky director of IPROG after Kagarlitsky had told Surikov that wanted the job. This request came two years after Kagarlitsky, then the head of the political section of the neoliberal Moscow weekly Novaya Gazeta, published his article on “the conspiracy in Nice” in which he described Surikov as “the ‘former’ officer of army intelligence” and fingered him as the person responsible for organizing the meeting between Shamil Basaev and Alexander Voloshin. (1) Kagarlitsky’s article also describes Surikov’s meeting with Basaev in late August of 1999 and all but explicitely connects Surikov and his associates to the Moscow explosions in September 1999. This is how Surikov describes his contacts with Kagarlistky when the latter was preparing that article.

“In the beginning of 2000 Mr. Kagarlitsky visited me on his own initiative to talk about the alleged conspiracy between Mr. Basaev and the Kremlin in the summer of 1999. He asked me several questions. I responded at length to those questions that related to me personally and to the political situation in general. As to several of his central questions, I did not give him any answers at all… By the way, I have no intention to answer these questions in the future as well. I read Mr. Kagarlitsky’s article of January 24, 2000 in Novaya Gazeta only after it had been published. I was neither thrilled nor disturbed by it. Back then I did not think it was of great importance. This publication did not affect my relations with Mr. Kagarlitsky at all. I just want to emphasize that I did not initiate his publication nor was I his main source of information for it.”

Surikov’s account is remarkable in several ways. As it was his tactics before, he continues to avoid confirming or denying the “central questions,” i.e., the allegations about his participation in the “conspiracy in Nice” and the very fact of the meeting between Basaev and Voloshin. This tactics allows Surikov to perpetuate the conspiracy story without formally acknowledging his part in it. Secondly, he braggs of not being “disturbed” by the allegations of him taking part in a grave international crime. Consider that Kagarlitsky article has since become a staple of anti-Russian propaganda and, as such, a part of public consciousness, especially in the West, where the images of new Russian rulers blowing up their citizens fall into the carefully cultivated soil of Russophobia. Yet Surikov seems not at all concerned with the bad name Kagarlitsky’s story gave him in the eyes of great many people around the world. This in itself is disturbing. Nor did Kagalitsky seem to have had any problems asking the man he accused in terrible crimes for a job in IPROG and later having the ”former” intelligence officer Surikov working under his directorship on a number of supposedly “left” projects like the first Social Forum and even the United Socialist Front.

According to Surikov, he was introduced to Kagarlitsky by Anatoly Baranov, a long-time associate of Surikov and the owner of and Baranov also is the chief editor of the CPRF web site Their meeting took place in the United States “in the early 1996.” It is not known what was the nature of Kagarlitsky’s visit to the United States. But it has been long established that Surikov’s first public contact with Fritz Ermarth, the high-ranking CIA official, took place in the spring of that year. It has also been known that Surikov and Ermarth worked together in the anti-Gore campaign of 1999, which peaked in the so-called Russiangate, or the BONY scandal. (2) Ermarth, who retired from the CIA in 1998, played central role in this operation. But he was clearly only a front man for some powerful Republican cabal behind him.

Two years after his meeting with Surikov in the US, Kagarlitsky was invited to give testimony to the Banking Subcommittee of US Congress (10 September 1998). The very fact of a prominent Russian Marxist being asked to testify before US Congress is rather unusual, especially considering that Kagarlitsky has no training in economic and financial matters. Kagarlitsky’s testimony was very much in line with Ermarth’s subsequesnt critique of Gore’s Russian politics. Could it be that the idea to invite Kagarlitsky to the Capitol Hill came from Ermarth and his circle?

Finally, Surikov confirms the central role of Ret. FSB General Alexei Kondaurov in financing the activities of IPROG during Kagarlitsky’s tenure. In the waning years of the Soviet Union Alexei Kondaurov occupied important positions in the Fifth Political Directorate of the KGB. His boss was General Philipp Bobkov. Eventually Bobkov wound up a head of the security service of Vladimir Gusinsky, the omnipotent oligarch and media mogul of Yeltsin’s epoch. Kondaurov, after several years of service in FSB, accepted a similar position in Khodorkovsky’s YUKOS. He became a millionaire and played active role in the attempt to ”privatize” Ziuganov’s CPRF in 2003. The attempt, led by Filin’s group and YUKOS, with the help of Ziuganov’s “intimate friend” Alexandr Prokhanov, with Boris Berezovsky behind him, eventually had failed. But Kondaurov secured for himself a seat in the State Duma from the CPRF. According to Vladimir Filin, Kondaurov sponsored not only IPROG, but the “Left Front,” one of Kagarlitsky’s political projects, “until last September.” (3)

What brought together the prominent leftist Boris Kagarlitsky and the man who could well have been his interrogator in 1982, when Kagarlitsky’s group of young socialists was arrested by KGB, is a question that deserves a separate journalistic investigation.


1) For a detailed analysis of that story, see the recent essay by Peter Dale Scott, “The Global Drug Meta-Group: Drugs, Managed Violence, and the Russian 9/11.” On Kagarlitsky’s explanations of his association with Surikov, see our report from the 2005 press-conference of the Left Front in Moscow, “Boris Kagarlitsky Defends Himself Against Accusations in Cover-Up.”

2) Surikov wrote about Ermarth’s role in Russiagate a number of times. One such account is in his 2002 article, “Did Berezovsky Buy Off Communists for US Intelligence?” at, published under the pen names “Anna Kolchak” (in English) and “Eintingon” (in Russian).

3) See interview with Filin at

Link: Left Russia

Left Russia subsequently grilled Kagarlitsky about the peculiar nature of his professional collaboration with the GRU agent Surikov. However, the researchers at Left Russia are unable to cogitate outside their small leftist box and, hence, believe that IPROG’s “renegade” FSB/GRU sponsors operate on behalf of a pro-Western cabal that is preparing a coup d’etat in Russia. Shenin and his followers in the continuing CPSU, it should be noted, beat Left Russia to the punch since the August 1991 coup plotters have long contended that the Western intelligence services sponsored Mike (“I’ll Always Be a Communist”) Gorbachev’s attempt to dismantle the first Soviet Union.

Kagarlitsky Defends Himself Against Cover -Up Accusations

In the end of June Internet weekly Left Russia published the first part of its journalistic investigation by the autonomous research group In the focus of this investigation is a group of renegade Soviet secret service officers who are allegedly involved in international drug traffiking and have ties with Western and Saudi security apparatus. Recently, this group of people made a public debut in the role of “radical communists” and “green revolutionists” (Islamic) under the cover of the Moscow Institute of Globalization Studies (IPROG) headed by the prominent Russian leftist Boris Kagarlitsky. The group believes that the Institute has become one of the centers for a pro-Western coup d’etat in Russia.

On July 1 2005 the organizers of the new social movement Left Front had a press conference. Participants included Boris Kagarlitsky, Ilya Ponomarev, Alexander Prigarin, and Boris Kravchenko. The correspondent for the Internet weekly Left Russia Dmitry Yakushev attended the event and asked Boris Kagarlitsky about his connections to secret services and Mr. Anton Surikov. What follows is the recording of their exchange.

I have a question for Boris Kagarlitsky. In 2000 Novaya Gazeta published your article about a meeting between Voloshin and Basaev. In this article you wrote that the “former” agent of GRU Anton Surikov took part in this meeting as well. Your article links the participants of this meeting to Basaev’s invasion into Dagestan and the blowing of residential buildings in Moscow. Now, five years after, Mr. Surikov works as a “senior scholar” in the Institute of Globalization Studies. How can you explain this? Do secret services of any country have something to do with your announced political initiative Left Front? Why did you hide these facts about Surikov from our left public?

This is a very interesting question. What do mean by hiding from the left public? And where from then did Mr. Yakushev learn about Surikov?

We uncovered this.

No, you did not uncover anything. You simply read our web site where we openly announced everything.

Your web site has no information about Surikov being a secret service agent and that he was involved in that meeting between Voloshin and Basaev. This story has been long forgotten and we had to dig it out. So I repeat my question: How did it happen that Mr. Surikov works in your Institute?

Now let’s talk about Surikov. You have to ask Surikov himself about the details of his biography. It is well known that I know him well and that Surikov and I collaborated together, discussed things and so on since at least 1998. And also, my relations with him became frequently visible to the public in the mid-1990s. Moreover, Surikov was often published in a number of oppositional newspapers. Now as far as the events of 1999, in the first place, I never accused anybody in anything. I simply related those facts that had become known to me. Not a single participant of those events came forward to deny those facts after I had made them public. They neither confirmed nor denied those facts. They could deny them; they could take me to court and so on. Yet they all did not say a word. Take a note that my article was published not in some marginal publication, not on the Web or some, but in Novaya Gazeta, a quite popular and influential press. Now, the article did not say anything bad about Surikov. He is a military man. This is a man who collaborates with and in the past belonged to organizations like GRU. He follows his orders.

Does he follow his orders in your Institute as well?

Ah…. It’s quite possible, but this question should be addressed to him.

But he is a member of your Institute and you are the Director.

I cannot deny this. But he is not on the permanent staff. His connections to secret services are his business. I believe in our country everyone either was or is in this situation. What is relevant in this situation is that Surikov is well-known journalist. He publishes regularly, makes his views public. The staff of our Institute does not necessarily share these views. Nevertheless we share a whole number of views, including political views. This is my first point. Secondly, he is simply involved in one concrete type of research in the Institute. This is his job as the head of this project. IPROG is not a one political team, but an expert community (“structure”) that includes people of different views.

Ilya Ponomarev: Allow me to say a few words. Dmitry Vladimirovich (Yakushev) should also keep in mind that we espouse the ideals of internationalism as the foundation of our activities. Our position on the conflict in Chechnya is also well known. We demand the speediest peaceful settlement. Comrade Surikov and a number of other members of our Institute do a number of research projects and not just research related to this problem in order to facilitate peace in Chechnya. comments

Clearly, Boris Kagarlitsky evades answering the question of our correspondent. He was asked to explain his decision to collaborate in a number of “left” projects with the man he implicated in a grave international crime. However, his evasion tricks raise new questions. For one, Kagarlitsky admits that Surikov may presently continue to have ties with secret services. But he seems to have no problems with this even though Surikov–using his position in IPROG–actively participates in the projects sponsored by Kagarlitsky’s Institute, like the First Social Forum last spring. Apparently, Kagarlitsky’s idea of left politics has become so stretchable that it includes the secret services of that very bourgeois state that Kagarlitsky and his circle claim to be in “opposition” to. We have every reason to believe that the majority of our left activists do not share his “globalist” tolerance. Yet Kagarlitsky, being one of the few leading organizers of the recent left “forums” and “movements”, has failed to inform their participants that they were discussing the “future revolution” with the “former” officers of Russian secret services like Colonel Anton Surikov and General Aleksey Kondaurov. This is a serious and dangerous business.

In the coming parts of our investigation we will be looking for answers to explain what made Kagarlitsky to give cover to Surikov and his secret service colleagues under the roof of IPROG. For now one thing is certain. Kagarlitsky continues to stand behind his article of 2000 in Novaya Gazeta, including the part concerning Surikov. If Kagarlitsky is correct, then judging by the evidence of his article one should suspect that Surikov is not only a military criminal, but also a very dangerous and experienced provocateur.

Amazingly, Kagarlitsky claims that in his article he “did not say anything bad” about Surikov. Then why he proceeds to defend him? Kagarlitsky’s arguments in defense of Surikov are neither new nor leftist. Surikov is a military man. He just obeys his orders. That’s what Kagarlitsky says. We recall hearing these arguments. In Nuremberg and many other places. Is it conceivable that a man with such a level of moral development, a man surrounded by people like Surikov, can be a leading organizer and ideologist of our broad Left?

Link: Left Russia

Russia’s “new” leftists, such as those at Left Russia, apparently have no understanding of the long-range strategy of the Kremlin to create and manipulate “independent” political parties. For example, in its summary of Russia’s First Social Forum in 2005, IPROG director Kagarlitsky disengenuously refers to the “conspicuous absence” of the CPRF delegates who were, on April 16, at a meeting of the Union of Communist Parties-Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which served as a cover for the continuing CPSU between 1993 and 2004. Nevertheless, this expose of the FSB/GRU’s machinations is a truly remarkable confirmation of KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn’s central thesis that the CPSU has long utilized the resources of the Soviet/Russian security and intelligence apparatus to create false opposition parties. The fact that the research was conducted by Russian leftists only enhances the reliability of the testimony.

Soviet Communists and Russia’s “New Left” Instruct Followers on the Infiltration of Religious Groups

IPROG’s position in the stratosphere of the Russian (communist) elite is apparently secure. On June 21 and 22, 2003 IPROG sponsored the International Forum of the Future of the Left, in Golitsyno, a Moscow suburb with apparently no relation to the famous KGB defector profiled at this blogsite. More than 130 participants from different parties and movements–including the Gorbachev Foundation; Gorbachev’s pet project, the Social Democratic Party of Russia; the CPRF and its Komsomol (Union of Communist Youth), and the continuing CPSU’s Komsomol (Red Youth Vanguard)–attended the forum.

In a previous blog we observed how Marxist teachings have warped the doctrines of various religious groups, from the social teachings of the Vatican to the World Council of Churches’ endorsements of Marxist “national liberation” movements. Forum moderator Hyder Jemal, in his speech “Religion and Social Progress,” articulated the ongoing Soviet communist plan to infiltrate religious groups:

Today believers need a left movement to overcome confessional marginality and participate in politics. But leftists should learn to cooperate with religions for the movements’ sake.

Religion and clericalism stand against each other and they should not be mixed up. Likewise the true theology is the technology of thinking, unlike clerical propaganda. The experience of “Theology of Liberation” has shown that believers and Marxists can find solidarity not only fighting the oppression, but agree on many ideological and moral positions.

Left movement should understand that:

– Religion as primordial ideological base for struggle of the oppressed has been consolidating the communities of individuals for about 2 thousand years. It resolved contradictions between individualism and solidarism;
– Religion has continually acted as a mechanism for mass mobilization in the whole field of history;
– Religion is a factor of forming protest ideology and transformation of society;
– Theology gives fundamental concepts that can be used politically.

These instructions should alarm conservative religious groups since adherents of the Religious Left among Protestants, Catholics, and Jews have whole-heartedly embraced the Gospel according to Marx. That false gospel of the oppressed “victim group” manifests itself preeminently as liberation theology in the Church of Rome, the social gospel and pacifism in the Protestant denominations, and the Jewish Renewal movement. The communist plan for the subversion of religion has been wildly successful, as one can witness especially in the interfaith/ecumenical movement, about which we blogged several weeks ago.

>Latin American File: Members of Armed Revolutionary Organization for the People of Oaxaca hurl explosives at two banks, escalating regional protests

>The Mexican Left’s violent spasm continues against the decrepit establishment of the Institutional Revolutionary Party . . . Pictured at left, a man fires a homemade rocket during a battle between strikers and unidentified opponents in Oaxaca, Mexico, on Sunday, October 1, 2006.

Banks attacked in restive Mexican city
POSTED: 1:27 p.m. EDT, October 2, 2006

OAXACA, Mexico (AP) — Protesters threw explosives at two banks in Oaxaca on Monday, shattering windows and further raising tensions in this once-charming colonial city.

The attacks on the banks by the previously unknown group called the Armed Revolutionary Organization for the People of Oaxaca follow months of violence in Oaxaca city, where protesters have set up street barricades and taken the city center. The explosions damaged the banks’ facades, but caused little other damage, city official Eliodoro Diaz said.

Protesters and news media speculated that federal forces were planning to retake the city after navy helicopters flew over the area during the weekend. But Interior Secretary Carlos Abascal insisted the helicopters and military planes were on routine supply runs that had nothing to do with the more than four months of unrest.

In response to the flyovers, protesters reinforced barricades with bags of cement and tree trunks. They have vowed to beat back any police and soldiers who moved on the city.

Fearing violence, tourists have shunned the city, which is normally popular for its exotic cuisine, colorful culture and nearby pre-Hispanic ruins. Local business associations estimate the protests have cost the city more than $300 million.

The unrest began in May, when tens of thousands of teachers seized the capital’s leafy central plaza to demand wage increases.

The following month, Gov. Ulises Ruiz sent police to attempt to retake the heart of the city. Since then, thousands of leftists, students and anarchists have joined striking teachers, building street barricades, burning buses and taking over radio and television stations.

They demand that Ruiz resign, alleging that he rigged the 2004 election and has used paramilitary gangs to attack dissidents.

At least two people have been shot to death and dozens more injured in clashes between protesters and police. On Saturday, a motorcyclist was decapitated when he ran into a wire strung across a street as part of a blockade.

Late Sunday, nearby residents and authorities clashed with protesters who had seized a tractor-trailer and were unloading its cargo.Abascal has overseen negotiations to end the standoff, but the federal government has said it will not force Ruiz to resign. Protesters maintain their demand that he leave office.

Link: CNN

>Breaking News: Two Russian bombers penetrate buffer zone near Alaska, US and Canadian fighter jets scramble to intercept

>Fighter planes intercept Russian bombers
By MARY PEMBERTON Associated Press Writer

Sept. 29, 2006, 6:25PM
© 2006 The Associated Press <!– commented out ad



ANCHORAGE, Alaska — American and Canadian fighter planes were launched to intercept a pair of Russian bombers after the bombers came close to Alaska while conducting an exercise, military officials said Friday.

The Russian aircraft on Thursday penetrated a 12-mile buffer zone near American airspace, according to the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.

The bombers never violated U.S. or Canadian airspace, said Maj. Gen. Brett Cairns, NORAD director of operations.

Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage sent four F-15s to meet the Russian aircraft, said Master Sgt. Tim Hoffman, a base information officer. Two F-15s intercepted the planes by making visual contact and verifying their identity.

The Russian planes then left the buffer zone, he said.

“We just carried out our typical mission,” Hoffman said. “They were in international airspace the whole time.”

CF-18 fighters also were launched from Canada, but did not intercept the Russian planes.

Lt. Gen. Igor Khvorov, commander of Russian long-range aviation, said the exercise involved 70 bombers, which test-fired 18 cruise missiles, the Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported.

“All the aircraft involved flew over neutral waters, and none of them came closer than 12 nautical miles to the maritime borders of any country,” Khvorov said.

What made the event somewhat unusual was that the Russian military had told the United States about the maneuvers ahead of time, Hoffman said, a sharp contrast to Cold War practices.

“They have become more open with the exercises,” he said.

Link: Houston Chronicle

More information on incident here.

>EU File: European Court of Human Rights upholds Germany’s Nazi-era homeschooling ban; 5 of 7 presiding judges Eastern European, 1 confirmed communist

>The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.
— Adolf Hitler, National Socialist Dictator of Germany, 1937

This ruling against the homeschooling Konrad family of Germany is yet another ominous development in the erosion of civil liberties in Western Europe. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is a creature of the Council of Europe (COE), which is distinct from the institutions of the European Union. To give credit where credit is due the COE did pass an anti-communist resolution earlier this year that enraged Soviet Communists and their comrades worldwide. Nevertheless, the infiltration of European bodies by lawyers and judges of Eastern European origin, who may not necessarily be clandestine communists but were still educated within the framework of Marxist law, poses a severe threat to citizens who are anti-statists by conviction. The Fifth Section of the ECHR that passed judgment on the Konrad case consisted of seven judges, five of whom are Eastern European nationals:

  1. Snejana Botoucharova, born 1955, Bulgaria; graduate, Lomonosov University, Moscow, 1984; attorney at law, Sofia, 1980-84; senior assistant professor, 1984; chief assistant professor, 1987, Kliment Ohridski University, Sofia; the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe notes: “Mrs. Botoucharova-Doїtcheva (Bulgaria) – legal adviser to the Union of Democratic Forces and several times deputy in the National Assembly – did not reply under the section entitled ‘other public activities.’ It is true that Mrs. Botoucharova-Doїtcheva had, in the past, fulfilled the function of secretary in local communist party branches.”
  2. Karel Jungwiert, born 1944, Czech Republic; graduate, Faculty of Law, Charles University, Prague, 1969; trainee barrister, 1969-71; barrister, 1974-89
  3. Volodymyr Butkevych, born 1946, Ukraine; graduate, Faculty of Law, Kyiv State University, 1965-81; professor, dean, Faculty of International Relations and International Law, Kyiv State University; director, Institute of International Relations and International Law, Kyiv State University, 1984-98
  4. Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska, born 1950, Macedonia; graduate, Cyril and Methodius Law Faculty, Skopje; judge, trial court “Skopje I,” 1978; judge, District (later Appeal) Court of Skopje, 1986
  5. Rait Maruste, born 1953, Estonia; graduate, Tartu University Law School, 1977; PhD candidate, Leningrad State University, 1984; assistant professor, department head, Tartu University, 1985; president, Supreme Court, Republic of Estonia, 1992-98

The other two presiding judges were the trial president Peer Lorenzen of Denmark and Mark Villiger of Switzerland.

Siding with the German Federal Constitutional Court, the ECHR observed:

The Federal Constitutional Court found that the interferences with the applicants’ fundamental rights were also proportionate given the general interest of society to avoid the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions. Moreover, society also had an interest in the integration of minorities. Such integration required not only that minorities with separate religious or philosophical views should not be excluded, but also that they should not exclude themselves. Therefore, the exercise and practising of tolerance in primary schools was an important goal.

This self-serving statist ruling against homeschooling–along with those European laws protecting sodomy and others that severely limit the vocalization of dissent– is one of many legal and institutional components advancing a rigorous communist jurisdiction throughout the “new European Soviet.”

The issues of admitting the Not-So-Former Soviet Bloc republics into the Council of Europe, the principal mandate of which is to defend human rights throughout member states, and by extension “ex”-communist judges onto the ECHR, has plagued COE leadership. The following history is excerpted from a July 8, 1997 report published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty:

Controversy has erupted in some Central and East European circles following the recent publication of an interview in an Alsatian newspaper (“Les dernieres Nouvelles d’Alsace,” 26 June 1997) with the Council of Europe’s outgoing number-two man. Deputy Secretary-General Peter Leuprecht told the daily he was taking early retirement this month in protest at what he called a lowering of the Council’s human-rights standards for its new Central and East European members. Leuprecht characterized those once rigid Council standards as “soft” for Eastern members.

Leuprecht is the first Council official to say in public what many in the Council of Europe Secretariat have said in private for years. The majority of Council officials clearly believe that, under pressure from West European member states like France and Germany, the 40-state organization has granted membership too fast and uncritically to many of the 16 former communist nations that have joined over the past seven years.

Velvet-gloved totalitarians and anti-homeschooling “educators” in North America will no doubt be greatly encouraged by the current COE ruling. This includes the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, which is hopelessly wedded to the “progressive,” otherwise known as Marxist, transformation of society.

Christians be warned: You can worship Jesus in your closet, but you must sacrifice your children to Caesar. The many gods of multiculturalism, otherwise known as polytheism, demand your homage.

Court Upholds Nazi-Era Ban On Homeschooling
Decision: State Must Avoid Dissent, ‘Separate Philosophical Convictions’
Posted: September 29, 2006

A new ruling from the European Human Rights Court has affirmed the German nation’s Nazi-era ban on homeschooling, concluding that society has a significant interest in preventing the development of dissent through “separate philosophical convictions.”

The Strasburg-based court addressed the issue on appeal from a Christian family whose members alleged their human rights to educate their own children according to their own religious beliefs are being violated by the ban.

The specific case addressed in the opinion involved Fritz and Marianna Konrad, who filed the complaint in 2003 and argued that Germany’s compulsory school attendance endangered their children’s religious upbringing and promotes teaching inconsistent with the family’s Christian faith.

The court said the Konrads belong to a “Christian community which is strongly attached to the Bible” and rejected public schooling because of the explicit sexual indoctrination programs that the courses there include.

The German court already had ruled that the parental “wish” to have their children grow up in a home without such influences “could not take priority over compulsory school attendance.” The decision also said the parents do not have an “exclusive” right to lead their children’s education.

The family had appealed under the European Convention on Human Rights statement that: “No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”

But the court’s ruling said, instead, that schools represent society, and “it was in the children’s interest to become part of that society.

“The parents’ right to education did not go as far as to deprive their children of that experience,” the ruling said.

“Not only the acquisition of knowledge, but also the integration into and first experience with society are important goals in primary school education,” the court said. “The German courts found that those objectives cannot be equally met by home education even if it allowed children to acquire the same standard of knowledge as provided for by primary school education.

“The (German) Federal Constitutional Court stressed the general interest of society to avoid the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions and the importance of integrating minorities into society,” the ruling said.

The court noted it was a similar argument that arose in Holland earlier, where a politician, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, sought to close down all religious schools because only the state could properly teach children “tolerance.”

The U.S.-based Home School Legal Defense Association has confirmed that nearly 40 homeschooling families are embroiled in legal battles over the issue in Germany. The group, which has quickly growing influence around the globe on the issue of homeschooling, said the German families are facing persecution for trying to educate their children in a Christian atmosphere without exposing them to the state’s harmful secular values, especially sex education.

In fact, the HSLDA just recently announced a campaign to address the persecution Christians in Germany are facing from education authorities.

Ian Slatter, a spokesman for the HSLDA, said it was launched after a mother was arrested and jailed on criminal homeschooling counts.

A report in the conservative Brussels Journal said Katharina Plett was arrested and ordered to jail while her husband fled to Austria with the family’s 12 children.

Slatter said just a few days into the campaign, there already has been a large response from American homeschoolers, with e-mails and telephone calls pouring in to the German embassy.

A website for the Practical Homeschool Magazine noted one of the first acts by Hitler when he moved into power was to create the governmental Ministry of Education and give it control of all schools, and school-related issues.

In 1937, the dictator said, “The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.”

The HSLDA said the German embassy can be reached by e-mail through its website, by telephone at 202-298-4000 or by mail at: Wolfgang Ischinger, Ambassador, German Embassy, 4645 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20007-1998.

“It is beyond belief that Germany is still enforcing a law that was written for one reason only – to be used by Hitler to control and indoctrinate German youth. It had no other redeeming value,” said Shoshona Bat-Zion on a homeschoolers’ blog.

The Pletts are part of a group of seven Baptist homeschool families who have been targeted frequently by authorities. Two families have left Germany and five others have enrolled their children in a Christian school, but their court cases remain pending.

Link: WorldNetDaily

The Home School Legal Defense Association contains more information on the Konrad case. The official ruling related to the same case can be accessed here.

>Comrades Hugo and Noam