How Gozman woke up Yarovaya. About a possible article "Rehabilitation of Nazism" and the reaction to it
The entire megaliberal public of Russia today says its sincere “thank you” to one of the brightest representatives of this, namely, Leonid Yakovlevich Gozman. Yes, yes, the same advisor working in the most advanced and innovative company Rosnano, who said just now that the actions of the Soviet SMERSH and the SS Nazi units are identical things. “Thank you” says the liberal Russian echelon Gozman for the fact that he was able to wake the deputy Irina Yarovaya, who is going to introduce a new wording of the bill on criminal punishment for the justification of Nazism. SMERSH woke Gozman, Gozman woke Yarovaya, Yarova shook our home-grown (and not only) groaned liberals ...
The deputy proposed a new version of the bill, which, admittedly, has not been discussed for a single year. The first version of this bill was proposed as early as 2009 by Boris Gryzlov and, in fact, by Irina Yarovaya herself, who, as the author, decided to make certain changes (probably, after Mr. Gozman’s conclusions). One of the main additions to the bill can be words about imposing sanctions for denying the sentence handed down by the International Military Tribunal, as well as denying the activities of the armies of the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition to maintain international peace and security during World War II.
In addition, the courts will consider the cases of those who disseminated false information about the activities of the anti-Hitler coalition during the Second World War.
In this regard, it is proposed to supplement the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a new article entitled “Rehabilitation of Nazism”. All penalties for this bill is not planned to change. Thus, persons who will be held liable under an additional article of the Criminal Code may receive a 3-year prison sentence or be fined 300 thousand rubles. If similar actions were followed by a person using his official position, the amount of the fine rises to half a million rubles, and the time of imprisonment to 5 years.
It is noteworthy that the innovations for which Irina Yarovaya was in favor today are representatives of all Duma factions, but there are also deputies among those who are not prepared to withstand factional discipline. These gentlemen declare that the new bill is “another attempt by the authorities to suppress freedom of speech”. But in fact, such deputies with a loose factional discipline themselves signify that by freedom of speech they mean, among other things, the obvious substitution of concepts, and even outright lies. Their message is about the following: we are forbidden to lie about storiesbut what about the oppositionists who survive without constant lie, to persistently unsystematic or even unsystematic ... All our work is based on the substitution of facts and the rape of history. How to survive now ?! Guard! We are deprived of freedom to lie! Uh-uh, that is, freedom of speech ...
It is worth paying attention to the fact that many domestic publications have managed to present the discussed bill (and this is still a bill that, in its updated form, was not even discussed in the State Duma) under, let's say, its own sauce. For example, the publication Vedomosti came out with the heading "The State Duma will forbid criticizing the Soviet army." At the same time, “Vedomosti” somehow does not particularly reflect on the fact that this title has nothing to do with the reality of the bill itself. And here is a criticism of the Soviet army? How does the title of the hypothetical article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Rehabilitation of Nazism” generally combine with criticism of the Soviet army? It is obvious that the authors of the material simply decided to warm up the megaliberal public so that it would publish its everyday mundane, the “weeping of Yaroslavna”, which became almost everyday due to what is not there in reality.
“Vedomosti”, among other things, leads the reaction of political scientist Alexei Chesnakov to the updated version of the bill. Chesnakov considers the wording in the bill "extremely vague." In his opinion, the bill after gaining its legal force will allow criminal prosecution of those who speak critically, for example, regarding the bombings of Hiroshima ...
But this is not how the wording of the bill is vague, but vague, say so, external interpretations. If you read the proposals of Irina Yarovoy, then the bill says in black and white that the prosecution will be organized if a person spreads false information about the activities of both the Soviet troops and the entire anti-Hitler coalition. Attention, once again: the dissemination of false information (through the media including).
If tens of thousands of civilians were killed during the bombing of Hiroshima, then does this fact require someone to sing the praises or something? .. Or if the Red Army in the first days of the Great Patriotic War suffered heavy losses and was forced to retreat inland, what bill prohibits talking about it? Yes, no! The bill will be discussed in order to put an end to the attempts to blacken white and whiten black by presenting both in a neutral gray color. As an example: the same statement by Mr. Gozman that SMERSH and the SS troops are supposedly of the same berry field.
By the way, Leonid Gozman now decided to defend his honor and dignity (and he, as he himself believes, has them ...). And now I am ready to file a lawsuit against, no less, the State Duma. Gozman, from the new:
At the same time, Gozman decided to somewhat distance himself from the individual championship in terms of voicing this idea, so that he apparently could later (well, after receiving the status of the real law by the Spring bill), declare that he was influenced by the opinions of other people. After saying that he was ready to sue the State Duma, he said that he, he says, was not the first to say such words, recalling Grossman and Solzhenitsyn. Like, if anything, then let the descendants of Grossman and Solzhenitsyn on 300 or 500 pay thousands of rubles or "treshka" with "fives" "shake" ...
Well, to declare that he was not the first to express a similar thought, and therefore not to consider himself guilty of anything is about the same as, God forgive me, hack an old woman lender and say that this is all Dostoevsky ... He supposedly , I wrote it first, and therefore I am suing you, as you denigrate my honor and dignity ... Well, an interesting train of thought! It’s not for nothing that Anatoly Borisovich himself took a man as an adviser in his time - he would suddenly throw a little idea how to get out of the water after turning over another scam.
In general, the liberal intelligentsia after expressing the idea of the deputy Yarovoi stirred up. However, such a hubbub was raised, as if before the appearance of the draft law they did nothing but engage in activities that rehabilitate fascism and Nazism. Or someone on this really earned bread and butter. Judging by the number of various textbooks and “historical research in which the history of the country was raped without a shadow of author's embarrassment, there were many such masters in our country.
The deputy proposed a new version of the bill, which, admittedly, has not been discussed for a single year. The first version of this bill was proposed as early as 2009 by Boris Gryzlov and, in fact, by Irina Yarovaya herself, who, as the author, decided to make certain changes (probably, after Mr. Gozman’s conclusions). One of the main additions to the bill can be words about imposing sanctions for denying the sentence handed down by the International Military Tribunal, as well as denying the activities of the armies of the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition to maintain international peace and security during World War II.
In addition, the courts will consider the cases of those who disseminated false information about the activities of the anti-Hitler coalition during the Second World War.
In this regard, it is proposed to supplement the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a new article entitled “Rehabilitation of Nazism”. All penalties for this bill is not planned to change. Thus, persons who will be held liable under an additional article of the Criminal Code may receive a 3-year prison sentence or be fined 300 thousand rubles. If similar actions were followed by a person using his official position, the amount of the fine rises to half a million rubles, and the time of imprisonment to 5 years.
It is noteworthy that the innovations for which Irina Yarovaya was in favor today are representatives of all Duma factions, but there are also deputies among those who are not prepared to withstand factional discipline. These gentlemen declare that the new bill is “another attempt by the authorities to suppress freedom of speech”. But in fact, such deputies with a loose factional discipline themselves signify that by freedom of speech they mean, among other things, the obvious substitution of concepts, and even outright lies. Their message is about the following: we are forbidden to lie about storiesbut what about the oppositionists who survive without constant lie, to persistently unsystematic or even unsystematic ... All our work is based on the substitution of facts and the rape of history. How to survive now ?! Guard! We are deprived of freedom to lie! Uh-uh, that is, freedom of speech ...
It is worth paying attention to the fact that many domestic publications have managed to present the discussed bill (and this is still a bill that, in its updated form, was not even discussed in the State Duma) under, let's say, its own sauce. For example, the publication Vedomosti came out with the heading "The State Duma will forbid criticizing the Soviet army." At the same time, “Vedomosti” somehow does not particularly reflect on the fact that this title has nothing to do with the reality of the bill itself. And here is a criticism of the Soviet army? How does the title of the hypothetical article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Rehabilitation of Nazism” generally combine with criticism of the Soviet army? It is obvious that the authors of the material simply decided to warm up the megaliberal public so that it would publish its everyday mundane, the “weeping of Yaroslavna”, which became almost everyday due to what is not there in reality.
“Vedomosti”, among other things, leads the reaction of political scientist Alexei Chesnakov to the updated version of the bill. Chesnakov considers the wording in the bill "extremely vague." In his opinion, the bill after gaining its legal force will allow criminal prosecution of those who speak critically, for example, regarding the bombings of Hiroshima ...
But this is not how the wording of the bill is vague, but vague, say so, external interpretations. If you read the proposals of Irina Yarovoy, then the bill says in black and white that the prosecution will be organized if a person spreads false information about the activities of both the Soviet troops and the entire anti-Hitler coalition. Attention, once again: the dissemination of false information (through the media including).
If tens of thousands of civilians were killed during the bombing of Hiroshima, then does this fact require someone to sing the praises or something? .. Or if the Red Army in the first days of the Great Patriotic War suffered heavy losses and was forced to retreat inland, what bill prohibits talking about it? Yes, no! The bill will be discussed in order to put an end to the attempts to blacken white and whiten black by presenting both in a neutral gray color. As an example: the same statement by Mr. Gozman that SMERSH and the SS troops are supposedly of the same berry field.
By the way, Leonid Gozman now decided to defend his honor and dignity (and he, as he himself believes, has them ...). And now I am ready to file a lawsuit against, no less, the State Duma. Gozman, from the new:
I consider Stalin to be no less criminal than Hitler and Stalin’s punitive organs are no less disgusting than Hitler’s punitive organs.
At the same time, Gozman decided to somewhat distance himself from the individual championship in terms of voicing this idea, so that he apparently could later (well, after receiving the status of the real law by the Spring bill), declare that he was influenced by the opinions of other people. After saying that he was ready to sue the State Duma, he said that he, he says, was not the first to say such words, recalling Grossman and Solzhenitsyn. Like, if anything, then let the descendants of Grossman and Solzhenitsyn on 300 or 500 pay thousands of rubles or "treshka" with "fives" "shake" ...
Well, to declare that he was not the first to express a similar thought, and therefore not to consider himself guilty of anything is about the same as, God forgive me, hack an old woman lender and say that this is all Dostoevsky ... He supposedly , I wrote it first, and therefore I am suing you, as you denigrate my honor and dignity ... Well, an interesting train of thought! It’s not for nothing that Anatoly Borisovich himself took a man as an adviser in his time - he would suddenly throw a little idea how to get out of the water after turning over another scam.
In general, the liberal intelligentsia after expressing the idea of the deputy Yarovoi stirred up. However, such a hubbub was raised, as if before the appearance of the draft law they did nothing but engage in activities that rehabilitate fascism and Nazism. Or someone on this really earned bread and butter. Judging by the number of various textbooks and “historical research in which the history of the country was raped without a shadow of author's embarrassment, there were many such masters in our country.
Information