17 July marks 95 years since the murder of the Romanovs

481
It is more and more habitual that the Russian people are preparing for the day of special commemoration of the holy Royal Martyrs. It could not be otherwise - they gave themselves in the name of saving Russia. The time comes to germinate in the soul of the people the grain that the royal sacrifice has become. It’s great happiness to know that after dozens of years of lies, slander and oblivion in thousands of churches in countless numbers of houses on this day, July 17, a grateful prayer is going on, bright in its sadness.

But how we all feel - besides sadness, there is a taste of Easter joy. Still shy. Like those who, doubting, stood in the tomb of the Lord, where He was no longer crucified. But the angels announced: The one you are looking for is not here. Obeying our ordinary ideas, and we, like the disciples of the Savior, are now “looking for” our holy Tsar Nicholas and his Royal Family. But is he where we look for him?

It is impossible to overestimate the importance and necessity of the processions, prayers, memorial meetings and outward manifestations of love, in particular, placing the sincere words “Forgive us, Sovereign” where many could see them.

But are our actions enough? And is there a danger of leaving the outside of the case? From here, as you know, is only one step to Pharisaism, when they honor with their lips, but their hearts are far away. This was precisely the attempt to say in the previous article “Tsar's business”. However, it was said, apparently, it was unnecessarily harsh and, judging by the comments, it embarrassed some readers. May they forgive the author, and in his thoughts he did not question the righteousness and necessity of the ministry now being done.

But, as the Lord says, one must do the same and not leave the other behind. Please, brothers and sisters, ponder the following. Would you like the Royal Martyrs so that the places of their commemoration bear such names as Ganina Yama or the logging of the Pigs, which is obsessively “pushed” now by the Piglets?

The place of royal Golgotha, as we all know, is in Yekaterinburg, where the Temple-on-the-Blood was erected. There, as it should, we are going to bring a prayer. Our desire to visit that mournful suburb, where the fanatics in haste dealt with the honest remains of the holy martyrs, is also explicable.

But shouldn't we think about renaming? Not only is everything still happening in the so-called Sverdlovsk region. It is named after the villain, who played, as it is more and more obvious, one of the most key (if not the most key) roles in regicide. The word "pit" has the most ancient origin and in translation from Sanskrit means hellish region. Is it not necessary to achieve for the whole region and for the area of ​​abandoned mines, established by investigator Sokolov, as the place of a possible finding of the relics of martyrs, before making processions, a new, proper name?

And can not our indifference in this matter be an alarming sign of the not quite right realization of which activity most closely corresponds to the feat of the royal martyrs?

It is necessary to resist being drawn into Pharisee worship. The very thing that Christ said: you are building the tombs of the prophets and saints, who were beaten by your ancestors, than you testify even more against yourself. It is not by chance that names are mentioned here, because much begins with the correction of names. Indeed, in the very persistence with which the authorities refuse to rename the same Sverdlovsk region or to remove from the map of Moscow the mention of another participant in the Yekaterinburg villainy (Voikov) contains a direct indication.

The present country is too far from the Russia for which our great newly-born Tsar Nikolai made his great sacrifice. Amid total decay, betrayed daily and hourly by dignitaries, ministers, entourage, generals, the Tsar was alone in the battle for Orthodoxy, Autocracy and the People. He worked tirelessly to strengthen the Orthodox faith, despite all the slander and mockery of the "enlightened intelligentsia". Created conditions for unprecedented economic and demographic growth. Provided breaking sabotage and theft necessary army. He led it and led to victory in world war, to the possession of Constantinople and access to the Holy Land.

And for all this was mean betrayed. Weak, stupid and short-sighted grandee-conspirators were not able to resist the elements held by the Sovereign. And after even more vile and evil usurpers, the Bolsheviks established their dictator, the country with a blunt indifference took the news of regicide.

The emperor never allowed the possibility of a constitutional monarchy, the possibility of becoming a decorative element of a society striving for disintegration.

The emperor rejected the path of tyranny. An attempt to force the throne to serve with violence and repression. Turn subjects into slaves.

The emperor wanted a truly Christian, free, prosperous Russia. That is his testament.

Today, our task is to get out of the stupor and begin a coherent activity to embody the royal desire. Only this will become a true repentance, an excuse for indifferent estrangement, which our ancestors of 95 fell into due to their own and no fault of their own.

May our processions and penitential prayers be accepted. But faith without works is dead. The visible manifestations of penitential piety will not lead us into a new detachment, into the beauty of imaginary repentance. But may they be the guarantee of a nationwide movement for the acquisition of the Russia that the Sovereign bequeathed to create.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

481 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +41
    17 July 2013 09: 55
    Sani Romanov has a good reason to "throw up" today drinks
    I feel sorry for the family, the tsar is not a bit ... In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was troublesome and more worthy people died terrible deaths.
    1. +26
      17 July 2013 09: 57
      No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children, unjustifiable and bloody atrocities!


      And the assassination of Princess Elizabeth Fedorovna and other members of the Romanov dynasty can be compared only with the atrocities of the Nazis:


      On the night of July 5 (18), 1918, Grand Duchess Elizaveta Fedorovna was killed by the Bolsheviks: dumped in the Novaya Selimskaya mine 18 km from Alapaevsk. [12] Together with her died:

      Grand Duke Sergey Mikhailovich;
      Prince John Konstantinovich;
      Prince Konstantin Konstantinovich (younger);
      Prince Igor Konstantinovich;
      Prince Vladimir Pavlovich Paley;
      Fedor Semenovich Remez, managing the affairs of Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich;
      sister of the Martha-Mariinsky monastery of Varvara (Yakovlev).

      All of them, except for the shot Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich, were dumped into the mine alive. When the bodies were removed from the mine, it was discovered that some victims lived after the fall, dying of hunger and wounds. At the same time, the wound of Prince John, who fell on the ledge of the mine near the Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, was bandaged by part of her apostle. Nearby peasants said that for several days singing of prayers came from the mine.

      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%95%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0
      %B0_%D0%A4%D1%91%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0
      1. +28
        17 July 2013 10: 01
        Quote: GreatRussia
        No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children, is in no way justified and bloody atrocity!

        And why do you stamp common truths. Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...
        1. +6
          17 July 2013 10: 06
          Quote: seasoned
          And why do you stamp common truths. Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...

          Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?
          1. +20
            17 July 2013 10: 16
            Quote: GreatRussia
            Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?

            His job was for all of Russia to bear responsibility and pursue a policy to strengthen it. It was necessary to pursue a tough policy means not to shy away from blood, it is better to execute hundreds but save millions, and he played with his wife in Rasputinovism and led Russia to the Russian revolt "cruel and merciless." At the same time, all the nobility and the intelligentsia were "mowed down", the country was filled with blood "brother against brother went". Why glorify him? Yeltsin, with this "martyrdom", in my opinion, encrypted his guilt in the demolition of the Ipatevsky house
            1. -21
              17 July 2013 10: 28
              Quote: seasoned
              . It was necessary to pursue a tough policy means not to shun blood, it’s better to execute hundreds but save millions

              This was done by the Bolsheviks, but he remained clean before the country, people and faith !!! People had a choice with whom to stay with the King until the end or to betray him. They made their choice. There is nothing more to talk about. Lenin in oblivion, Nicholas to the face of saints, history has put everything in its place!
              1. +36
                17 July 2013 10: 36
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Lenin in oblivion, Nicholas to the face of saints, history has put everything in its place!

                Sanya, I will then complete your chain
                Gorbachev receives orders
                Monument to Yeltsin
                Has history put everything in its place? winked History is often rewritten for the sake of the regime and power; it has long passed from the field of science into a lever of influence on the people.
                1. +18
                  17 July 2013 11: 04
                  Quote: seasoned
                  History has put everything in its place

                  With respect to Yeltsin, there is no hunchback. Time will pass and the monument will be demolished and the humpbacked medal will be taken away, albeit posthumously, but history will put everything in its place. Sooner or later hi
              2. +16
                17 July 2013 10: 48
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                People had a choice with whom to stay with the King until the end or to betray him. They made their choice. There is nothing more to talk about. Lenin in oblivion, Nicholas to the face of saints, history has put everything in its place!

                I would say it is not yet evening. The story has not ended, it continues. And who will end up being holy and who still have to find out. Do not rush time and do not make hasty decisions, my friends, for time is an eternal substance and infinite, and the decisions would seem to be correct, often erroneous.
                And the article is negative. We oozing oil, and the call to bring a penitent prayer somehow does not suit me. Who should let it be remembered .......
                1. +1
                  17 July 2013 11: 06
                  Quote: baltika-18
                  I. And who ultimately turns out to be a saint, and who in oblivion remains to be seen.

                  but really the rotten mummy to the face of the "saints" will be attached to Judas. Well, yes, then everything will definitely be in its place wink
                  Quote: baltika-18
                  Oil oozes, and the call to bring a repentant prayer somehow does not suit me.

                  Not satisfied??? Well, what are the difficulties Kolya, you see the Church, pass by and go its expensive. Bon Voyage
                  1. +9
                    17 July 2013 11: 38
                    Well, Lenin was counted among the other saints - the party ...
                    What kind of power, what kind of regime - such and saints.
                    It is not history that puts everything in its "place" but the rulers to please the situation - something like that. It will be advantageous for the authorities to mix one with poop and on the shield of the other, they will not accept to do this. And history has ceased to be a science - more precisely, history has remained history, but what is now called it is rather political propaganda.
                    1. +10
                      17 July 2013 12: 00
                      Quote: klimpopov
                      It is not history that puts everything in "its" place, but the rulers to please the situation - something like this

                      Klim, in 1945, politics didn’t matter, history put everything in its place, to whom the gallows, and to whom the laurels. What happened in 1917 and who, after renunciation, came to power? Kerensky along with his government, many of whom were US citizens or not?
                      1. +4
                        17 July 2013 12: 12
                        Klim, in 1945, politics didn’t matter; history put everything in its place, to whom the gallows and to whom the laurels.

                        Then yes, and now? In the same places the United States all put? About the same WWII results? And what is happening in the republics.
                        And then politics was of great importance ...
                        Kerensky along with his government, many of whom were US citizens or not?

                        All right Yes
                        I had a slightly different message.
                  2. grafrozow
                    +1
                    17 July 2013 11: 50
                    That's right, not in the eyebrow, but in the eye.
                  3. +5
                    17 July 2013 11: 54
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    Not satisfied??? Well, what are the difficulties Kolya, you see the Church, pass by and go your way. Bon Voyage

                    So I go mine. I do not urge anyone to repent.
                    Quote: baltika-18
                    .Who should be remembered .......

                    Let the dead remember their dead. And we have life ahead.
                    1. +6
                      17 July 2013 12: 02
                      Quote: baltika-18
                      Let the dead remember their dead. And we have life ahead.

                      Everyone thinks so and no one thinks about death, but it can be on a bend. once drunk on a jeep and no life. Figuratively, but I think you will.
                  4. +2
                    18 July 2013 15: 59
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    yes really will the rotten mummy be attached to the face of the "saints"

                    When a sewer pipe burst in the Kremlin, the mausoleum was flooded with shit. To which Patriarch Tikhon said: "By the relics and oil." laughing
              3. +23
                17 July 2013 10: 56
                As soon as Nikolashka renounced (By the way, the Bolsheviks have nothing to do with this), he would cease as emperor. So there can be no talk of any betrayal by the people and the army.
                Rather, he is a traitor.
                As for the faces of the saints .. well, that's all funny.
                1. +1
                  17 July 2013 11: 04
                  Quote: pistons
                  So there can be no talk of any betrayal by the people and the army. Rather, he is a traitor.

                  Have you accidentally forgotten a simple truth - "Every nation is worthy of its ruler"?
                  1. Lacoste
                    +3
                    17 July 2013 14: 42
                    Right! So our people chose Lenin.
                2. -7
                  17 July 2013 11: 07
                  Quote: pistons
                  As for the faces of the saints .. well, that's all funny.

                  Well, laughing until retirement.
              4. +10
                17 July 2013 11: 46
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                history has put everything in its place!

                I’ll add a little. About the story. The Romanovs came to power through blood, through murders, including children, one 4-year-old child hanged on the gate (17 century, true). So what they came through, through that gone. As believers say, everything is God's will, isn't it, Alexander.
                1. +3
                  17 July 2013 12: 04
                  Quote: baltika-18
                  .About the story. The Romanovs came to power through blood, through murders, including children, one 4-year-old child hanged at the gates of which is worth (17 century, true

                  here some say. that the explosions of high-rise buildings in Moscow were arranged by Putin and even "proofs" are cited. if the Romanovs destroyed in their time the local Nemtsovs and Navalny, then honor and praise to them.
                  1. +10
                    17 July 2013 12: 49
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    if the Romanovs destroyed in their time the local Nemtsov and Navalny, then honor and praise be to them.

                    Yeah, if the Romanovs destroy whole names under the root, honor and praise be to them, but if the Romanovs are a cruel crime. A strange logic. This, you know, is like in a Bandera joke:
                    Bandera Kumu says
                    -I'll go, m.o.s.c.a.la.y.a.
                    What if he is you?
                    -so, what about me?
                    1. -7
                      17 July 2013 13: 20
                      Quote: revnagan
                      Yeah, if the Romanovs destroy whole names at the root, honor and praise to them,

                      What surnames destroyed the Romanovs? What have read Lenin and others like him trying to destroy Russia.
                      Quote: revnagan
                      But if the Romanovs is a fierce crime.

                      Who sang this for you?
                      1. +3
                        17 July 2013 16: 06
                        ...... What surnames destroyed the Romanovs? What they read to Lenin and others like him trying to destroy Russia............. Bloody Sunday, Lensky execution ............. when Nicholas II took place ......, and if you dig a little deeper .. ....... the list of surnames will be more than one volume ........... well, of course, it is impossible to shoot children under any circumstances. for sin is great............. Yes, ...... the time was like that, the long-suffering Russia- brother to brother, son to father .......
                      2. consul
                        0
                        20 July 2013 11: 31
                        Quote: FREGATENKAPITAN
                        Bloody Sunday, Lensky execution.


                        The first is a provocation with leaflets scattered on the same day, printed ahead of time (with victims counted already), the second is the arbitrariness of the owners of the Lena goldfields, the emperor personally understood, the results are described, if you want to find no problem.
                      3. -4
                        17 July 2013 16: 07
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        What have read Lenin and others like him trying to destroy Russia.

                        No, I didn’t master Lenin, it’s boring. But in general I like to read, I read and read a lot ... So there is something to draw conclusions from.
                  2. +5
                    17 July 2013 13: 06
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    if the Romanovs destroyed in their time the local Nemtsov and Navalny, then honor and praise be to them.

                    Yes, the fact is that the Romanovs were at one time the same Nemtsov and Navalny.
                    1. -3
                      17 July 2013 13: 22
                      Quote: baltika-18

                      Yes, the fact is that the Romanovs were at one time the same Nemtsov and Navalny.

                      You have now shown the level of your intellect. Do you think Putin also leads friendship with Navalny? do you even think. what you write.
                      1. Sanyl
                        +2
                        17 July 2013 14: 41
                        Alexander, please, more respect for the opponents. Do not turn the discussion into trash.
                      2. +4
                        17 July 2013 15: 13
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        You have now shown the level of your intellect.

                        Not for you to judge, sir.
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        Do you think Putin also leads friendship with Navalny?

                        But what does Putin have to do with it?
                      3. 0
                        17 July 2013 15: 31
                        Quote: baltika-18
                        Not for you to judge, sir.

                        Oh well, you judge others, and I judge you. What is the problem?
                        Quote: baltika-18
                        But what does Putin have to do with it?

                        draw a parallel, maybe you can.
                      4. -1
                        17 July 2013 16: 36
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        draw a parallel, maybe you can.

                        Both have the same end? wink
                    2. +2
                      17 July 2013 18: 16
                      Quote: baltika-18
                      Quote: Alexander Romanov
                      if the Romanovs destroyed in their time the local Nemtsov and Navalny, then honor and praise be to them.

                      Yes, the fact is that the Romanovs were at one time the same Nemtsov and Navalny.

                      Probably the current monarchists have already forgotten that the main initiators and organizers of the burial of the Romanov remains in the Peter and Paul Fortress were NEMTSOV and Mikhalkov. Balagan and only, with these overage "monarchists"
                      1. +5
                        17 July 2013 19: 15
                        Quote: Polar
                        Probably the current monarchists have already forgotten that the main initiators and organizers of the burial of the Romanov remains in the Peter and Paul Fortress were NEMTSOV and Mikhalkov. Balagan and only, with these overage "monarchists"

                        You exposed yourself as a liar. Mikhalkov was not a member of the Government Commission. From the humanities (with the exception of historians and archivists) there were Averintsev, Glazunov, Radzinsky and the deputy minister of culture Bragin. Nemtsov was the head of the commission by position - 1st Deputy Prime Minister (but not with him it started). And where to bury - the question is far from personally Nemtsov.

                        The composition of the "Government Commission for the Study of Issues ..." is known and is in the public domain. So we could not slander.
              5. Uhe
                Uhe
                +15
                17 July 2013 11: 47
                Yeah, it was for his "purity" that the people called him Bloody. And precisely because of his purity in front of some kind of faith, his relatives forced him to abdicate, and he abdicated, by which he broke his oath when he was crowned on the throne;) For what kind of faith is an oath-breaker pure?
                1. 0
                  17 July 2013 12: 06
                  Quote: Uhe
                  Yeah, it was for his "purity" that the people called him Bloody

                  The people or Lenin with their scumbags leading the country to a fratricidal warrior in which more people died than in 1 world war.
                  1. Lacoste
                    +9
                    17 July 2013 14: 44
                    It was not they who brought the country, but the kings who brought the people to the extreme point. After all, if the people have something to lose, then he will not take up arms.
                    1. 0
                      23 July 2013 18: 08
                      A small addition: revolutions are made either "from above" (for example, the USSR was drained), or "from the outside" (for example, the draining of the Russian Empire), "from below" there are only riots (Salt riot, well, etc.). hi
                  2. +1
                    18 July 2013 12: 48
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    The people or Lenin with their scumbags leading the country to a fratricidal warrior

                    Listen to everything well in moderation, including fiction, it's me about "bloody"
                    and as for the civilian, it’s not the Bolsheviks who are to blame, but the stupid people who took power in February, and what they didn’t understand what to do with it, the Bolsheviks are already a consequence
                    1. -1
                      18 July 2013 12: 53
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

                      Listen well to the best of your ability, including fiction,

                      Fudge ??? Yes, there have already been laid out so many times documents about crimes and red terror that there is no strength left to repeat itself, especially for those who really need it. Love the Bolsheviks, love to blame the sick for healthy, well, well, good luck. Personally, nothing and no one will ever prove to you.
                      1. +6
                        18 July 2013 13: 02
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        Fudge ??? Yes, there have already been laid out so many times documents about crimes and red terror that there is no strength left to repeat itself, especially for those who really need it. Love the Bolsheviks, love to blame the sick for healthy, well, well, good luck. Personally, nothing and no one will ever prove to you.

                        you piled everything in a heap again
                        nikolashka got the kikkuha for the tragedy at the coronation, for some reason you dragged Lenin here, I belong to the Bolsheviks absolutely exactly, they skillfully took advantage of the situation and, as history has shown, they turned out to be better organizers and leaders than all those who were near or against them.
                        As for the evidence, you have not yet brought anything more weighty than saliva.
                      2. +1
                        19 July 2013 06: 56
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        Fudge ??? Yes, there have already been laid out so many times documents about crimes and red terror that there is no strength left to repeat itself, especially for those who really need it.

                        You really don’t need it. Don't you know how the Civil War began? Great Britain, France and Italy decided to support the anti-Bolshevik forces, Churchill called for "strangling Bolshevism in the cradle." December 22 The 1917 conference of representatives of the Entente countries in Paris recognized the need to maintain contact with the anti-Bolshevik governments of Ukraine, Cossack regions, Siberia, the Caucasus and Finland and to open loans to them. On December 23, on November 1917, an English-French agreement was concluded on the division of the spheres of future military operations in Russia: the Caucasus and Cossack regions entered the Great Britain zone, Bessarabia, Ukraine and Crimea entered the French zone; Siberia and the Far East were considered as the sphere of interests of the USA and Japan.
                        On 6 of March 1918 a small English landing force, two companies of marines, landed in Murmansk to prevent the Germans from capturing the huge amount of military cargo delivered by the Allies to Russia, but did not take any hostile action against the Soviet government (until June 30).
                        On the night of August 2 1918 the organization of the captain of the 2 rank Chaplin (about 500 people) overthrew the Soviet regime in Arkhangelsk, the 1 thousandth red garrison fled without a single shot. Power in the city passed to local self-government and the creation of the Northern Army began. Then the 2 thousandth English landing landed in Arkhangelsk. Chaplin was appointed as a member of the Supreme Administration of the Northern Region "commander of all naval and land armed forces of the Supreme Administration of the Northern Region." The armed forces at that time consisted of 5 companies, a squadron, and an artillery battery. Parts were formed from volunteers. The local peasantry preferred to take a neutral position, and there was little hope of mobilization. Mobilization in the Murmansk region was also not successful.
                        In the North, the Soviet command creates the Northern Front (the commander is former General of the Imperial Army Dmitry Pavlovich Parsky) as part of the 6 and 7 Army.
                        On November 1 on November 1917, at a meeting of representatives of the Entente in Iasi, a decision was made to use the corps to fight the Russian revolution, on January 15 on 1918, the corps was declared part of the French army and preparations began for the corps (40 of thousands of people) to be transported from Ukraine through Far Eastern ports to Western Europe to continue fighting on the side of the Entente. Echelons with Czechoslovakians were scattered along the Trans-Siberian Railway for a long distance from Penza to Vladivostok, where the main part of the corps (14 thousand people) had already arrived, when on 20 on May the corps command refused to comply with the Bolshevik government’s disarmament demand and began active fighting against the red detachments, which was the impetus for the uprising of the whole corps.
                        And where are the "bloody Bolsheviks" who unleashed the Civil War?
                    2. +2
                      19 July 2013 10: 29
                      Power lay on the ground, the Bolsheviks picked it up and skillfully took advantage of it.
                2. consul
                  -2
                  20 July 2013 11: 45
                  Quote: Uhe
                  Yeah, it was for his "purity" that the people called him Bloody. And precisely because of his purity in front of some kind of faith, his relatives forced him to abdicate, and he abdicated, by which he broke his oath when he was crowned on the throne;) For what kind of faith is an oath-breaker pure?


                  The slanderers who wished to destroy Russia were not called bloody at all (the script is partly very similar to what is happening in Syria), and what they see as renunciation for this, when carefully considered, is not suitable. But the oath-criminal, in this case, is just the people (the oath of 1613 and confirmed in 1913, no one has canceled).
                  1. consul
                    +1
                    20 July 2013 11: 47
                    Cathedral Vow - Zemsky Electoral Council, held on February 21, 1613

                    The Lord sent His Holy Spirit to the hearts of all Orthodox Christians, as if by common mouth I cry out that being in Vladimir and Moscow and in all the States of the Russian Kingdom, Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Prince of All Russia Autocrat, You, Grand Sovereign Mikhail Feodorovich.
                    They kissed all the Life-giving Cross and the vow they gave, that for the Great Sovereign, the venerable God, God chosen and God beloved, the Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Feodorovich, the All-Russia Autocrat, and the Blessed Queen and the Grand Duchess, and Their Royal Children, To the sovereigns, henceforth, God will give, put your souls and your heads, and serve Him, the Sovereigns with our faith and truth, with all your souls and with your heads.
                    It is commanded that the Chosen One of God, Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich Romanov, be the ancestor of the Rulers in Russia from generation to generation, with responsibility in his affairs to a single Heavenly King. And who will go against this Council Decree - whether the Tsar, whether the Patriarch, and every person, may he be cursed by such in this century and in the future, he will be excommunicated from the Holy Trinity. And another Sovereign, past the Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Feodorovich, all Russia Autocrat; and Their Tsar Children, whom God will give them to the Sovereigns from now on, to seek and want another Sovereign from any people you wake up, or what famously wants to do; then we are the boyars, and the roundabouts, and the nobles, and the ordered people, and the guest, and the children of the boyars, and all kinds of people on that traitor to stand by all the earth for one.
                    After reading this Approved Charter at the Great All-Russian Council, and after hearing for ever greater strengthening - to be so in everything because it is written in this Approved Charter. But whoever does not abduct ubo to listen to this Council Code, God bless him; and he will begin to say other words and rumors in the Chiniti people, then such as the sacred to the order, and from the Boyars, the Royal Synclites, and the military, or some people from ordinary people, and in whatever rank you wake up; according to the holy Rules of st. The Apostle, and the Ecumenical Week of Saints Father and Local; and according to the Council Code, everything will be cast out, and excommunicated from the Church of God, and the Holy Mysteries of Christ; like a schismatic of the Church of God and all Orthodox Christianity, a rebel and a destroyer to the Law of God, but according to the Royal Laws, revenge be perceived; and our humility and the entire Consecrated Council, do not be blessed on it from now on and forever. May it be firmly and indestructible in previous summers, in childbirth and childbirth, and not a single hell from those written in it shall pass.
                    And at the Council there were the Moscow State from all the cities of the Russian Kingdom of power: metropolitans, bishops and archimandrites, hegumen, protopopes and the entire Consecrated Council; boyars and okolnichi, cupholders and captains and solicitors, duma nobles and deacons and tenants; big nobles and nobles from cities; diamonds from the Orders; strelets' heads, and Cossack chieftains, streltsy and Cossacks trading and townsmen; and great ranks all sorts of servants and tenants; and from all the cities of the Russian kingdom, elected people.
                    Handwritten signatures [1] .A quickness is laid down and written Approved Certificate for the hands and for the seals of the Great Sovereign of our Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Feodorovich of all Russia Autocrat, in the reigning city of Moscow, in the first summer of his reign, and from the creation of the world 7121 .
              6. +13
                17 July 2013 14: 59
                I repeat: not the Bolsheviks. Revolutionaries. In particular, the SRs. He did not remain clean before the country. He got dirty in stupidity and idleness, he did not solve problems in the country, he was not a de facto king. The headless crown was who he was. And Lenin, in fact, no one forgot. Nicholas's canonization is just a twist of modern propaganda, nothing more. Remember one Bloody Resurrection ...
                And he was not emperor and king - he abdicated from the throne.
              7. +4
                17 July 2013 15: 53
                There was nothing to shoot down a family for, it was an atrocity, but Nikolai himself does not want a saint, in general, the Commander-in-Chief of those military personnel has no right to leave the service, so Nikolay is a deserter, besides the leader of a huge country should not think about himself or family, and the question itself is not about hanging political ones, they were dying enough in hard labor, but about mediocre leadership of troops and the country, direct negligence in the performance of duties for which he was prepared as heir to the throne from childhood.
              8. +3
                17 July 2013 20: 52
                This was done by the Bolsheviks, but he remained pure before the country, people and faith !!
                What does it mean to remain clean before the country, people and faith? Thanks to him, millions perished. All the same, he was an autocrat and in his power was to select and appoint officials. The king did not fulfill his duties and ruined the country.
                People had a choice with whom to stay with the King until the end or to betray him.
                It was Nicholas who betrayed the country and the people.
              9. +3
                18 July 2013 17: 19
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                People had a choice with whom to stay with the King until the end or to betray him.

                As far as I know, it was not the people who betrayed the king, but the king - the people. His renunciation in itself is not worth anything until this renunciation takes on something like a general meeting (I can't remember now exactly what it is called). It was only this "veche" that decided whether to accept or not accept renunciation. And Nicholas did not give a damn about it, and the people are now being asked to repent before the king. What to repent of ?. And Mr. Experienced is right - a politician must think that if blood cannot be avoided, then order must be achieved with little blood, in order to avoid big blood later. Remember Gorbachev - I wanted to be kind to everyone, here is a lot of blood for you in the Caucasus. But he could have done so to stop all this at the very beginning.
              10. 0
                23 July 2013 23: 55
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                history has put everything in its place!

                "Russia is a country with an unpredictable past."
                Mikhail Zadornov
            2. Uhe
              Uhe
              +13
              17 July 2013 11: 45
              And he executed. Rumors about the softness of his domestic politics are a lie. A bunch of Russian people were executed on the gallows. At the same time, he lost 2 wars in which he threatened several million Russian lives; with it, several tens of billions of rubles were exported to the USA, for which Witte was named the best minister of finance in the world (is it true, does he remind anyone?;)); it was not the solution of the peasant question that led to 3 (three!) revolutions, but Stolypin’s reforms destroyed the Russian community. In general, the affairs of this gentleman can be listed for a long time. Of course, these are not crimes against the state, for he himself was the state and was in his own right, but these are crimes against the Russian people, for which he paid.

              And a family with children and Botkin was shot in vain, here I agree. Yes, and himself, too, should not have been, but apparently, people had too fresh memories of the "delights" of that life.
              1. -3
                17 July 2013 12: 07
                Quote: Uhe
                And he executed. Rumors about the softness of his domestic politics are a lie. A bunch of Russian people executed on the gallows

                This is you writing a lie! And if they executed those who organized terrorist acts at that time and led the troubles into the people. so there the Jewish people of the fatherland are also dear to them.
                1. georg737577
                  -1
                  17 July 2013 14: 50
                  Uv. Alexander Romanov! Reading your comments in this thread, I want to change my nickname to "Yurovsky" ...
                  1. shpuntik
                    +1
                    18 July 2013 23: 37
                    georg737577 UA Yesterday, 14:50 ↑
                    Uv. Alexander Romanov! Reading your comments in this thread, I want to change my nickname to "Yurovsky" ...

                    He double-clicked "minus" for Yakov, once "plus" for humor. laughing "Laughing out loud".
                2. +11
                  17 July 2013 15: 14
                  I am forced to oppose you: those who carried out the attacks were just executed unforgivably few, they were given short prison sentences or hard labor, and there were even cases (quite a few) that sometimes were justified. But the rebellious peasants, demanding bread and land (1896 - 1897), just hung ...
                  Someone will say that the Tsar is not to blame for the Bloody Resurrection. Just to blame. The demonstration of people, and in the form of a religious procession was just the ancient Russian form of conveying their problems to the sovereign, moreover, a form of exceptionally respectful (Do you remember that Nikolai advertised himself as a true Russian and Orthodox sovereign in the Old Russian style?). At all times, even penknives were not taken for such a procession, not to mention something more serious, and therefore the people in this demonstration were completely unarmed. And so the tsar washes away from the palace, and a soldier is put forward towards the procession ... And who is Nicholas 2 after that? - a coward and a scoundrel.
                  As for his incredible Orthodoxness: dominance at the court of the horde of mystics, incl. and the quacking itself, the evocation of spirits, than the Empress dabbled with Vyrubova - where is Orthodoxy ?!
                  In addition, this Rasputin, a former free or involuntary agent of influence on the king and a profitable way of access to him and to state information ...
                  You can remember forever. And judging by the records of the most notorious monarchists, the enemies of the monarchy write even harder ...
                  1. chaban13
                    -1
                    17 July 2013 22: 27
                    It was proved that on January 9 there were provocateurs in the convoy (mainly the Socialist Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks) who were the first to shoot soldiers
                    1. soldier's grandson
                      +2
                      17 July 2013 22: 39
                      But what did the fresh shells find or did the foremen appear?
                      1. +1
                        18 July 2013 10: 17
                        why are the witnesses, the dog barks, the wind wears
                  2. +1
                    21 July 2013 00: 30
                    You have read misinformation, half a lie. They didn’t shoot at the police with penknives; there were clearly provocateurs in the crowd. and besides, it also confirms that the victims in an exaggerated number were scheduled already within 2-3 hours after the tragedy. Question? The revolutionaries were used by provocateurs, by the way among the revolutionaries in the vast majority were Jews.
              2. consul
                +3
                20 July 2013 12: 15
                Quote: Uhe
                And he executed. Rumors about the softness of his domestic politics are a lie. A bunch of Russian people were executed on the gallows ...


                Under Nicholas II - 6107 people were executed in court and executed, most of the executions took place in the period 1905-1910, when it was just necessary to establish order in the country because of rampant terrorism, fed from abroad.
            3. grafrozow
              -2
              17 July 2013 11: 47
              By your logic, that was how Humpbacked was to lie nearby. Yes, and the mausoleum closer to Yekaterinburg would not hurt.
              1. 0
                17 July 2013 15: 58
                with pleasure would help, but it would be necessary to judge.
            4. 0
              21 July 2013 00: 24
              He did not play rassputivism, all this was gossip of the then opposition. According to the tsar's admission in his diaries, Rasputin visited the royal family 1-2 a year, and the rest of the time he "treated" the heir by telephone.
          2. +33
            17 July 2013 10: 45
            Quote: GreatRussia
            Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?

            I think it is strange: Nikolai, who led Russia to revolution and civil war, was recognized as a saint by the church. We stick out his sufferings and the sufferings of the royal family, and yet millions died in this meat grinder.
            Stalin, who brought Russia out of the state of ruin, is a "bloody tyrant". Guilty for everything and everyone.
            1. -18
              17 July 2013 11: 08
              Quote: andrejwz
              I think it is strange: Nikolai, who led Russia to revolution and civil war

              Did Nikolai bring this? Have you mixed up anything in your life?
              1. +4
                17 July 2013 11: 12
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Did Nikolai bring this? Have you mixed up anything in your life?

                Sash, it was his weak-willedness and "lack of personality" in Russia before the revolution and the subsequent civil war led hi
                1. -1
                  17 July 2013 12: 08
                  Quote: seasoned
                  Sash, this is his weakness and lack of expression

                  it was his choice and he did not spill the blood of his compatriots in the battle. He accepted what the people of renunciation demanded. Wanted-got
                  1. avt
                    +17
                    17 July 2013 15: 07
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    it was his choice and he did not spill the blood of his compatriots in the battle. He accepted what the people of renunciation demanded. Wanted-got

                    You are talking nonsense! And you are positioning yourself as a monarchist. No people demanded anything from him, his own circle and family merged him, all these Rodzyans, Shulgins, Kirilovichs, Nikolayevichs, and he did not fulfill his duty as king and commander in chief, could not keep up like Paul I, but MANDATED. This work and the corresponding time - war. He had no choice, there were only duties from which he merged. Whatever you want to say, but thank God from Stalin such a scam during the war did not wait, not that leader.
                    1. -3
                      17 July 2013 15: 11
                      Quote: avt
                      Quote: Alexander Romanov
                      it was his choice and he did not spill the blood of his compatriots in the battle. He accepted what the people of renunciation demanded. Wanted-got

                      You are talking nonsense! And you are positioning yourself as a monarchist. No people demanded anything from him, his own circle and family merged him, all these Rodzyans, Shulgins, Kirilovichs, Nikolayevichs, and he did not fulfill his duty as king and commander in chief, could not keep up like Paul I, but MANDATED. This work and the corresponding time - war. He had no choice, there were only duties from which he merged. Whatever you want to say, but thank God from Stalin such a scam during the war did not wait, not that leader.


                      for Christ’s sake, I’d like to put a plus, put a minus, I repent feel
                      1. avt
                        0
                        17 July 2013 15: 14
                        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Christ for the sake of excuse, I wanted to put a plus, put a minus, I repent

                        It happens .
                      2. 0
                        17 July 2013 15: 25
                        level set plus
                    2. lexe
                      -3
                      17 July 2013 20: 41
                      thank God from Stalin such a scam during the war did not wait, not that leader.

                      Yes, the difference is significant ... Renunciation a step before the victory and lost at the time of the disasters of 1941-42.
                    3. +1
                      21 July 2013 00: 34
                      There is a version that the tsar did not abdicate at all, because he wasn’t allowed to pass the train, he was detained, and a renunciation was pasted into the manifesto about the call for the army. Divorced people.
                  2. +5
                    17 July 2013 15: 31
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    it was his choice and he did not spill the blood of his compatriots in the battle. He accepted what the people of renunciation demanded. Wanted-got

                    Well, the civil war that followed all this had no victims.
                    he was frightened of responsibility, he was simply scoffed, it’s about the same crap about the bald Judas, they say that they saved the country from a civil war
                    1. +1
                      17 July 2013 15: 34
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

                      Well, the civil war that followed all this had no victims.

                      Do you even read what I write? If not, why write to me?
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      it's about the same crap about the bald Judah they say that they say the country was saved from civil war

                      Hard with you. Sometimes hard. Although it may be that you’re not writing what is, to put it mildly, not the same thing. And give examples not of those. Although these are your difficulties.
                      1. -2
                        17 July 2013 15: 37
                        it's hard with you
                      2. soldier's grandson
                        -1
                        17 July 2013 22: 47
                        do not pay attention to the flawed especially the namesake of the king
              2. +8
                17 July 2013 11: 17
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                I think it is strange: Nikolai, who led Russia to revolution and civil war

                Nicholas did not bring, but admitted. But at the critical moment he denied and withdrew. It is foolish to blame what happened only for him. This is not true. The failure was systemic. Almost the entire General Staff urged the abdication. The Church supported the Provisional Government, seeking to achieve full independence. How it ended for everyone is known.
                Nikolai Alexandrovich was probably a good person. But obviously - a bad politician. Unfortunately, both for the country and for his family.
                1. 0
                  17 July 2013 15: 28
                  once again I will give the same example, I’m all the same who and how convinces a woman to leave her child in the baby’s house, for me the important fact is that she succumbed to these beliefs, and the rest is just words.
                  he was anointed of God and was obliged to bear this burden or refuse immediately
              3. -2
                17 July 2013 15: 09
                Do you think that if the train derailed passengers are to blame?
                1. -1
                  18 July 2013 09: 18
                  Someone believes that all the same passengers laughing ?
                  1. shpuntik
                    +1
                    19 July 2013 20: 03
                    Vasilenko Vladimir (2) SU Yesterday, 09:18 ↑
                    Someone believes that all the same passengers laughing ?

                    There are oligophrenics - the "stop-cock" is pulled at night, and then they laugh on the sly bully.
              4. +4
                17 July 2013 15: 23
                And he too. Captain is always responsible for incidents on the ship. For the mess at the factory - the director. For the mess and the collapse of the country - the ruler. Well?
              5. soldier's grandson
                -9
                17 July 2013 22: 41
                how much does the State Department pay you?
                1. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. soldier's grandson
              0
              17 July 2013 22: 40
              simple and strong, plus you huge
          3. Uhe
            Uhe
            0
            17 July 2013 11: 38
            And you take an interest in what they called Stolypin the Hangman, and Nicholas 2 - Nicholas the Bloody;)
            1. +7
              17 July 2013 12: 03
              Stolypin - for "Stolypin ties" when he was still 1905. Well, the Bloody - for Khodynka ...
              Just for the sake of justice, it should be noted that the narrow circle of revolutionaries, liberals (then read the same thing) and political emigrants so called them. Nothing from today reminds? And then, and now they used the weakness of power. Then it turned out ...
            2. -13
              17 July 2013 12: 11
              Quote: Uhe
              and Nicholas 2 - Nicholas the Bloody;)

              Who to ask Zyuganov and the Bolsheviks who drowned the country in blood
              1. +13
                17 July 2013 12: 16
                Here again, this is a stamp to paint "Bolshiviks who drowned the country in blood"
                I can say the same about Nikolai ...
                1. +2
                  17 July 2013 12: 26
                  The Bolsheviks ruled their affairs after the death of Nicholas. How Nikolai personally drowned the country in blood is not clear, tell me?
                  1. +16
                    17 July 2013 12: 46
                    And before the 1919 year there was stillness and God's grace, right?
                    Before this, there were no two wars or revolutions - everything flourished and smelled! And if you want, then he began to drown the country in blood, it was he who received the nickname among the people.
                    By the way, it was not the Bolsheviks who invented the storytelling, but Heinrich Yulievich Witte (if you want more detail), so you don’t need all the dogs for the Bolsheviks either, but as always it turns out .. This happened by the way.
                    But the Tsar is not to blame for anything! This is all around and the king is holy! Doesn't it remind you of anything?
                    1. +4
                      17 July 2013 13: 20
                      He was shot in 18, before 19 how a zombie wielded, right? lol
                      The nickname was given to him by the Bolsheviks and the liberals, which people they are talking about is not clear.
                      Witte was a liberoid and a stooge of the French, I can even compare it with our past minister - Kudrin. But the Bolsheviks began to hang and cut the Cossacks, because they remembered the concept of honor and duty, but then they cut all such honest ones. Well, the Germans in Kiev have already made it a tradition.
                      1. +1
                        17 July 2013 13: 49
                        He was shot in 18, before 19 how a zombie wielded, right?

                        I know when he was shot.
                        Why do you link "bloodiness" to the date of Nikolai's execution? That they did not die before? Didn't they die in 1905? Didn't he shoot demonstrations? Who gave a nickname can no longer be established, but the fact that it stuck is a fact!
                        Witte was a liberoid and a stooge of the French, I can even compare it with our past minister - Kudrin.

                        But what about under the tsar and autocrat some kind of proteges of foreign states appeared who promoted their ideas here? How is that?
                        And the fact that he was the first to speak about the storytelling and even plans were certain regarding the Cossacks. Who then brought them to life another question ... Again, Witte is just an example.
                        What about the generals? Christmas and the like? How is that with such a king, Father? Do not blame everything on one side ...
                      2. +4
                        17 July 2013 14: 26
                        Quote: klimpopov
                        In 1905 did not die? Did he not shoot demonstrations?

                        Did the terrorists not blow up the Tsar? It was the terrorists. Even the Bolsheviks called them revolutionaries. Doesn’t the USA call terrorists revolutionaries? Why did they bother Lenin’s brother? Not an hour for terrorism.
                        As Putin said, watering the toilet. And if Nicholas drenched them, then good
                      3. +3
                        17 July 2013 14: 36
                        Blew up! And Alexander was sent to the other world. But I just said that the country drowned in blood with the connivance of the king and all power ... And everything else was later.
                      4. soldier's grandson
                        -4
                        17 July 2013 22: 54
                        they wouldn’t blast it in vain
                      5. +6
                        17 July 2013 15: 33
                        They staged a revelation for the counter-revolution and for separatism — they wanted to separate, they planned to build the Don Republic, they didn’t participate in the white movement, they didn’t sit out and didn’t succeed, they made tricks with the Germans ... So we got to them.
                        And as for the Witte project on razachachivaniya - it was a matter, really.
                        Honest slaughtered and white, they had their sins. In general, in the Civil War that was not right - all to blame.
                  2. +1
                    17 July 2013 14: 23
                    Quote: RETX
                    . How Nikolai personally drowned the country in blood is not clear, tell me?

                    Well, you have to blame someone. You shoot, and then you say yes, it was my neighbor who forced me to shoot. This does not work in the courts. At the highest, too, will not ride.
                    1. +2
                      17 July 2013 14: 40
                      And you do not blame all the blame on one? And all the rest is not necessary?
                  3. +1
                    17 July 2013 17: 11
                    Quote: RETX
                    The Bolsheviks ruled their affairs after the death of Nicholas. How Nikolai personally drowned the country in blood is not clear, tell me?

                    such an example is a terrible accident a lot of corpses a lot of victims, someone is taken to the hospital and there they die who is on the table of the surgeon, who is after.
                    who do you think the doctors are to blame for their death or the one who caused the accident?
                    Nicholas, among other things, by his renunciation provoked a series of terrible events in Russia, it is he who is responsible for what happened as the driver of a "car" called Russia
                2. +1
                  17 July 2013 14: 21
                  Quote: klimpopov
                  I can say the same about Nikolai ...

                  try, but not with the Bolshevik proof, which they themselves came up with.
                  1. +3
                    17 July 2013 14: 42
                    Ha! And with what "proof" then? What is "proof" in your understanding? That there was no PMA? And the society was healthy in every sense and did not bode well for trouble? The peasants peacefully sowed the land and the workers worked for the good of the empire? And the state ...
              2. +7
                17 July 2013 12: 44
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Who to ask Zyuganov and the Bolsheviks who drowned the country in blood

                Gennady Andreyevich before the Bolsheviks as ... him for such a thing in the RSDLP (b) ...
                1. +2
                  17 July 2013 13: 24
                  Quote: Bronis

                  Gennady Andreyevich before the Bolsheviks as

                  And, as soon as Putin came to the Temple, so Zyuganov pulled the candles to light. I wonder why he doesn’t light them with a lighter for an hour. According to Stanislavsky, I don’t believe it. What didn’t go before?
                  1. +1
                    17 July 2013 13: 29
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    According to Stanislavsky, I don’t believe it. What didn’t go before?

                    Well, you yourself answered the question yourself - as soon as Putin went to the temple ... by the way, how does the ROC relate to divorce ...
                    1. +2
                      17 July 2013 13: 33
                      Quote: Bronis
                      Well, you yourself answered the question yourself - as soon as Putin went to the temple.

                      Putin had walked before, but he was not shown until he became president.
                      Quote: Bronis
                      . By the way, how does the ROC relate to divorce ...

                      But it doesn’t apply to divorces if marriages were made in the registry office. Putin did not get married.
                      1. +6
                        17 July 2013 13: 38
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        Putin had walked before, but he was not shown until he became president.
                        Yeah, when he served in the KGB bully

                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        . By the way, how does the ROC relate to divorce ...
                        But it doesn’t apply to divorces if marriages were made in the registry office. Putin did not get married.
                        I knew that this answer. Well, if you didn’t get married - then, of course, you can leave your wife. Or even not so, generally horror! Well, they lived 30 years of sin ... even worse ...
                        Such a divorce is a pious deed
                      2. +4
                        17 July 2013 14: 29
                        Quote: Bronis
                        Yeah, when he served in the KGB

                        no, I don’t know this, so it’s not worth it, it’s cheap.
                        Quote: Bronis
                        Well, if you didn’t get married - then, of course, you can leave your wife.

                        I got divorced myself, so what? Or any reason for you to spit at Putin. Look at yourself "saint" you are ours.
                      3. +3
                        17 July 2013 14: 43
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        I got divorced myself, so what? Or any reason for you to spit at Putin. Look at yourself "saint" you are ours.

                        Sasha! Do not disperse from scratch! No one spits on Putin! Echo Matzi is better at doing this. I even vote for GDP ... (and for whom else?)
                        And I’m not a saint (thank God), I don’t even pretend!
                        You are an emotional person. right, it’s not worth it - spoil your health. There is simply nothing unequivocal in this world. there is no absolute good, no absolute evil. Nikolai, Putin, Zyuganov - people with their own strengths and weaknesses. This is understandable and understandable. they also shouldn’t catch a halo ...
                        And in general, if you say that you got divorced, it means that the person is an adult (relatively). And you are engaged in childishness ... You are often "caught" and "bullied" on this. Like now. No need to be led ... winked drinks World! Work! May! (sorry for the communist slogan)
                  2. +5
                    17 July 2013 13: 51
                    Oh yes, they also found a "commie"))) Daddy Zyu ... He sold back in 95m ... Or maybe even earlier ...
                    1. +2
                      17 July 2013 14: 30
                      Quote: klimpopov
                      ) Daddy Zyu ... He sold out as early as 95m ... Or maybe earlier ..

                      Как instilled ran into the party, and sold out.
                      1. +3
                        17 July 2013 14: 44
                        Hm. Sash and my father then sold out when he joined the Communist Party. Although the betrayal was precisely in the year 1991 ...
              3. The comment was deleted.
            3. +5
              17 July 2013 12: 44
              Quote: Uhe
              And you take an interest in what they called Stolypin the Hangman,


              Indeed, why not ask?
              Take an interest:


              In 1909, the Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior P. A. Stolypin asked the French journalist Gaston Drew, who interviewed him: "Do you know what figure the manifestations of banditry and anarchist attempts reached in 1906-1908?" And he answered his own question. "In 1906, 4742" attempts "were committed, in which 738 officials and 640 individuals were paid with the lives. 972 officials and 707 private persons were wounded. In 1907, 12102" attempts "were committed, 1231 officials were killed and 1284 were wounded. Individuals were killed 1768 and 1734 were wounded, 2771000 rubles were expropriated from the treasury and from private individuals In 1908, 9424 "assassination attempts" took place, 365 officials were killed, 571 were wounded. 1349 private individuals were killed, 1384 were wounded, 2200000 rubles were expropriated.

              Total: for three years "assassination attempts" - <26268>, 6091 officials and private persons were killed, more than 6000 were wounded, more than 5000000 rubles were robbed.




              Quote: Uhe

              and Nicholas 2 - Nicholas the Bloody;)

              And where are the people here? Continuous propaganda:

              ..... nicknamed radical opposition "Nikolai the Bloody"; with such a nickname appeared in the Soviet popular historiography.
              http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/kurlov_pg/01.html
            4. 0
              17 July 2013 17: 05
              Quote: Uhe
              and Nicholas 2 - Nicholas the Bloody;)

              as for Nicholas’s cliche, everything is ambiguous, there are several options: coronation and Lensky execution (to the latter, the Bolsheviks were more gravitated by it and became official)
          4. Mikado
            0
            17 July 2013 16: 17
            Quote: GreatRussia
            Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?


            but did not apply? Stolypin's military courts tell what?
            1. +2
              17 July 2013 16: 27
              Quote: Mikado
              Quote: GreatRussia
              Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?


              but did not apply? Stolypin's military courts tell what?


              Yes, tell me, getting acquainted to whom this was applied:

              In 1909, the Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior P. A. Stolypin asked the French journalist Gaston Drew, who interviewed him: "Do you know what figure the manifestations of banditry and anarchist attempts reached in 1906-1908?" And he answered his own question. "In 1906, 4742" attempts "were committed, in which 738 officials and 640 individuals were paid with the lives. 972 officials and 707 private persons were wounded. In 1907, 12102" attempts "were committed, 1231 officials were killed and 1284 were wounded. Individuals were killed 1768 and 1734 were wounded, 2771000 rubles were expropriated from the treasury and from private individuals In 1908, 9424 "assassination attempts" took place, 365 officials were killed, 571 were wounded. 1349 private individuals were killed, 1384 were wounded, 2200000 rubles were expropriated.

              Total: for three years "assassination attempts" - <26268>, 6091 officials and private persons were killed, more than 6000 were wounded, more than 5000000 rubles were robbed.
              1. Mikado
                -3
                18 July 2013 21: 34
                This, of course, very interesting information, somehow, tells us that the bloody repression was not applied to the revolutionaries?
          5. +4
            19 July 2013 10: 18
            Joseph Vissarionovich himself got rid of the frenzied revolutionaries.
        2. +4
          17 July 2013 10: 12
          Quote: seasoned
          Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...

          The king was weak. Someone does not argue that his place was not, however, he was not a scoundrel or a scoundrel and did not deserve death, let alone the whole family.
          1. +5
            17 July 2013 10: 29
            Quote: bomg.77
            The king was weak. Someone does not argue that his place was not, however, he was not a scoundrel or a scoundrel and did not deserve death, let alone the whole family.


            Quote: GreatRussia
            Do you think that before the 1917 coup, the revolutionaries should have applied bloody repression?


            In terms of quantity and effectiveness, Russia is up to 17g. surpassed the Russia of our days (starting from the 90s and ending today). Moreover, in many respects, the Russian Empire is still higher than the Federation.
            The entire revolutionary movement was far from based on the donations of the proletariat - all congresses were held in London, during the Russo-Japanese terror against the civilian population sharply increased, during the WWII, the revolutionaries opened a new financial path - from Germany. After the Revolution, the country lost a lot of its population (officers, scientists, intellectuals, ordinary peasants), many provinces, the complete collapse of the country and the persecution of Christians.
            Therefore - YES - the revolutionaries should not have been planted, but hanged.

            The tsar was weak, but not to the extent that they think - beside him, the monarchies of Germany and (partially) Austria fell from the revolutionary ideas. The main, and perhaps the only critical, shortcomings of Nicholas II is that, on the one hand, he could not "ride" the unrest (pursuing, first of all, social and partly liberal goals), and on the other hand, he could not understand the danger for him represents not Stolypin, but the higher nobility, the capitalists (who forced them to abdicate the throne), striving to obtain maximum power, and acting on the revolutionary movements sitting in Switzerland and ready to give half of the country to the enemies just to seize power (remember the Brest Peace).
          2. The comment was deleted.
        3. -1
          17 July 2013 10: 26
          Quote: seasoned
          . Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...

          It’s easy to judge while sitting on the couch, you would probably bet you in his place, probably, the whole world would be fucked up. negative
          1. +11
            17 July 2013 10: 29
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            It’s easy to judge while sitting on the couch, you would probably bet you in his place, probably, the whole world would be fucked up.

            Probably would have gone crazy, but "God does not give horns to a vigorous cow" wassat
            1. -1
              17 July 2013 11: 09
              Quote: seasoned
              "God does not give horns to a whipping cow"

              Then I look in skype, and you have horns laughing Wife did not ask questions wink
              1. +3
                17 July 2013 11: 16
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                I’m looking in skype, but your wife’s horns didn’t ask questions

                Not horn, but horn wassat There is no wife, but the horn is growing, maybe someone from the ancestors with the unicorn sinned? laughing
          2. +10
            17 July 2013 11: 07
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            you would probably tell, the whole world would go crazy.

            Provided that by that moment something else remained from him ..
          3. +1
            17 July 2013 15: 38
            "It's easy to judge sitting on the couch, you would have been driven in his place, probably, the whole world would have gone crazy."
            What am I? That's right! If I hadn’t been banged before, of course ... :)))
        4. 0
          18 July 2013 15: 53
          Quote: seasoned
          And why do you stamp common truths. Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...

          Experienced, then you, forgive me, think in cliches about the lack of will of the king. He did not want to take blood on his soul, the Bolsheviks did it. There was no other way to "cure" these people. This is not lack of will, this is philanthropy, this is love of God in the end.
          And at the expense of reckoning as saints, this is not for us to judge.
      2. Nevsky
        +2
        17 July 2013 10: 04
        They say there was more than the assassination of the royal family.

        1. +2
          17 July 2013 10: 40
          Quote: Nevsky
          They say there was more than the assassination of the royal family.

          The public focused on forensic medical examination (they are not them), but completely ignored the historical examination. Ritual murder is categorically excluded. Read. The level of argumentation in it is unacceptable even for my knowledge on this topic. Investigator V. Solovyov proved himself to be a very compromise person in this matter. IMHO, he tried to conduct this business along the path of least resistance. A lot of facts.

          In the photo, skull No. 4 from the burial, identified as the skull of Nicholas II. It was made on a tomograph at a children's hospital in Yekaterinburg (if you haven’t forgotten - No. 40). From the personal archive.

          PS. Does the site have any guidance on how to insert a picture from your computer (max size, etc.)? In the "change" mode, nothing can be done with your picture).
      3. avt
        +2
        17 July 2013 10: 06
        Quote: GreatRussia
        No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children,

        So the work of them, the kings, was such, very dangerous at times request and by and large Niki No. 2 had to think about it early, at least in 1905, when the first bell rang. Well, with regards to the article, ... people of serfdom are real dogs sometimes, the harder the punishment, the more dear the Lord is ... "Russia is not a Romanov patrimony. Gentlemen Orthodox monarchists - read the Bible, Book of 1 Kings chapter 8, everything is popular there , figuratively and lucidly explained, then let the snot on the new tsar, if you don’t feel sick.
        1. +1
          17 July 2013 10: 08
          Quote: avt
          ... the heavier the punishment, the better gentlemen they are ...

          Is this such an excuse for killing children and atrocities against the Romanovs and domestic servants, thrown alive into the mine and thrown grenades left wounded there to die?
          1. avt
            +1
            17 July 2013 10: 25
            Quote: GreatRussia
            Is this such an excuse for killing children and atrocities against the Romanovs and domestic servants, thrown alive into the mine and thrown grenades left wounded there to die?

            This is a statement of fact. A fairly accurate description of the state of the current monarchists and there is nothing for me to amoral on the old communist principle to sew. Sew it to your chosen head of the Romanovsky house, after building the pyramid in Petropavlovka and sharing the inheritance, he said on camera that only the servants were innocent there, the rest seemed to be at professional risk - the profession is so dangerous they say, the tsar and his family members.
            Quote: Apollon
            They brutally managed, in the end they could have sent them somewhere under reliable protection, in the end the history of the royal family is the history of Russia itself.

            The most interesting thing is that there is no direct evidence, the Bolsheviks kept their word - the fate of the royal family is still not known for sure. At the press conference about the first "remains" Soloviev almost cried when they asked him a question. And where are the shards from the vessels with acid? When the second call was, well, according to the Tsarevich and Anastasia, this moment was corrected and even persistently several times on TV repeated.
          2. Lacoste
            0
            17 July 2013 16: 22
            There is no justification, of course, but you can understand why. You are probably aware of how ordinary people lived in Russia at that time. Why did the king allow pregnant women to work in factories? Why did most live in poverty? Why did children work and die in huge numbers? And why were there people who fattened at the expense of others? It is from all this that it becomes clear why all the same people with such pleasure abandoned the king and sided with the revolution.
            1. -1
              17 July 2013 17: 01
              Well, not with everything, so I threw it about and stood up, people by and large didn’t ask much
              1. Lacoste
                +1
                17 July 2013 17: 04
                The strength of the red army in the civilian was much greater than that of whites. It may have been after the tsar’s revolutions and death, but they definitely didn’t want to return to the former.
                1. -3
                  17 July 2013 17: 48
                  also a moot point, it's me about incentive mativa
            2. +2
              18 July 2013 15: 57
              Quote: Lacoste
              Why did the king allow

              Well, again, one person is to blame! Now Putin is to blame, then Nikolai. Old song.
        2. -1
          17 July 2013 17: 22
          Quote: avt
          So the work of them, the kings, was such, very dangerous at times

          In order to assess the fidelity or fallacy of any historical decision, you need to remember the historical context and put yourself in the place of the people who make the decisions (in this case, the Urals Council)
          Having done this, you immediately come to the conclusion that there were only 2 alternatives.
          1) Maintenance of the family with a retreating army.
          2) The shooting of the whole family.
          Given the rebellion of Muravyov, the first option was extremely doubtful.
          It is also clear that the execution of one Nicholas (all the more so with his wife) did not give anything, because White needed not a king, but a symbol that did not have real power, and the sick heir was ideally suited for this role.
          In fact, only the execution of the servants was truly erroneous, though they themselves refused to leave Nicholas.
      4. +7
        17 July 2013 12: 27
        Quote: GreatRussia
        No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children, is in no way justified and bloody atrocity!

        I agree that it was atrocity, but as you know, the Bolsheviks did not give orders for the execution, and this was a purely arbitrary decision of the local authorities. And how the people treated him then, in modern terms, his rating was very negative. They even wrote in those newspapers such a version of the anthem - "Booozhe take the Tsar." The people were very tired of the dominance of kulaks, landowners and nobles, the mortality rate among ordinary people was simply huge, there was almost no industry, an agrarian third world country.
        If the Tsar pursued the correct policy, then the Bolsheviks would not have any support for the revolution, and so all the people supported them.
        1. Mikado
          -2
          18 July 2013 21: 58
          Firstly, it is not clear why at every corner they shout about the murder of children, according to the then law, there was only one "Child" there - a son, and even then in his years many people worked in the mines and fields for 12-16 hours a day on a par with adults, so I don’t presume to call him “Child” either. Secondly, according to Lenin's correspondence, it is known that they wanted to take the former tsar to court in Moscow in order to publicly judge and publicly execute, so that there would be no reason later to appear by all "miraculously saved". But the people "on the ground" decided in their own way, realized that they had such a chance - to shoot the king himself, and he was about to be taken away from them, and played a comedy with a sudden offensive of the whites.
      5. +1
        17 July 2013 14: 47
        By the way, not the Bolsheviks. The SRs were there. The Bolsheviks were just against it, they were going to negotiate and use the tsar as propaganda - some of the people still believed in the legend of the "good tsar-father". Sverdlov gave an order for liquidation under very incomprehensible circumstances, there is even a fairly well-founded opinion that there was a conspiracy between the whites and the reds to eliminate the tsar and his family (the whites were not just monarchists, for example, Kolchak's monarchists were pursued by counterintelligence). So this case is very vague, muddy and indistinct ...
      6. +3
        17 July 2013 15: 24
        Quote: GreatRussia
        No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children, is in no way justified and bloody atrocity!

        if we ignore the sentiments, then the question is controversial, albeit very delicate, the Bolsheviks destroyed a possible "banner" around which unification could take place, unfortunately the rest of the family was removed from this OBLIGATION

        Rayevsky’s youngest son was 11 years old, he, like his elder brother, who was 17, was with his father on the Borodino field, and what did this whole family do in civilian when the future of the country was decided? !!!
      7. 0
        22 July 2013 11: 33
        GreatRussia SU July 17, 2013 09:57 ↑

        No matter how anyone relates to the Romanovs, but the murder of the whole family, including children, is in no way justified and bloody atrocity!


        And the assassination of Princess Elizabeth Fedorovna and other members of the Romanov dynasty can be compared only with the atrocities of the Nazis:

        Perhaps you are right, only how to relate to the history of the Khodynka field, I don’t see the point of listing further.
        If you are a KING with a capital letter, then besides the blessings given by this circumstance, there is everything else - the struggle for the throne, the preservation of the throne, the good of the heirs, the good of those close to the throne and their responsibility for EVERYTHING around.
        And the fact that he is counted among the saints, I think this is a tribute to the time when this happened, now this would not have happened. I believe that this is a big mistake of the Orthodox Church.
    2. +9
      17 July 2013 10: 09
      Quote: seasoned
      I feel sorry for the family, the king is not the least bit ...


      I welcome you Alexey! hi As for the tsar, you are in vain. He was a symbol of the state power of the country. They were brutally dealt with, in the end they could have been exiled somewhere under reliable protection, in the end the history of the royal family is the history of Russia itself.
      1. +6
        17 July 2013 10: 21
        Quote: Apollon
        As for the king, you are in vain. He was a symbol of the state power of the country.

        When a new state is being built, new symbols come into force, and the old go into oblivion. So from the point of view of building a state, everything is logical.
        1. Uhe
          Uhe
          -1
          17 July 2013 12: 06
          But the Chinese acted wiser, not executing their own;)

          It is necessary to execute finished murderers, traitors, and the rest need to be re-educated, for the benefit of effective methods now are a dime a dozen, although not all of them are philanthropic. The Chinese also applied strong methods of psychological re-education to their king, and they succeeded. But they broke it cruelly, but they left it alive. This is more humane than execution.
        2. +2
          17 July 2013 12: 12
          Quote: baltika-18
          So from the point of view of building a state, everything is logical.

          Consequently, is it logical and dichotomy - physical extermination? Destruction, mainly physical, of other classes?

          Whose state are you writing about?
          1. -2
            17 July 2013 13: 29
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            Consequently, is it logical and dichotomy - physical extermination?

            In general, the Cossacks have always been the main armed force of the Russian state, at least under the Ruriks. But after the troubles that brought the Romanovs to power, they began to fight with the Cossacks, tk. they defended the Russian values ​​and the Russian culture, and the Romanovs, as stavleniks of the West, promoted Western culture, eradicating everything Russian! Peter 1 even made fun of the people by ordering to celebrate the new year (translation "new god") on the day of the circumcision of the Lord, and to congratulate each other not on the new summer, but on the new God (Year). And he himself hardly spoke Russian .. But the Last Romanovs had already mutated and merged with Russian culture, only they still did not find the keys to the Russian spirit, for which they paid ..
            1. +2
              17 July 2013 14: 00
              Quote: DEfindER
              Cossacks, in general, have always been the main armed force of the Russian state, at least under the Ruriks.

              At least under most Rurikovich Cossacks did not yet exist as an estate.
              Quote: DEfindER
              But the Last Romanovs have already mutated and merged with Russian culture
              Sorry, but this is just a standard! Better to use the term "evolved". Turtles mutated in their time. laughing from the memorable creativity of our potential adversary
              Save on your computer - a masterpiece.
              1. +1
                17 July 2013 15: 21
                Quote: Bronis
                At least under most Rurikovich Cossacks did not yet exist as an estate.

                It was precisely with the Romanovs that they were singled out as an estate. And before that they were just Russian warriors.
                1. 0
                  17 July 2013 15: 53
                  Quote: DEfindER
                  And before that they were just Russian warriors

                  Unfortunately, this is often heard. But this has nothing to do with history, alas. If we talk about Kievan Rus, then there the military class was narrowly professional, having nothing to do with the Cossacks. Russians are not Vikings. There were mostly farmers. Well, the Cossacks began to form much later - towards the end of the feudal fragmentation of very variegated seekers of the "best lot". I'm sorry, but it sounds a little better than "The Great History of Ancient Ukrov".
                  1. +1
                    17 July 2013 23: 24
                    Quote: Bronis
                    Unfortunately, this is often heard. But this attitude is unfortunately not related to history. If we talk about Kievan Rus, then there the military-service class was narrowly professional, having nothing to do with the Cossacks.

                    In general, all historical sources say that Cossacks are free people who could either work or fight for hire. Therefore, all our Kings took them to their army, and they constituted, so to speak, the professional fist of the Russian army. And remember the uprisings of Razin and Pugachev, against the Romanovs, the Cossacks there were the main force, because despite all their liberties, they had a homeland, and they could not allow the substitution of Russian culture, Western, which the Romanovs sought.
                    1. +1
                      18 July 2013 14: 43
                      Quote: DEfindER
                      In general, all historical sources say that Cossacks are free people who could either work or fight for hire. Therefore, all our Kings took them to their army, and they constituted, so to speak, the professional fist of the Russian army. And remember the uprising of Razin and Pugachev, against the Romanovs

                      Ages, please do not confuse. The first Rurikovichs and the first Romanovs are separated by almost 700 years. In the XNUMXth century, there were no Cossacks ... Our history was rewritten many times to please the momentary political situation. This is a fact, but now there are many quasi-historians-graphomaniacs. They often write not historical studies, but set out their excessively rich inner world. Some are for money, and some are simply inadequate. Science - science, "artist" - "artist".
                2. +1
                  17 July 2013 18: 15
                  Quote: DEfindER
                  And before that they were just Russian warriors.

                  mmm, or rather fluent
                  1. +1
                    18 July 2013 14: 44
                    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                    mmm, or rather fluent

                    In vain you were minus, you + One of the most significant sources of replenishment was ... A normal historical fact, but shy for some reason .. for some reason they didn’t run away from gingerbread
                    1. 0
                      18 July 2013 16: 25
                      there is no extradition from Don wink
          2. +5
            17 July 2013 14: 04
            About
            Quote: baltika-18
            When a new state is being built, new symbols come into force, and the old go into oblivion. So from the point of view of building a state, everything is logical.


            Foolish. Zaminusovali. This is your country and the story began in 1917 or like that of the Bear in the 1991s. And my country and my people live a thousand years and then in the gray of centuries and will live another 10000 years. And my symbols Alexander Nevsky, Ivan the Terrible, Alexander Suvorov and others have not gone into nothingness. I do not betray my ancestors and do not sell. And no terror can not be considered a crime. Even sweetheart to the minus one red.

            PS. Many here confuse their nodular acquaintance with agitprop and real knowledge of history, including period of Nicholas II and, especially, the circumstances of the killing by the Bolsheviks of the royal family (not only Nicholas II, AF, daughters and Alexei) and their close ones. To make definitive conclusions, you need to be sure that you know that you know something. About this, Plato spoke. For you - also not a symbol.
            1. +2
              17 July 2013 14: 33
              Quote: Nikolai S.
              PS. Many here confuse their nodular acquaintance with agitprop and real knowledge of history, including

              Many here do not know it at all! The story for them is that all-zombies have invested in the school.
              1. -2
                17 July 2013 15: 25
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Many here do not know it at all! The story for them is that all-zombies have invested in the school.

                As I accumulated knowledge, I revised many of my views on Russian history. But even in his young years he was ready to listen and perceive arguments, and to argue his position.

                Your opponents not only do not know how to listen, but also do not want to hear. And they want to score with dogmas (and not arguments) and so, like, win the dispute. Therefore, I sympathize with you in your struggle on this site, especially with trolls.

                Itself categorically unacceptable any dogmatic thinking, incl. any party or sectarian, or, even more so, imposed by the propaganda of foreign non-profit organizations.

                Question as a moderator. Where are the rules for posting your pictures? I wanted to hit the forum users with a couple of photos or scans, because dealt with this topic, even fulfilled instructions of the Government Commission to me. But I already realized that the very essence of the topic is not interesting here. Here people solve much more important issues. Therefore, a question for the future, suddenly you need to insert a picture from Murzilka.
                1. -3
                  17 July 2013 18: 25
                  Quote: Nikolai S.
                  And they want to score with dogmas (and not arguments)

                  examples in the studio
                  1. shpuntik
                    +1
                    17 July 2013 19: 05

                    Vasilenko Vladimir (2) SU Today, 18:25 ↑ New
                    examples in the studio

                    And, here's a goose-shaven for you: Lazar Moiseevich Kaganovich (Cohen). He survived all, died calmly. So, just standing behind me, and nothing else lol.
                    When he turned the handle of the dynamo machine, during the explosion of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, he would say: "Eh, let's pull up the hem of Mother Russia!"
                    1. -1
                      17 July 2013 20: 19
                      in the elderberry garden ...
                      what relation do I have to the cogan, dynamo and other garbage that you have tried, where are examples of some dogmas that I rely on?
                      1. shpuntik
                        +2
                        17 July 2013 22: 26
                        Army General
                        Vasilenko Vladimir (2) SU Today, 20:19 ↑
                        in the elderberry garden ...
                        what relation do I have to the cogan, dynamo and other garbage that you have tried, where are examples of some dogmas that I rely on?

                        Here, I apologize, I put a colon in the wrong place: "shaved goose" is to Lazar Moiseevich :-)
                        As for dogmas, it was not for you, so I responded to the call: "examples in the studio", given your attitude to the murdered king. And this "elder" is about good and evil. Not the evil that is on the surface, not the "red" and "white", the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks with the Socialist-Revolutionaries, no. It's about metaphysics, about the fight against Christianity. Who fought? I showed the tip of the iceberg above.
                        Well, and the spiritual causes of the crisis here in this video, we are talking about the sacrament, from the second minute:
                2. soldier's grandson
                  -1
                  17 July 2013 23: 43
                  my story is a young powerful USSR, which everyone was afraid and respected, and the people who broke the ridge of fascism, and your struggle on the site resembles convulsions of a rotten west. I am not interested and do not need to raise the theme of the tsar who pro-Japanese war, which brought the people to beggarly, especially smart people understood that they needed to take control into their own hands. and the tsar had a lot of time to correct mistakes, but everything was spent in hard labor, shots of demonstrations, and his rotten environment itself renounced the anointed. god be his judge
          3. 0
            17 July 2013 15: 21
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            Whose state are you writing about?

            About his native Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
            1. +8
              17 July 2013 15: 58
              Quote: baltika-18
              About his native Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

              One must love the Motherland, the Fatherland and not be confused with the leaders. Then there will be no internal contradictions. Leaders come and go. And the Romanovs left. And Lenin with Trotsky. And even Putin will leave. In all periods of the history of my country, including in the Soviet Union, there were mistakes, there were disasters, but there was great, there is something to be proud of. And not so that in one case everything is only good, in the other - everything is bad. In any case, 4 thousand Cossacks and 150 thousand Cossacks left Russia from the Bolsheviks, and no one went to defend the USSR.

              I regret you. Your country is less than 100 years old. And mine - only according to written sources, much more than 1000.

              When a person has a Fatherland, no amount of power will confuse him. In a war, when it was necessary to withstand and win, then not only the Patriarchate was restored, etc. They even went into battle first "for the Motherland" and then "for Stalin." Note - not "for the USSR, for Stalin."
              1. soldier's grandson
                -3
                18 July 2013 00: 10
                my grandfathers who defeated fascism stand for me higher than a cowardly king, and you are probably one of those mummers who drag portraits of the king in your madhouse on open door
      2. +3
        17 July 2013 10: 27
        Quote: Apollon
        As for the tsar, you are in vain. He was a symbol of the state power of the country. They were brutally dealt with, in the end they could have been exiled somewhere under reliable protection, in the end the history of the royal family is the history of Russia itself.

        Greetings Apollo! hi It is clear that this is the history of Russia, but these are not its best pages. Yes, it was the Emperor, but as a figure he was a "dummy" and as a result he destroyed what his ancestors had cultivated for generations, so that he went down in history as a man who destroyed the Empire. The new government did not expel him anywhere, because they understood that they would become a person who would unite the scattered forces of the counter-revolution, besides, there were many versions that they were going to release him there and therefore the execution was so fleeting. In Soviet history, the execution was justified and the tsar was defamed, now they made a martyr of him, I don't know what will happen tomorrow, maybe the palaces will be returned to the descendants and the Kremlin will be given ...
        1. +6
          17 July 2013 10: 32
          Quote: seasoned
          maybe the descendants will be returned palaces and the Kremlin will give ...


          nothing will be returned, but in the interests of future generations, rehabilitation is needed.
        2. 0
          22 July 2013 15: 15
          Actually, at the beginning, they just wanted to send it. They offered England but those noses turned away and refused. In general, here the people are right about the Bolsheviks, it was the Bolsheviks who did not plan the murder of the entire royal family, this is a decision of the local authorities, and not by order from above.
      3. +3
        17 July 2013 10: 33
        Quote: Apollon
        As for the king, you are in vain. He was a symbol of the state power of the countries.

        Hi Apollo! With two hands in favor, today we criticize Putin for his weakness, because he does not shoot a bunch of different freaks. It is easiest to criticize and spit on the Tsar after the passage of time, especially if a lot of time has passed and there are no more participants in the events.
        The Tsar is the master of the Russian land, and now we have no master, but there are liberals who overthrew the Tsar a century ago
      4. +8
        17 July 2013 10: 45
        "... He was a symbol of the state power of the country ..." Apollon  Today, 10:09 ↑

        He was not any "symbol". He himself abdicated the throne, betrayed Russia, and with all his actions brought the state to destruction. After his abdication, he was simply Nikolai Romanov.
        On the example of Nikolai the Bloody, all layers of Russian society understood - the monarchy for Russia has passed the stage, the brake in its further development.
        And no "revolutionaries" did not overthrow the tsar, he himself "resigned" from his post under the applause of the upper strata of society and the generals of the Russian army, who saw what mediocrity rules Russia.
        It's a pity for the family, but Nikolai Romanov himself chose this to take into account.
        1. -1
          17 July 2013 10: 57
          Quote: vladimirZ
          He abdicated, betrayed Russia,



          It’s a pity that I don’t have the time ..........!
          And you. it seems to me that you are renouncing history, you are renouncing the country. The minus you deserve.
          1. +5
            17 July 2013 11: 03
            What makes you think that I renounce history. History needs to know and be able to draw conclusions from it so as not to repeat past mistakes.
            History itself has proved the correctness of the "withdrawal" of the monarchy from Russia. God forbid that Russia met World War II with a monarchical form of government.
            1. -3
              17 July 2013 11: 08
              Quote: vladimirZ
              God forbid that Russia meet the Second World War with a monarchical form of government.

              And what would it be? smile This would not be a war.
              1. -6
                17 July 2013 11: 21
                RETX  Today, 11:08 ↑ New

                Quote: vladimirZ
                God forbid that Russia meet the Second World War with a monarchical form of government.


                And what would it be? This would not be a war.


                Where are such conclusions from?
                Repeat the course of history, cause-effect relations the beginning of world wars, so as not to issue such pearls.
                1. +3
                  17 July 2013 11: 45
                  What is the course of history if we are talking about an alternative? Poland and Finland as part of the Republic of Ingushetia, Romania and all the Balkans below us. Would Hitler be in this case?
            2. +3
              17 July 2013 12: 49
              Well now you can continue the discussion.
              Quote: vladimirZ
              God forbid that Russia meet the Second World War with a monarchical form of government.


              England met the Second World ....... monarchical form of government and ......?!
              Next


              Quote: vladimirZ
              He was not any "symbol". He himself abdicated the throne, betrayed Russia,


              You didn’t learn history, he was forced to abdicate, or you don’t know?! Since he voluntarily abdicated life for him and his family should be preserved in any case, remember the reason for abdication, or remind you, in the name of preserving the integrity of Russia and its main purpose renunciation to avoid civil war.
              As for the betrayal, well, here you are great bent, where and when did you betray Russia ?!
              Look at the picture, the picture presented by me doesn’t tell you anything ?!
        2. +3
          17 July 2013 11: 11
          Quote: vladimirZ
          He was not any "symbol". He himself abdicated the throne, betrayed Russia, with all his actions brought the state to destruction

          And the people are the same, it’s easier to blame the Tsar than on their own stupidity fool
          1. +8
            17 July 2013 11: 45
            Sasha. But what nonsense? I mean the people of that time. The people were confronted with the fact and then the interim government ... Kerensky ... by the way, too, is now a hero and so on ...
            1. +1
              17 July 2013 14: 35
              Quote: klimpopov
              I mean the people of that time. The people were confronted with a fact and then the interim government ...

              They could have driven out onto the street for the Tsar, but they didn’t go out; on the contrary, they went for the Reds.
              1. +7
                17 July 2013 14: 57
                So and for whom to marry if the king is no longer kind of like. And for the "red" not so much that originally went. The Bolsheviks had something to offer the people, the part of it that had nothing. Again, what did the provisional government offer? Essers? Nothing! And the generals? They dreamed of ascending the throne and reviving the old regime, under which they lived comfortably and their children were guaranteed a comfortable existence. That's what they fought for, not for Russia.
      5. Uhe
        Uhe
        0
        17 July 2013 12: 04
        By that time he was no longer - he renounced himself. Otherwise, I completely agree. But there the whites entered the city. Although I do not believe that there was no other way out and it was necessary to shoot. However, so many kings and their children were killed before him, that it makes no sense to cry for this alone.
    3. +1
      17 July 2013 10: 20
      Quote: seasoned
      I feel sorry for the family the king is not the least bit ...

      Quote: seasoned
      Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...

      I agree. Himself renounced, himself, weak-willed, and the family ruined.
      And the family ... So it’s not just women and children, it’s the wife and children of the KING. Of course, I feel sorry for their people ... but they are heirs and successors of the clan ... They became hostages to the character of Pope, Nikolai ...
      During the formation of China, ordinary children were killed (alive in the earth) - so that there was no one to take revenge in the future ...

      And the article is a minus. One-sided and tearful.
      1. +4
        17 July 2013 10: 24
        Quote: Z.A.M.
        I agree. He renounced himself ...

        This is written with a pitchfork on the water, just look at the conditions of "renunciation".
      2. avt
        +12
        17 July 2013 10: 32
        Quote: Z.A.M.
        I agree. Sam renounced himself

        And here you are wrong. a letter with the words, "To the Chief of the General Staff ..." is not a manifesto of renunciation, but a cry for help from a man squeezed by the conspirators, but EVERYTHING was betrayed, and all the rest of the then monarchical elite, and now the responsibility is poured onto the people in general and forced to repent, in circles to walk with banners, beg for a new tsar.
      3. +1
        17 July 2013 10: 35
        Quote: Z.A.M.
        I agree. He denied himself, weak-willed, and killed his family.

        All by himself, oh what a bad one. They did not force him to renounce him, to see, according to yours and the execution of his own family, he himself gave the order. How many are you fool
        1. Penachet
          +6
          17 July 2013 11: 30
          Gee-gee, yes there are a lot of us. If the tsar (president) does not know what is going on in his country (i.e., with all state special services apparatus, police, etc. subordinate to him, he stupidly does not change the situation) , then on ...... he is needed, such a king (president). And then there is nobody to remember. I DO NOT DESERVE !!!
          1. +3
            17 July 2013 12: 14
            Quote: Penachet
            , then on ...... he is needed, such a king (president). And

            are you talking about Putin now? Does the country need you?
        2. +3
          17 July 2013 11: 52
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          They didn’t force him to abdicate, to see, according to yours and the execution of his own family, he himself gave the order. How many are you

          sorry stupidity froze and all fell into one pile
          he denied himself or under duress it doesn’t matter to me, just as it doesn’t matter for what reasons the mother left the child in the baby’s house, this was done and this can not be discussed, HE betrayed the country, the reasons don’t interest me
          1. 0
            17 July 2013 14: 38
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            He betrayed the country, the reasons do not interest me

            Those who shot were also not interested in the reasons, the verdict was passed and should be executed. The reasons will not interest you, but you are sure that he betrayed.
            You are not just a bunch, you wrote crap.
            1. 0
              17 July 2013 15: 05
              he betrayed not then when he was shot, but much earlier.
              he took upon himself the burden of managing the state and had no right to throw this burden, we want all the benefits that such a "position" implies, but we forget about responsibilities.
              as for crap (to be rude then why) you can point out what is wrong, not verbiage and not understandable phrases, but on clear and concrete examples.

              p / s / I am a convinced monarchist and I believe that this form of government is the only possible for Russia, but the Romanovs have no moral right to even look this way, they did not have a sense of duty to raise the Russian patriots who were in exile to fight the Germans in exile 41, they did not want to save the country in neither 17 nor 18
    4. +3
      17 July 2013 10: 21
      Quote: seasoned
      In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was vague and more worthy people died terrible deaths.


      Passion-bearer - this is the name in the Orthodox Church in general for all Christian martyrs who suffered suffering (passion, Greek πάθος, πάθημα, lat. Passio) in the name of Jesus Christ. But mainly this name refers to those saints, who did not accept the martyrdom for the Christian faith, in contrast to the martyrs and great martyrs, perhaps even from their loved ones and co-religionists - because of their anger, greed, cunning, conspiracy.

      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D1%F2%F0%E0%F1%F2%EE%F2%E5%F0%EF%E5%F6
    5. +2
      17 July 2013 10: 23
      Quote: seasoned
      Sani Romanov has a good reason to "throw up" today drinks
      I feel sorry for the family, the tsar is not a bit ... In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was troublesome and more worthy people died terrible deaths.

      ++++ I fully support! He was primarily the Tsar, and he betrayed the people with his abdication! -This confusion and introduced into the minds .. He is a traitor and not a saint. And I feel sorry for the children ..
      1. -4
        17 July 2013 10: 36
        Quote: skrgar
        ! He was first of all the Tsar, and he betrayed the people with his abdication!

        The people betrayed him, and not vice versa! The people followed the liberals. Who ultimately shot the Tsar.
        1. +6
          17 July 2013 10: 51
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          The people betrayed him

          Alexander, the people were simply fooled by populist slogans.
          1. -1
            17 July 2013 11: 14
            Quote: bomg.77
            the people were simply fooled by populist slogans.

            are people fooled? But what brains are given to you and to me and others? people are fooled, but look at the comments now after almost a century, nonsense is not gone hi there is no need to seek excuses for the people, and even more so for the soldiers and officers who have flooded the whole country. I do not say the oath. Faith, the King and the Fatherland - EVERYTHING HAS BEEN TRADED!
            1. +7
              17 July 2013 12: 29
              As in 1991 was betrayed by the CPSU. First and foremost, and secondly by the people ...
            2. +5
              17 July 2013 13: 37
              Maybe you are partly right, but I wouldn’t talk about betrayal about the people. The case was in St. Petersburg and everything was decided in the capital, the rest of the country's population was not asked as in the 91 year. They fooled him. Now, after a hundred years, the lie has really mixed up therefore argue, trying to get to the truth. hi
              PS When disputes over the revolution begin, Larashfoucauld's statement comes to mind: "People sobbing over the horrors of the revolution, shed at least one tear about the horrors that gave birth to it"
              1. +3
                17 July 2013 14: 40
                Quote: bomg.77
                People sobbing over the horrors of the revolution, - shed at least one tear about the horrors that gave birth to it "

                You will not see tears here, there will be hatred and anger hi
            3. Lacoste
              +1
              17 July 2013 16: 26
              As I understand it, the king should act in the interests of the people. How did it happen that interests diverged?
            4. Anti
              0
              18 July 2013 01: 12
              This is also his fault, in tsarist Russia only 10 percent of the population was literate. And with the advent of Soviet power, illiteracy was over.
        2. avt
          +3
          17 July 2013 11: 39
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          The people betrayed him, and not vice versa!

          Stupidity please assert. The people follow a LEADER who is able to captivate with an idea and a set, attractive goal. And it goes on confidently and with self-sacrifice until the stated words do not diverge from the deeds. As Julian Semenovich Leandr wrote in one of his detectives, Semenov "-" The profession of the leader is the greatness of the nation! The lot of the leader is modesty! The profession of the leader is the exact correspondence of promises with their fulfillment! " And no monarchical principle of blood will help here, this is only for neurostenics - to let snot on the next anniversary of any event. And the current attempts to inflate the idea of ​​monarchy are more like a banal ideological impotence, a kind of childish attempt to cover his head with a monarchic blanket to hide from problems and challenges time.
          1. 0
            17 July 2013 12: 16
            Quote: avt
            .A current attempts to inflate the monarchical idea are more like a banal ideological impotence

            with impotence to the doctor is your problem. And the state of Russia, Rus.was always with the Tsars. The presidents, like the parliament, came to us from the west. As they came, they will leave
            1. avt
              0
              17 July 2013 14: 39
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              , Rus.was always with the Kings.

              Which one? The title of tsar Vanya IV officially entrusted himself, so he took it, and he called himself king laughing And before that, even the Great, but the princes were, it is, for reference. Well, as the Romanov dynasty reigned in our country, this is generally an epic! laughing The thieves' Cossacks Trubetskoy from the camp of the Tushinsky thief, the next False Dmitry, moved Misha to the kingdom, while the Pozharsky militia chased the Poles, but his father, whom Godunov forcibly tonsured as a monk, and the Tushinsky thief False Dmitry No. 2 made him a patriarch, specifically blessed for the kingdom. laughing Well, once again, as a person with a monarchical headset, and now for
              Quote: Perch_1
              Russia will return to the tsar in the near future, after a terrible world war, as was predicted by the elders ascetics.
              I strongly recommend, again, as Orthodox Christians, well, you read the source. The Bible, the Old Testament, the First Book of Kings, chapter 8, there is for those who cry out to be given a king, well, everything is very intelligently and intelligibly written out what to expect in this case and what then you will never get.
            2. +4
              17 July 2013 14: 58
              But what about the Novgorod veche? As an example.
      2. Perch_xnumx
        -3
        17 July 2013 10: 59
        ++++ I fully support! He was primarily the Tsar, and he betrayed the people with his abdication! -This confusion and introduced into the minds .. He is a traitor and not a saint. And I feel sorry for the children ..

        It was not the king who renounced the country, but the country from the king. The king didn’t destroy and destroy, attacked churches, killed priests. The people became godless and depraved, all this resulted in revolution and communism.
        Russia will return to the tsar in the near future, after a terrible world war, as was predicted by the elders ascetics.
        1. -1
          17 July 2013 11: 10
          Quote: Perch_1
          ++++ I fully support! He was primarily the Tsar, and he betrayed the people with his abdication! -This confusion and introduced into the minds .. He is a traitor and not a saint. And I feel sorry for the children ..

          It was not the king who renounced the country, but the country from the king. The king didn’t destroy and destroy, attacked churches, killed priests. The people became godless and depraved, all this resulted in revolution and communism.
          Russia will return to the tsar in the near future, after a terrible world war, as was predicted by the elders ascetics.

          The people became godless only when they renounced! The Tsar-Stavlenik of God, the people were faithful to this postulate. And the "Son of God" renounced, which "said" to the people .. "Godlessness has come" - the people have brought this into chaos !! He is about his own skin! thought, renounced, sent two ships with gold to England, after all, everyone knew! The Bolsheviks would not have dared “to shove the Tsar!” They had already overthrown the Provisional Government ..
          1. Perch_xnumx
            +2
            17 July 2013 11: 39
            Quote: skrgar

            The people became godless only when they renounced! The Tsar-Stavlenik of God, the people were faithful to this postulate. And the "Son of God" renounced, which "said" to the people .. "Godlessness has come" - the people have brought this into chaos !! He is about his own skin! thought, renounced, sent two ships with gold to England, after all, everyone knew! The Bolsheviks would not have dared “to shove the Tsar!” They had already overthrown the Provisional Government ..

            The people were godless. Russia did not decompose immediately. Everyone is responsible for himself, and not screaming, the atheist is the king to blame, I am a drunkard and the king walking this is to blame. Where did the crowds of atheists of workers and peasants come from, which the churches and monasteries had torn apart, where did those who killed the priests came from. If people were believers, the king would never have left the king. And by the way, even the highlanders — the wild division told the tsar, we’ll leave for us to defend you, we even wanted to arrange an assault to liberate the tsar, and these are the Caucasians, the Highlanders who fought in the tsarist army.
            1. avt
              +2
              17 July 2013 11: 49
              Quote: Perch_1
              And by the way, even the highlanders - the wild division spoke to the king,

              It was .
              Quote: Perch_1
              they even wanted to organize an assault to liberate the king, and these are the highlanders of the Caucasians who fought in the tsarist army.

              And here they lied, because it was just exactly the opposite. They decided not to go to the Tsar's rescue, they say, it’s the Russians’s business and let them figure it out themselves, but as they wrote earlier, they suggested that if he wants to, give him shelter at home.
          2. +4
            17 July 2013 12: 17
            Quote: skrgar
            The people became godless only when they renounced!

            Oh, the Tsar denied and the people immediately became godless, but don’t write crap, look around.
        2. +1
          17 July 2013 11: 16
          Quote: Perch_1

          It was not the king who renounced the country, but the country from the king. The king didn’t destroy and destroy, attacked churches, killed priests. The people became godless and depraved, all this resulted in revolution and communism.

          Just a plus and respect!
        3. +9
          17 July 2013 11: 47
          And by the way, why did the people turn away from the church and why did they hate the Orthodox religion? So not religion itself, but its priests personifying ... Does it not remind you of anything?
          Russia will return to the tsar in the near future, after a terrible world war, as was predicted by the elders ascetics.

          wassat although I have suspicions what kind of dynasty will be and what surname, although it seems like a daughter ...
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 12: 19
            Quote: klimpopov
            And by the way, why did the people turn away from the church and why did they hate the Orthodox religion?

            Klim is a simple question! Why do thousands go to the swamp, why are they spitting in the Church here?
            Quote: klimpopov
            although I have suspicions what kind of dynasty will be and what surname, although it seems like a daughter ...

            No, not Putin, the other will be a surname.
            1. +4
              17 July 2013 12: 33
              Klim is a simple question! Why do thousands go to the swamp, why are they spitting in the Church here?

              And I do not believe the priests who sell faith! And I can give a lot of examples from my life! I do not spit in the church but it’s very disgusting from the priests! There is no faith behind them! Behind them is window dressing. Not for everyone of course .. As then ..
              There is God, there is a church ...
              Py Sy at the marsh I do not go to church I do not spit.
              1. +3
                17 July 2013 14: 42
                Quote: klimpopov

                And I do not believe the priests who sell faith!

                Klim, there are those who trade, and there are those who honestly serve their duty. Everything is as in life, there are honest cops, and there are corrupt ones. I answered fully, look for the difference yourself.
                1. +1
                  17 July 2013 15: 25
                  Only now the majority, unfortunately, "rotted".
                  Klim, there are those who trade, and there are those who honestly serve their duty

                  And the principles of their ministry have changed somehow ...
          2. avt
            0
            17 July 2013 14: 48
            Quote: klimpopov
            And by the way, why did the people turn away from the church and why did they hate the Orthodox religion? So not religion itself, but its priests personifying ... Does it not remind you of anything?

            There is a very good old film - "The Feast of St. Jorgen" over there in an artistic form and the answer was given, in particular, to Chaplin's exclamation, "And why a priest should be poor" and while others cite parables about a camel, which is easier to crawl into the eye of a needle than the rich go to heaven. When people claiming spiritual leadership, let's say more generally - the priests begin to stupidly eat into three throats at the expense of the people whom they must lead morally and spiritually, then there is nothing to be surprised at the response of the deceived people. This general rule also affected the communists with the final of the USSR in 1991.
          3. +2
            17 July 2013 16: 33
            Quote: klimpopov
            And by the way, why did the people turn away from the church and why did they hate the Orthodox religion? So not religion itself, but its priests personifying ... Does it not remind you of anything?

            If the people had denied and hated, after several decades of planting godlessness, the following would not have happened:


            On September 4, 1943, Stalin (Karpov and V. M. Molotov were also present) received Metropolitans Sergius (Stragorodsky), Alexy (Simansky) and Nikolai (Yarushevich); during the conversation, it was decided to elect the Patriarch [10], to open theological educational institutions; agreed on the creation of a body for interaction between the Russian Orthodox Church and the government - the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church at the Council of People's Commissars. In response to the topic raised by Metropolitan Sergius about the persecution of the clergy, the need to increase the number of parishes, the release of bishops and priests who were in exile, prisons, camps and the possibility of unhindered worship, free movement around the country and residence in cities - Stalin is right there gave instructions to "study the matter." He, in turn, suggested that Sergius prepare lists of priests who are in prison. On October 27, 1943, Patriarch Sergius presented a list of 26 names (24 bishops, 1 archimandrite and 1 archpriest) [11]. From this list, only one clergyman was not executed - Bishop Nikolai (Mogilev), but he remained in prison for more than a year and a half.

            As a result of the “change of course” over the next five years in the USSR, where by the beginning of World War II, according to various sources, from 150 to 400 active parishes remained, hundreds of churches and even one monastery — the Trinity-Sergius Lavra — were opened. Thousands of temples, opened by believers themselves in the occupied territories, were registered as “actually operating”; the number of Orthodox communities (including the "reunited" Uniate) has, according to some sources, reached 22 thousand. The overwhelming majority of the clergy in the camps, who were fortunate enough not to be shot in 1937-1938, were released from prison. The direct persecution of believers by the “Union of Militant Atheists” [3] has ceased. As a residence, the Patriarch was given the building of the former German embassy. The state virtually ceased support for the renovationist structures, which by 1946 were completely liquidated.
        4. The comment was deleted.
    6. -5
      17 July 2013 10: 25
      Quote: seasoned
      It’s a pity for the family, not a bit of the tsar ... In my opinion, they have vainly counted the martyrs

      Well, minus you bold!
      1. +6
        17 July 2013 10: 32
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Well, minus you bold!

        Stop revenge for the namesake wassat Be more objective drinks
        1. 0
          17 July 2013 11: 21
          Quote: seasoned
          Be more objective

          I am more than objective! It is you (the people), including you, who are ready to make Krainim any convenient, although you did not live in that era. Now you don’t make Putin’s margin, now you say Nemtsov, Kasparov and others are corrupt, but not Putin. But at the same time you forget that at that time, in fact, there were their own marshes that could achieve renunciation. Now they are yelling, too, as then. 2013 -Russia without Putin, 2017 Russia without a Tsar. What has changed Lesha, all the same. Does history really teach nothing, maybe it's time to turn your brains on yourself and think?
          1. +6
            17 July 2013 11: 27
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            I am more than objective! It is you (the people), including you, who are ready to make Krainim any convenient, although you did not live in that era. Now you do not make Putin’s margin, now you say Nemtsov, Kasparov and others are corrupt creatures, but not Putin

            Everything seems to be "thrown" in the memory of the namesake drinks
          2. +2
            17 July 2013 11: 52
            Definitely a healthy grain to eat! But! And what in a healthy state is it possible to play on contradictions like this?
            Isn't the power itself to blame for the unrest?
            And then and now and always ...
            And if the faces of the saints, then Alexander III ... Although all these are human conventions that have nothing to do with God ...
            1. +3
              17 July 2013 14: 44
              Quote: klimpopov
              And what in a healthy state is it possible to play on contradictions like this?

              Out of the easy. What revolution has recently taken place without any interference from outside?
              1. +5
                17 July 2013 15: 17
                Intervention from outside is possible when there are certain contradictions in the state itself and these contradictions sway - sometimes longer, sometimes less. But, in a healthy and prosperous society, the PEOPLE'S revolution is impossible! People just won’t go.
                1. +3
                  17 July 2013 15: 28
                  Quote: klimpopov
                  . But, in a healthy and prosperous society, the PEOPLE'S revolution is impossible! People just won’t go.

                  Drops on the economy of Libya for example, it was not just a prosperous society, but more than a socialist one. Grandmas are poured into any collapse - into any - forever!
                  1. +2
                    17 July 2013 16: 00
                    The scale is just different! A revolution in a small country or a revolution in Russia. As they say, feel the difference. Were satisfied and dissatisfied. The fact that participation from outside was in Russia is also understandable. But why, then, did the king not rely on the people, but on his elites, who ultimately betrayed him?

                    Grandmas are poured into any collapse - into any - forever!

                    I agree.
          3. +4
            17 July 2013 13: 13
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            I am more than objective! It is you (people), including you

            It seems that with the real Nikolai Romanov there was something similar to him about Rasputin, hunger, the dominance of the Germans at court and Jewish bankers-jewelers, and he "The Tsar knows what he is doing! The state will not become impoverished." laughing That ended badly. And you are not making any conclusions. hi
            1. -2
              17 July 2013 14: 46
              Quote: revnagan
              new was something similar to him about Rasputin, famine, the dominance of Germans at court and Jewish bankers-jewelers, and he "The Tsar knows what he is doing! The state will not become impoverished."

              Yes, you do not worry, you liberals will end badly, and Putin will rule quietly further. Although I am sorry that he will not shoot some, maybe then you will start to think with your brains.
              1. +1
                17 July 2013 16: 41
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Yes, you do not worry, you liberals end badly,

                Well, they took and insulted a stranger. They called him a liberal. Yes, for such an insult you need to call for a duel. How offended I choose a cobblestone weapon. Or a sickle. laughing I can’t be more noble, well, there were noblemen and even merchants in the family. From now on, call me a non-partisan communist. hi
          4. Lacoste
            +3
            17 July 2013 16: 34
            It is you (people), including you

            And you, it seems, do not consider yourself for the people? Bet above, and we, then? Here are those in the civilian and shot.
            1. +1
              18 July 2013 04: 53
              Quote: Lacoste
              .Or sickle

              Do not cut only yourself anything, and then wave.
              Quote: Lacoste
              Bet above, and we, then?

              If about myself, then I’m probably the first among the last and the last among the first hi
      2. +3
        17 July 2013 10: 35
        I wanted to write something about ... But I will not ...
        They killed (!) Not the king ... And indeed, from the first days his rule did not work out ... But go into details, chew on the chewed ... I will remain with my own.
      3. -2
        17 July 2013 11: 22
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Well, minus you bold!

        I accept it with pleasure, I’ll open it and hang it in a frame on the wall. laughing
        I remember how one clown on this site being (foreman) wrote to someone here my fat minus, it looked ridiculous wassat
        1. Anti
          -2
          17 July 2013 12: 45
          Quote: seasoned
          You are my fat minus, it looked ridiculous


          Shaw again tormented star disease? laughing here is my weighty minus !!
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 12: 53
            Quote: Anti
            Shaw again tormented star disease? here is my weighty minus !!

            I put the first "-" in the whole branch and it became so good wassat
            1. Anti
              -1
              17 July 2013 12: 56
              Quote: seasoned
              I put the first "-" in the whole branch and it became so good


              Well, sweat, sweat yourself !! lol It's time for the factory sad
    7. +4
      17 July 2013 10: 58
      Quote: seasoned
      I feel sorry for the family, the tsar is not a bit ... In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was troublesome and more worthy people died terrible deaths.

      The most interesting thing is that today's attitude to those events is politicized no less than 95 years ago. Then it was justified by revolutionary necessity (then - quietly bypassed). Now they rushed to repent. Not a connoisseur of church rites - I do not know how the great martyrs are glorified. But the execution of the royal family had no religious motives, only political ones. Accordingly, the decision of the church is political.
      It's time to leave the bones alone. The story is this: often cruel and bloody, far from always fair. But there are no more white or red. And they are trying to raise the topic (which means someone needs). Repent, they say. Neither I nor my ancestors did this. I have something to repent for, but obviously not for that. Bring to the point of absurdity. May the church also repent for the thousands and thousands of serfs that belonged to it. And they were in a more distressed situation than other categories of the dependent population. The church in Russia was the largest landowner ...
    8. +5
      17 July 2013 11: 02
      I just can not understand what is the holiness of Nicholas. Various kinds of analogies are constantly cited. You can bring one like that, Ivan the Terrible did not leave an heir after himself and this ended in a terrible turmoil. Nicholas 2, too, did not leave an heir behind him (Alexei couldn’t be a sovereign through the sick) and the terrible unrest repeated. And in this confusion I see not holiness, but the criminal negligence of Nicholas.
      1. Uhe
        Uhe
        0
        17 July 2013 12: 28
        The most amazing thing is that this disease is evidence of the illegitimacy of this kind, because the Romanov family did not have such a disease, and this disease was in another kind (something is connected with the British), that is, someone and somewhere among these foreigners sinned, what was passed on through an illegitimate (what a bashful site, beeping the Russian word "illegally born child feeding on the dish of a high-natal parent";)), born in sin, to the Holsteins, who then sat down on the table of Russia under the guise of the Romanovs :) There is research into this subject, you can read. I read it for a long time, so I don't remember the details.
        1. +2
          21 July 2013 00: 42
          What illegitimate darkness ?! Nikolai’s wife was a relative of Queen Victoria; from her on the female side, the disease was transmitted to everyone.
    9. +6
      17 July 2013 11: 03
      Yeah. The king, who inherited a great country, a strong army, managed to lose three wars, arrange three revolutions in the country and shed a sea of ​​blood. As a date - you need to remember. Grieve ??? This, as they say, to each his own.
      1. Uhe
        Uhe
        +1
        17 July 2013 12: 35
        This correct saying of yours does not remind you of anything of the present: "The king, who inherited a great country, the strongest army, managed to lose ..."? :))) Very similar to the current reality, isn't it? Therefore, for them he is a saint, and for us - ....
      2. +1
        21 July 2013 00: 44
        not three wars, but one with Japan and then because of the revolution and then the prisoners of the world, the Japanese were not happy, and the world king did not lose because they did not give the opportunity to finish
    10. Turik
      +6
      17 July 2013 11: 09
      Do not be idealists! Yes, I agree this terrible deed of the bloody Bolsheviks, unacceptable from the point of view of morality and human values, etc., etc.

      BUT, what would happen if Trotsky or Lenin took pity on them? They are the only legal heirs of the House of Romanov from the point of view of international law of that era. And ANY country that promised them assistance in rebuilding the monarchy could legally occupy Russia.

      Destruction of the Family - alas, an urgent need, without this, our country would be torn to pieces.
      1. -3
        17 July 2013 12: 26
        Quote: Turik
        Destruction of the Family - alas, an urgent need

        Human stupidity has no limits and you have proved it.
        1. Turik
          0
          17 July 2013 13: 09
          Human stupidity has no limits and you have proved it.

          It was foolish to change horses at the crossing, i.e. start a revolution during the war. But if this is done, then we must go to the end, otherwise - the END.

          Well, it was not me who proved it, all the demand from Trotsky. Take him to court. Moreover, he is an "innocent" victim of Stalin's butchers.
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 13: 41
            Quote: Turik
            Well, it was not me who proved it, all the demand from Trotsky. Sue him

            So it’s Trotsky’s fault for everything, but that no one supported Trotsky?
            Quote: Turik
            But if this is done, then we must go to the end, otherwise - the END.

            Write this to Egypt or Syria.
            1. Turik
              -1
              17 July 2013 14: 28
              I'm not going to write to the Wahhabis in Syria or to the "Brothers ..." in Egypt with suggestions or advice, my views on life with them are somewhat different.
              But look at Libya: no matter who is going to rule the country there (or whatever remains of it), the only way to stay in power is to destroy the entire family of the Colonel.

              This is the logic of revolutions. As long as the heirs are alive, there will always be those who are ready to support them.

              As for Trotsky, everything is simpler - he is the Commander, and there is demand from him. Lenin, however, is to blame for this, not less.

              And most importantly - about Nikolai himself, I did not say anything. This "Autocrat" did nothing to save himself. Consequently, he too is involved in this. Well-fed people will not take the pitchfork.
    11. shpuntik
      +3
      17 July 2013 11: 49
      experienced RU Today, 09:55
      I feel sorry for the family, the tsar is not a bit ... In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was troublesome and more worthy people died terrible deaths.

      "It is a pity for the family, not a bit for the king", how is that? what Power collapsed? Even without him, she went to the station, everything was ready: the environment was completely traitors.
      Secondly: Nicholas came to power "by accident", the brothers simply refused.
      Well, and the third: you Rogozin or maybe "stooltkin" in "Ratnik" saw? Probably not. So Nicholas 2 in a new form, with full gear, did the march 50 km away. In Crimea. Where, by the way, the only road in the mountains so far "Romanovskaya" is called, as it was built on the personal savings of the royal family.
      I watch many judged by books about Rasputin, published in the 1990s. Only it’s incomprehensibly briskly they came out: there is a mess in the country, there is no money, and books from the KGB archives are right there.
      Here is a link for those interested:

      http://dvoynik-nikolay.livejournal.com/18377.html
    12. honest jew
      -4
      17 July 2013 14: 09
      This bloodsucker of the Russian people had to be quartered, not shot, and his entire family should be sold to a Turkish harem! Dragged Russia and the Russian people into a senseless slaughter Only thanks to the February revolution did Russia embark on the path of development! Before the revolution under the tsar, 84 percent of the population could neither write nor read! The land belonged to landowners and priests who exploited and drank the blood of the people. Factories and factories belonged to the capitalists! Workers worked 16 hours, children 14! We got up to work on a dial tone and went to bed too. We lived in factory barracks for 900 people without any hygiene! The state of the Romanovs today would be 700 billion dollars! This is worse than our Russian oligarchs put together! For some reason, he did not care much about the people in such a state ... At the same time, at the most difficult and crucial moment, he abdicated the throne ... decided to evade responsibility! Therefore, no kind words are needed about this "God's anointed" ... His place is on a par with such Judas as Gorbachev and Yeltsin !!!
      1. +1
        17 July 2013 14: 48
        Quote: Honest Jew
        This bloodsucker of the Russian people had to be quartered, not shot down

        Bloodsuckers came after him, you should list the names ah?
      2. +1
        21 July 2013 00: 46
        Such nonsense is still to be found in one word by a Jew, by the way it was they who made up the lion's share of revolutionaries.
    13. +1
      17 July 2013 14: 20
      Exactly. I also believe that it was the stupidity, lack of will and lack of activity of the king that led to the death of both the country and the family. The country has revived, but the family has not. Whom I ranked as a martyr was Alexander the Second, who worked for Russia (unlike Nicholas II, who worked only for image, for self-promotion, and that was unsuccessful), and he died long and painfully after the bomb of the Narodnaya Volya.
      The elevation of saints to Nicholas II is just propaganda, one of the forms of defamation of the previous system, which, although it was not right in everything, was very good. I will also remember that before the decision to consider him a holy martyr there was high-quality advertising - paintings with his image streamed myrrh, "miracles" all happened ... (As for the myrrh streaming - I know a restorer who makes custom-made myrrh-streaming icons. 3-5 years after Such icons are extremely expensive, and from our provinces he moved to Moscow, having bought an apartment there.)

      In general, it seems to me that the author of the article confused the site ...
    14. Sanyl
      0
      17 July 2013 14: 37
      I totally agree. By the degree of damage to his country, Nicholas can only be compared EBN. And the death of his family is only a small fee for this.
    15. +1
      21 July 2013 00: 22
      Why is the king not sorry ?! Under him, the country reached industrial and agricultural. development.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. -3
    17 July 2013 09: 59
    Nikolai Romanov is a good man, an exemplary family man, a great martyr. I agree with all this. The person in our history is more than remarkable. But we do not take into account his "talents" in the management of the country.
    1. +9
      17 July 2013 10: 03
      Quote: FC Skif
      But we do not take into account his "talents" in the management of the country.

      He was the Sovereign of All Russia and I do not care how he was a family man and a man, but he led a great country to collapse and washed it with blood, it would be better if he drank vodka and babuh, but the country led to prosperity. IMHO hi
      1. +2
        17 July 2013 10: 37
        Hello! What prosperity did he lead her to? To the prosperity of 1917 of the year? Here is his father, yes ... But I don’t know Nicholas II, he does not want to admire him ..
      2. -5
        17 July 2013 11: 03
        Quote: seasoned
        it would be better if he drank vodka and bruhatil women, but the country led to prosperity. IMHO


        Add more "stealing"! The current officials have this "gentleman's set". But I have not yet seen something of the "prosperity" of Russia ...
        1. +3
          17 July 2013 12: 27
          Quote: nokki

          Add more "stolen"!

          Knocky did not understand ??? What kind of property did the Tsar have?
          1. -1
            17 July 2013 14: 53
            The largest landowner in the empire.
    2. +7
      17 July 2013 10: 26
      Quote: FC Skif
      Nikolai Romanov is a good man, an exemplary family man, a great martyr.

      But he was a worthless leader. For him, the state was nothing, the most important thing was Alice and the children. So his demise is quite objective.
      1. -3
        17 July 2013 10: 36
        I just don’t understand, the birth rate of the wow, the GDP growth is the best in the world, and Nikolai doesn’t give a damn about the country laughing "She herself!" (from)
        1. +4
          17 July 2013 11: 55
          two wars, the revolution of the fifth year ... also itself ...
        2. +1
          17 July 2013 15: 30
          Quote: RETX
          I just don’t understand, the birth rate of the wow, the GDP growth is the best in the world, and Nikolai doesn’t give a damn about the country

          Answer all fans of the king-father to one simple question.
          Why did the people support the Reds in 1917, defeat the civilian whites, and begin to build socialism?
          1. +6
            17 July 2013 22: 43
            Quote: baltika-18
            Why did the people support the Reds in 1917, defeat the civilian whites, and begin to build socialism?

            Because people want everything at once and preferably so that they don’t do a damn
            1. SergBrNord
              -1
              21 July 2013 20: 02
              Yeah. And the people are simple - they worked a hundred sweats and did not understand that the return comes from the amount of effort invested in labor. How did the Itellichents talk about the people there? There was something "not to understand" there ...
  4. +1
    17 July 2013 10: 03
    If this person was a saint, then what would happen to her as a result of his reign would not have happened to the country. The family is not to blame for anything, but the fate of the king was clear even after the first revolution.
    1. +4
      17 July 2013 10: 08
      These, as they say in Odessa, are two big differences. Holiness, this is, sorry, not the title "Mr. Manager of the Year."
      1. +4
        17 July 2013 10: 22
        And what is holiness? Bloody Sunday? Or in a crush on coronation? In the three revolutions and the ensuing civil war? Or did Nikolai have nothing to do with them?
        1. -1
          17 July 2013 10: 25
          He is a Great Martyr. This is a sufficient condition.
          1. +2
            17 July 2013 10: 33
            Great martyrdom means long torment for faith. He did not suffer for a long time, and it was not for faith, but for power ... True, the ROC recognized him as a martyr, not a great martyr, but if you insist.
        2. -2
          17 July 2013 10: 39
          Quote: Basileus
          And what is holiness? Bloody Sunday?

          And what do you know about bloody Sunday and from whom did you hear this story, not from the Bolsheviks who drowned the country in blood for an hour?
          Quote: Basileus
          In the three revolutions and the ensuing civil war?

          did he arrange a revolution too? You do not write nonsense, I beg you, but sit down and think.
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 10: 44
            If you have alternative sources, imagine them - all of them are here.

            Revolution? Why not? His rule led to revolutions. Or do you think that revolution is a spontaneous phenomenon that arises without cause? Or, perhaps, predetermined and arising regardless of the current government at a strictly defined time?
            1. +4
              17 July 2013 10: 46
              Quote: Basileus
              Or do you think that revolution is a spontaneous phenomenon that arises without cause? Or, perhaps, predetermined and arising regardless of the current government at a strictly defined time?

              This is not a revolution, it is the same coup that happened in the 91st under the silence of a deceived population and betrayal of the elite.
              1. +3
                17 July 2013 10: 48
                And the honestly earned loot of allies and enemies.
              2. -1
                17 July 2013 10: 55
                Yes? And what happened in 1905? Mass festivities in support of the king?

                Well, about the 17th. If this were a common provocation on German money, would the people support the coup?
                1. +4
                  17 July 2013 10: 56
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Well, about the 17th. If this were a common provocation on German money, would the people support the coup?

                  And in the 91st?
                  1. 0
                    17 July 2013 11: 12
                    And in the 91st there was no civil war in which it was decided whom people support more.
                    1. +3
                      17 July 2013 11: 14
                      hence the conclusion - in the 91st all did not care about the CPSU, communism, socialism, etc.
                      1. 0
                        17 July 2013 11: 24
                        Great conclusion. But why is he? We are actually talking about events that took place 70 years before that, we say. And not only and not so much the monarchists as the other anti-Bolshevik-minded forces participated in the white movement.
                      2. +2
                        17 July 2013 11: 48
                        Besides, someone was for and against, defending their point of view with weapons. And the unambiguity that "all pissed away" as in the Soviet Union in 91 was not.
                    2. +2
                      17 July 2013 12: 31
                      Quote: Basileus
                      And in the 91st there was no civil war,

                      Russia was torn apart by means of traitors and all. More subtly and insidiously, although as for civil warriors, how many conflicts were there with the destruction of the USSR, how much blood was shed and on whose money?
                      1. -1
                        17 July 2013 12: 41
                        Was there a war similar to the one that went on in 18-21 years? Local conflicts were also then, and in the 91st, it was only limited.

                        About the money. If this is not a secret, then it would be interesting to know whose. Maybe some investigations were carried out, they know the specific amounts and goals. If so, lay it out.
                      2. +4
                        17 July 2013 12: 56
                        By the end of 1917, German spending on rioting in Russia amounted to approximately 30 million marks. Yes, it’s enough to remember in which countries these bandits organized their party meetings.
                      3. +2
                        17 July 2013 13: 48
                        Quote: Basileus
                        Was there a war similar to the one that went on in 18-21 years?

                        There was a civilian that claimed almost 20 million lives. It was this warrior who was called the Bolsheviks the Great. Only that there was great in it except the shed blood.
                        Quote: Basileus
                        Local conflicts were also then, and in the 91st, it was only limited.

                        Of course, your relatives did not die on it, so it’s true to grieve over hundreds of thousands of dead negative
                        Quote: Basileus

                        About the money. If this is not a secret, then it would be interesting to know whose

                        Sponsors were Germany, USA and others. I have repeatedly laid out Old, type in the internet yourself and find out
                2. +4
                  17 July 2013 11: 25
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Well, about the 17th. If this were a common provocation on German money, would the people support the coup?

                  as can be seen from the story supported. And as we see today, clowns come to the swamp despite the fact that they know on whose money the entire collection.
                  1. +4
                    17 July 2013 11: 37
                    A well-fed and contented people would not support. Hungry and tired, but believing in a priest king, too. During the Second World War, the war was no less, and the first two years brought much more disappointment, but no one could even think about the overthrow of power. And this is after all the shocks experienced over the past 15 years. Not excluding the role of the NKVD and methods of cleansing from unreliable elements, it is worth recognizing that the Soviet government in this regard was much more far-sighted. With all the human qualities of the tsar, it is worth recognizing that it was his policy that drowned Russia in the blood.
                    1. +1
                      17 July 2013 12: 34
                      Quote: Basileus
                      A well-fed and contented people would not support.

                      On the swamp, I only saw "hungry" and "tired" people in mink and chinchilla coats. And it seems they are not starving and everything seems to be there, but what is missing?
                      Quote: Basileus
                      With all the human qualities of the tsar, it is worth recognizing that it was his policy that drowned Russia in the blood.

                      Swamps will start a bloody battle, do you blame Putin for this?
                      1. -1
                        17 July 2013 12: 51
                        But they will not start. They don’t have that kind of support. And will not be. And our power is more far-sighted than the last emperor.
                      2. +2
                        17 July 2013 13: 50
                        Quote: Basileus
                        But they will not start. They don’t have that kind of support. And will not be. And our power is more far-sighted than the last emperor.

                        Now there is an Internet, now there is a TV, which everyone will show and tell the people. They went after Yeltsin. Thanks to tv and other propaganda. Then the news is much slower or you are not able to understand this?
                      3. -2
                        17 July 2013 14: 30
                        I am able to understand that the swamp is exhausted. Where is it - your swamp?
                    2. shpuntik
                      +1
                      17 July 2013 12: 55
                      Foreman
                      Basileus RU Today, 11:37 ↑
                      A well-fed and contented people would not support.

                      As for satiety and hunger, I propose to count on gold. For gold: one Russian ruble is equal to ten euros, or 430 current rubles.
                      1. SergBrNord
                        -1
                        21 July 2013 20: 05
                        One sneeze. It’s as if the people’s money was shoved in all the burials.
                3. 0
                  17 July 2013 12: 29
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Yes? And what happened in 1905? Mass festivities in support of the king?

                  whose money?
                  1. 0
                    17 July 2013 12: 51
                    So who knows? If you have the results of any research on this subject, you can share, I already wrote above.
                    1. +2
                      17 July 2013 13: 52
                      Quote: Basileus
                      So who knows? If you have the results of any research on this subject

                      Do you even have a desire to find out? Or so, all over
            2. +2
              17 July 2013 12: 29
              Quote: Basileus
              His rule led to revolutions.

              The reign of Mubarak led to a revolution, the reign of Gaddafi led to a revolution, the reign of Assad led to a revolution, or maybe someone had to destroy Russia ???
              1. -2
                17 July 2013 12: 52
                Destroy someone, save someone. All three tried to save, one Nikolai renounced at the first request.
                1. +1
                  17 July 2013 13: 52
                  Quote: Basileus
                  All three tried to save, one Nikolai renounced at the first request.

                  The rest drowned the country in blood.
                  1. -1
                    17 July 2013 14: 31
                    ... and naturally the country came to the same.
              2. Lacoste
                +2
                17 July 2013 16: 56
                What kind of revolution are there? The people, basically, are sitting at home, militants are fighting and the best parts of the army. They are not warriors, therefore they cannot suppress bandits. And look at the strength of the red army in the civilian. This is really popular support.
      2. 0
        17 July 2013 10: 28
        Quote: FC Skif
        Holiness, this is, sorry, not the title "Mr. Manager of the Year."

        And what is holiness?
        1. +4
          17 July 2013 10: 34
          In Yandex I just typed "holiness" - a bunch of answers. But you'd better ask the priests.
          1. +3
            17 July 2013 11: 26
            Quote: FC Skif
            But it’s better to ask the priests.

            He will not ask.
        2. +3
          17 July 2013 11: 26
          Quote: baltika-18

          And what is holiness?

          Do you need an atheist?
          1. -2
            17 July 2013 15: 37
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            And what is holiness?
            Do you need an atheist?

            I'm interested in purely etymology.
            1. +2
              17 July 2013 15: 41
              Quote: baltika-18
              I'm interested in purely etymology.

              Kolya. I already wrote to you. You can not contact me with faith. I already thank God for you, I know how flaky and all your interest is in sight. So powder your brains to someone else, but rather pass by. I'm tired of the same thing.
      3. Uhe
        Uhe
        -1
        17 July 2013 12: 38
        But what about Alexander Nevsky?
        1. +3
          17 July 2013 14: 51
          Quote: Uhe
          But what about Alexander Nevsky?

          What Nevsky did not please you?
  5. +6
    17 July 2013 10: 10
    Good or bad, but this is our story! To the west, he did not flee to the end, remained loyal to the oath to his people!
    1. Fox
      -5
      17 July 2013 10: 17
      Quote: MIKHAN
      He did not flee west

      just did not have time ...
    2. +5
      17 July 2013 10: 21
      No comments

      execution of the royal family
    3. -1
      17 July 2013 10: 22
      And where was he faithful to the oath and the people? He and the people set up both the church and the state. By and large, he is a weak-willed traitor.
      1. 0
        17 July 2013 10: 39
        Quote: kirgudu
        . By and large, he is a weak-willed traitor.

        Have you done a lot for Russia?
    4. +1
      17 July 2013 10: 38
      So he denied! Is it loyalty to the people? Be the emperor to the end! Then the symbol would unite.
      1. 0
        17 July 2013 11: 28
        Quote: klimpopov
        So he denied! Is it loyalty to the people? Be the emperor to the end!

        The people demanded renunciation and this is a fact! Then the right-wingers said, here Nikolai will deny and everything will be fine. Nicholas fulfilled the will of the people that the people asked the people and received.
        1. +2
          17 July 2013 12: 02
          Do you call the people that bunch of liberals?
          Here I have personally betrayed my great-grandfather and he later disappeared (great-grandfather) betrayed the Cossacks, we still do not know where he is buried. Yes, he personally betrayed by his abdication, and if forced, he could go to death but remain king and save both family and fatherland. In general, the poor made the revolution among the masses ...
          1. 0
            17 July 2013 12: 38
            Quote: klimpopov
            Do you call the people that bunch of liberals?

            Thousands followed this bunch of liberals, as well as the marsh. Well-fed, happy, but deprived of power, corrupt rats. Now there is an Internet and TV, but then this was not and the news did not spread at minute speed. Klim, take the time into account.
            Quote: klimpopov
            Yes, he personally betrayed by his abdication, and if forced, he could go to death but remain king and save both family and fatherland

            For patriots, he remained and will remain the Tsar, the last Russian Tsar.
            Quote: klimpopov
            In general, the poor made the revolution among the masses ...

            The sheep are making a revolution, who are saying that we’ll overthrow and live as never before ..... But those who have arranged this revolution come to power. People. You are a means.
            1. +1
              17 July 2013 12: 49
              Yes, yes! I agree!
              For patriots, he remained and will remain the Tsar, the last Russian Tsar.

              I don’t agree with that. Lan for lunch I quickly run away and continue.
    5. -1
      17 July 2013 10: 43
      Quote: MIKHAN
      left to the end devoted to the oath to his people!


      Well, you old man, give!
      Yes, he is, from the throne on March 2 (15), 1917 - DISCLAIMER!
      This is normal "devotion", in the spirit of our time.
      Many turned away from Nicholas because of his abdication.
      You can't shout: "For the Tsar, for the Fatherland!" There is no symbol.
      Quote: seasoned
      His work was such a responsibility for all of Russia to bear and pursue a policy to strengthen it. It was necessary to conduct a tough policy, it means not to shun blood, it’s better to execute hundreds but save millions, and he played with his little wife in razutinovschina and led Russia to the "cruel and merciless" Russian revolt.
      1. +5
        17 July 2013 11: 29
        Quote: Z.A.M.

        You can't shout: "For the Tsar, for the Fatherland!" There is no symbol

        And where did the country and faith go?
        1. SergBrNord
          0
          21 July 2013 20: 17
          The country remained and even through the efforts of the "bloody executioner" has grown noticeably .. Well, faith .. forgot the artist (and the name of the picture), who painted a canvas about a fat priest, whom a peasant asks for something, but he doesn't care. Just somewhere in those days, painted ...

          In general, they would have believed the church - a sneeze with two who would have touched her.
          1. 0
            22 July 2013 15: 36
            There is such a picture, there, in my opinion, a disabled soldier asks for alms, and a fat priest sits at a table with a samovar and cookies ... and pretends not to see a disabled person ... I remembered Perov's painting "Tea drinking in Mytishchi."
    6. avt
      -1
      17 July 2013 11: 00
      Quote: MIKHAN
      Good or bad, but this is our story!

      Fact and argue nothing.
      Quote: MIKHAN
      To the west, he did not flee to the end, remained loyal to the oath to his people!
      And here you went wrong, yes, he wrote a second letter to Alekseev, he wanted to disavow the first one, but the Chief of the General Staff, according to his own recollections, just put it in his pocket. Well, then the future “holy family” was calmly prepared by the Provisional Government for leaving for England to stay with relatives, having received the appropriate permits for permanent residence from them. But relatives of Nika's family No. 2 accepted the luggage, but for some reason they refused to accept it! So the luggage lay, according to Sirotkin, not unpacked until the new head of the house was chosen after the official funeral at the EBN, well, one must assume now that the property has already been torn apart according to monarchist concepts.
  6. +1
    17 July 2013 10: 22
    Amendment, not an emperor, but a citizen of Romanov. Yes, the death of children is horrible from a moral point of view, but children have become hostages of politics, and this thing is cruel. Leaving them alive, as it is not cynical, is impossible. Remember the false "Anastasia", how many raiders gathered under her banners, and if the children of "myrropomozanik" had survived ... Let me remind you, Grishka Otrepiev "Tsarevich Dmitry", Emelka Pugachev "Peter-3", "Princess Tarakanova" "daughter" Elizabeth -1, nothing good for the Russian state, it did not bring. Enough and now the crooks of the "Messrs. Deception" vulgar impostors so-called. "The Grand Duchess Maria" and the heir Georgy Hohenzolern. By the way, in the 90s Sobchak married Ksyusha to Zhora. booth!
    1. +1
      17 July 2013 10: 41
      Quote: Djozz
      Amendment, not the emperor, but citizen Romanov

      With their correction in the mausoleum of Lenin, so the corrections are accepted. He was Emperor Nicholas and left with his head raised.
      1. +2
        17 July 2013 10: 53
        It turns out that there was no renunciation?
        1. -3
          17 July 2013 11: 31
          Quote: Djozz
          It turns out that there was no renunciation?

          Renunciation was by the will of the people! But at the same time he was the Emperor, and you are a Citizen and no more.
          1. +3
            17 July 2013 12: 03
            Renunciation was by the will of the people!

            Oh, Sasha. What kind of people?
            1. +3
              17 July 2013 12: 41
              Quote: klimpopov
              Oh, Sasha. What kind of people?

              But didn’t the people demand the abdication of Nicholas? Klim, well, you’ll be surprised. everything was covered with leaflets-Only the abdication of the Tsar will save Russia and the like.
              1. +2
                17 July 2013 12: 51
                Well it is clear. But what does the people mean? it's somehow blurry. But the king, if he could think, he would not deny, but he would have to sacrifice himself most likely and remain the king ...
                1. +3
                  17 July 2013 13: 54
                  Quote: klimpopov
                  Well it is clear. But what does the people mean? it's somehow blurry.

                  Klim turn on the TV, there is a crowd with the slogan -Russia without Putin, all the same, nothing new.
                  1. +2
                    17 July 2013 14: 19
                    So those that demand are the people? This is a bunch of snickering managers - hamsters who have run over in Spain and, having arrived here, begin to tell us about our "backwardness" ... It's just that some owners of Lexus want to throw off others ...
                    Klim turn on the telly

                    I will not
                2. 0
                  17 July 2013 13: 56
                  But too many woulds
                  1. +3
                    17 July 2013 14: 53
                    Quote: klimpopov
                    But too many woulds

                    At 91, everything would have been without, I think you remember, the main thing is to keep the media in your hands.
                    1. +1
                      17 July 2013 15: 27
                      I remember how my father on the party ticket on the line where the next installments were supposed to be, he wrote "the end of the Communist Party!" I keep a part ticket! Hid it from him! I wanted to burn him because of this shameful inscription - then it became ashamed that he had actually betrayed ... But I left it, I will leave it to posterity ...
      2. +1
        17 July 2013 11: 56
        Hamim, a colleague. Renounced, as if he had surrendered a company. (M. Shuigin.) Present at the renunciation.
        1. +2
          17 July 2013 12: 41
          Quote: Djozz
          Hamim, a colleague.

          I’m not your colleague!
          1. -1
            17 July 2013 12: 49
            From chagrin, I will die with an open eye.
            1. +2
              17 July 2013 13: 54
              Quote: Djozz
              From chagrin, I will die with an open eye.

              That will be so! With the closed don't die
              1. -1
                17 July 2013 14: 24
                Your monarchist has completely jammed your brains, you’re bulling when you run into trouble someday.
              2. +4
                17 July 2013 14: 47
                Are dying! Bend the stick. Both! no need for personality ...
    2. Perch_xnumx
      +3
      17 July 2013 11: 13
      Quote: Djozz
      Amendment, not the emperor, but a citizen of Romanov. Yes, the death of children, it is terrible from a moral point of view, but children have become hostages of politics, and this thing is cruel.
      Excellent policy, what kind of politics is this? The children of Stalin also needed this, and the children and relatives of Goering and the rest. How easy it is for you to find excuses, sprinkled conscience with excuses and normal. Sideways such excuses will come out of Russia and its patriots.
      1. avt
        +1
        17 July 2013 11: 21
        Quote: Perch_1
        Stalin’s children also needed

        And Stalin's children were not heirs to his throne, and Stalin himself, with all the power he had, was not a tsar, he was the general secretary of the party, he was the prime minister, in our understanding of these posts. By the way, despite this, the fate of Vasily is quite tragic and corresponds to the fate of some kind of "prince of blood", he served in Vladimir Central not sourly.
        1. grafrozow
          0
          17 July 2013 12: 21
          Vasya’s tragic fate, General, inspector of the Air Force, football, running, he had to drink less.
          1. avt
            +1
            17 July 2013 17: 20
            Quote: grafrozow
            Vasya’s tragic fate, General, inspector of the Air Force, football, running, he had to drink less.

            Forgot to add that he really was at the front, like Mikoyan, Khrushchev, Shcherbakov. Well, really had to thump less. And by the way, he was not in the zone, but in prison, and not like any authority.
        2. +1
          17 July 2013 15: 03
          Special thanks to Vasya for the Air Force! It was he who raised it to such heights!
    3. shpuntik
      0
      17 July 2013 12: 42
      Djozz RU Today, 10:22
      Amendment, not an emperor, but a citizen of Romanov. ... Grand Duchess Maria "and heir Georgy Hohenzolern. By the way, in the 90s Sobchak wooed Ksyusha for Zhora. A farce!

      You are careful with Soviet fiction - it is carefully filtered Yes .
      A tree is recognized by its fruits. And, Nicholas the second walked as intended, he had a prediction (such a reality), it was not for nothing that he went to the elders. And besides him, and before him, few were killed? There was a hunt for both Grand Duke Sergius and Stolypin. Therefore, this is a law, with this king or another crisis would have occurred anyway.
      Cause? The people departed from faith, and above all the elite, the intelligentsia.

  7. +10
    17 July 2013 10: 27
    Forgive us Tsar-Father! Forgive us the dark idiots who are tired of rotting in the trenches of the First World War for the interests of Great Britain and France, forgive us for not appreciating your good intentions when they shot at unarmed people and hanged peasants, forgive us for the merged Russo-Japanese war when your Tsar-Father played a point and you agreed to peace with Japan, which is on its last legs, forgive us, O great martyr, for the fact that we did not appreciate the purchase of domestic industry by foreigners, forgive the fact that the majority of the population was illiterate and lived worse Papuans in New Guinea, forgive us sinners for epic failures in foreign policy and in domestic policy too, we did not appreciate the sacred power of the "master of the Russian land." Forgive also their generals who dismissed you, O great commander! from the authorities, probably all of them were communists atheists, as well as their numerous relatives who threw your family at one time, those who had sworn allegiance yesterday. management, forgive us the king-rag for everything!
    1. -2
      17 July 2013 10: 33
      If I'm wrong in something, then correct me, monarchies!
      1. +2
        17 July 2013 10: 55
        "monarchidzy" - forgive the Georgians some wassat and so I agree, if in a nutshell then ...
      2. -1
        17 July 2013 11: 00
        The bloody resurrection is right, and the queen is a psychopath with rotten Hessian blood (granddaughter of Queen Victoria of England). The Romanian king did not want to marry his son to his daughter Nicholas -2, since all of Europe knew about the heir with hemophilia. By the way, this disease affects males, and women transmit it. Kings and dogs of kinship do not understand.
    2. +3
      17 July 2013 10: 40
      He, as he himself admitted, most of all in his life loved to chop wood ...
      1. +3
        17 July 2013 10: 45
        Quote: klimpopov
        I liked chopping wood ...

        Yes, chopped wood a lot ....
        1. +1
          17 July 2013 10: 59
          And also invent new snacks ...
        2. +1
          17 July 2013 11: 01
          Yes, chopped wood a lot .... [/ quote]
          To the point said!
      2. 0
        17 July 2013 10: 49
        But what about the famous cat and raven shooting? It seems to me, judging by the results, he liked more)
        1. +3
          17 July 2013 10: 53
          Quote: Basileus
          But what about the famous cat and raven shooting? It seems to me, judging by the results, he liked more)

          The shooting of stray animals and birds, as carriers of deadly diseases raging at that time, was charged to all hunters.
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 11: 01
            Quote: GreatRussia
            The shooting of stray animals and birds, as carriers of deadly diseases raging at that time, was charged to all hunters.

            And the monarchs were charged with the duty to govern the state ...
      3. 0
        17 July 2013 12: 44
        Quote: klimpopov
        He, as he himself admitted, most of all in his life loved to chop wood ...

        As Nikolay said, there is no sacrifice that I would not make for the sake of Russia. He sacrificed everything for the sake of Russia. You many cannot understand this, as you are used to the fact that the Bolsheviks created its history and know it from their (Bolsheviks) tales = lies!
        1. +4
          17 July 2013 14: 06
          And now is an honest story about the Bolsheviks being written? Who is Solzhenitsyn? Don’t make Sasha laugh. And then an honest story was written? Karamzin? Christamatically somehow everything turned out. Yes, and take the same Rybakov, well, in essence, how is Karamzin different? Values ​​have changed - some in the mud - others on the shield ... And always! The matrix however ...
          Again, how is the Romanov kings from God? They were chosen? Or am I wrong? And they chose it because of ties with advanced Europe and European courts ... And who chose that? People?
          Well and further ...
          And who laid the troubles and what happened there? A lot of spots. Yes, and this is Ivan’s canonical murder of his son ... And who needed it - confusion? To the people? And then the Poles and all the Tushino thieves there ...
          The Romanovs on the throne arranged everything at that time both in Europe and in Russia (ruling elites). History alone cannot be considered at a particular point. She can only be seen in the context of her entire line ...
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 15: 01
            Quote: klimpopov
            And now is an honest story about the Bolsheviks being written? Who is Solzhenitsyn? Don’t make Sasha laugh

            Yes, what does Sozhenitsyn have to do with it? I have not read this clown and will not read it. I trust archives more, there are truths, as it is more by an order of magnitude.
            Quote: klimpopov
            Again, how is the Romanov kings from God? They were chosen? Or am I wrong?

            No Klim is wrong, it’s the people who elect the president, and the Tsar is being enthroned and not the people are doing it. Like the Patriarch hi
            Quote: klimpopov
            . Yes, and this is Ivan’s canonical murder of his son ... And who needed it - confusion? To the people?

            of course a lot, but you need to distinguish the grain from the chaff. moreover, the Bolsheviks cleaned a lot for their own sake and you can now see the result in the comments of the article.
            Quote: klimpopov
            The Romanovs on the throne arranged everything at that time both in Europe and in Russia (

            Someone whom the Romanovs didn’t exactly like Europe, won too much warrior and collected land for Russia. The Romanovs were a threat to the West and more than real.
            1. 0
              17 July 2013 15: 34
              No Klim is wrong, it’s the people who elect the president, and the Tsar is being enthroned and not the people are doing it.

              And who builds a king? Sasha, really, who raised the Romanovs to the throne? I have a specific case with the Romanovs ...

              Someone whom the Romanovs didn’t exactly like Europe, won too much warrior and collected land for Russia. The Romanovs were a threat to the West and more than real.

              Very satisfied. By that time, they were already happy because they gave hope for the European vector of Russia's development, which ultimately happened.
              Yes, what does Sozhenitsyn have to do with it? I have not read this clown and will not read it. I trust archives more, there are truths, as it is more by an order of magnitude.

              The Germans still cleaned the archives well in the 18th century. if anything hi
  8. +8
    17 July 2013 10: 52
    time to sprout in the soul of the people to that grain, which became the royal sacrifice.
    b ... what kind of sacrifice they climbed to the throne through the back of the ass, mediocrely slain him, one simply betrayed the country, and not one of the Romanovs considered it his duty to take responsibility
    1. +2
      17 July 2013 10: 55
      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
      and not one of the Romanovs considered it his duty to take responsibility

      Well, you are in vain, one of the Romanovs is now on the site "blown away" wassat
      By the way, today is a full-day article, Admin guessed with an article about China, and then this seminar oily penance was laid out for dessert ...
      I respect all opinions or put minuses, plus those who like, stock up on beer and popcorn laughing
      1. +1
        17 July 2013 11: 08
        Quote: seasoned
        beer and popcorn

        I'm going too. I stock up for the evening. An entertaining reading is coming. But China doesn’t even have any strength ... eyes wouldn’t leak out
        1. +2
          17 July 2013 11: 14
          Quote: Bronis
          I'm going too. I stock up for the evening. An entertaining reading is coming. But China doesn’t even have any strength ... eyes wouldn’t leak out

          Bugaga, went to China, looked that 60 unread comments and decided that "the train left", it's more interesting here hi
          Here the moderator Romanov "bared his saber", you can rarely see him so emotional, Krasava !!! The show succeeded drinks
          1. +2
            17 July 2013 11: 20
            hi Sorry "Trivolta" no. I would do my bit ... wassat
            1. +1
              17 July 2013 11: 29
              Quote: Bronis
              Sorry "Trivolta" no. I would do my bit.

              It’s on the other side, here it’s about Romanov, and not about Putin, but if someone had run into GDP, then the low-voltage would be the first to rush to the barricades lol
          2. +1
            17 July 2013 11: 31
            I have not even opened China in comments yet - I'm afraid. And then yes - today’s show!
            Krasava !!!

            Agree with you!
            Although not very good with him drinks But that's the opinion!
          3. Cat
            +3
            17 July 2013 11: 56
            Show succeeded

            Bullfight!
          4. 0
            17 July 2013 15: 44
            Quote: seasoned
            Here the moderator Romanov "bared his saber", you can rarely see him so emotional, Krasava !!! The show succeeded

            And I didn’t know that Sashok was a monarchist over, from the mere mention of my namesake into a trance, and even from religion.
            1. +1
              17 July 2013 15: 53
              Quote: baltika-18
              And I didn’t know that Sashok was a monarchist over, from the mere mention of my namesake in a trance, and even from religion

              and what's wrong with monarchism? !!!
              In essence, Russia has monarchism in one form or another, with the exception of the last 20 years, draw your own conclusion
      2. Perch_xnumx
        0
        17 July 2013 11: 21
        By the way, today is a full-day article, Admin guessed with an article about China, and then this seminar oily penance was laid out for dessert ...
        Yeah you give Stalin, you give "the end justifies the means." Just not ... you won't succeed in the end. There will be a world war, so that people like you will have their brains cleansed, there will be a terrible meat grinder, and whoever remains alive in Russia will rush to repent, then Russia will have a new tsar.
        1. -1
          17 July 2013 11: 30
          Quote: Perch_1
          Yeah you give Stalin, you give "the end justifies the means." Just not ... you won't succeed in the end. There will be a world war, so that people like you will have their brains cleansed, there will be a terrible meat grinder, and whoever remains alive in Russia will rush to repent, then Russia will have a new tsar.

          Did you go to the madhouse? hi Neighbor Napoleon is not bored? laughing
          1. -1
            17 July 2013 11: 47
            Pray, fast, listen to Radonezh radio (with three hard signs) wassat
            By the way, with the same enthusiasm and logic, the royal family was shot ... now let's bow down to the earth ...
            1. Perch_xnumx
              -2
              17 July 2013 12: 35
              Quote: Bronis
              Pray, fast, listen to Radonezh radio (with three hard signs) wassat
              By the way, with the same enthusiasm and logic, the royal family was shot ... now let's bow down to the earth ...

              Who and whom shot with enthusiasm. I'm not going to anyone. Human life is a treasure. It is easy and simple to go into battle with God, faith and repentance in the heart, and one will overcome a thousand if there is the will of God and it is not scary to die for the fatherland, church and faith. To pray and fast and read the holy fathers, bow to God, not Marx and Lenin to read, and I will not lay down their obeisances.
              1. 0
                17 July 2013 13: 17
                Quote: Perch_1
                To pray and fast and read the holy fathers, bow to God, not Marx and Lenin to read, and I will not lay down their obeisances.

                Eh ... In your words ... Reality is different.
                Quote: Perch_1
                Who and whom shot with enthusiasm.

                Populists were among the Bolsheviks, and there are now. psychotypes are common. You've probably heard about the basics of Orthodox culture at school? And you know how some hierarchs, pressing with authority, try to push through "their" (necessary for them, and not for the subject) textbooks. At prices ... uh ... How are they trying to put pressure on schools to introduce not the basics of secular ethics, but "their" subject? I know not from the Internet, but from my own practice. Everywhere people, and not everywhere honest ... Companions were always a few ... I know and very good Fathers. But they, too, in the church hierarchy often "get" the Nomenclature - identical ...
                I do not understand "church" populism, "communist", "liberal" and others. Neither God, nor communism, nor democracy, respectively, they have nothing to do ...
                Some say that the king was shot correctly! Others are wrong! He is a saint! That this will already change ... there is no Empire for a long time, even the USSR - 20 years as ... sheer clicks.
          2. 0
            17 July 2013 12: 06
            They drink tea with him laughing
        2. +2
          17 July 2013 12: 06
          then Russia will have a new king.

          Already have ... Just do not still understand.
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 12: 11
            Quote: klimpopov
            Already have ... Just do not still understand.

            We have not understood yet, but the rule is that the Tsar is good and knows nothing, and the bad ministers who steal behind the Tsar and rob people are visible in our blood hi
          2. 0
            17 July 2013 13: 26
            Quote: klimpopov
            then Russia will have a new king.
            Already have ... Just do not still understand

            Yeah, with the prince ... laughing
            1. 0
              17 July 2013 14: 07
              Tell who the prince is ...
              1. +1
                17 July 2013 16: 20
                Well, who ... who was the acting president of the President in 2008-2012? For the lovely ladies!
                1. 0
                  17 July 2013 16: 34
                  Not this one will not ride ...
      3. Cat
        0
        17 July 2013 11: 54
        beer and popcorn

        And I'm cognac with lemon, sprinkled with sugar and coffee powder drinks
        As far as I know, this is the recipe of one of the Romanovs. At least there was some benefit from them. wassat
        1. series
          0
          17 July 2013 12: 22
          Quote: Gato
          beer and popcorn

          And I'm cognac with lemon, sprinkled with sugar and coffee powder drinks
          As far as I know, this is the recipe of one of the Romanovs. At least there was some benefit from them. wassat

          sprinkled with lemon salt (to taste) with ground natural coffee! (Nicholas II)
          I RECOMMEND for brandy ... hi
          and as the Cat Matroskin advised - "Put the sandwich on your tongue with sausage!"
          laughing
        2. +1
          17 July 2013 12: 23
          This is directly an invention of Nicholas. hi
          coffee powder

          Sprinkled with ground coffee!
          1. Cat
            +2
            17 July 2013 12: 38
            Sprinkled with ground coffee!

            Mercy for clarification, I am in the know hi
            Natural ground ended, and too lazy to go to the shop, and even here SUCH a bullfight! fellow
      4. -1
        17 July 2013 11: 57
        Quote: seasoned
        one of the Romanovs is now "blown away" on the site

        I'm afraid to ask who?
        1. +2
          17 July 2013 12: 46
          Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
          I'm afraid to ask who?

          And do not be afraid, ask.
          1. 0
            17 July 2013 15: 33
            I don’t remember what we would drink at the Brudershaft !!!
            so what without familiarities
  9. +4
    17 July 2013 11: 05
    Bad work is like stealing. He was a bad autocrat. It was in vain that the then liberals called it "bloody" for unwillingness to postpone the coronation because of the Khodyn catastrophe. He was indifferent to everything except his family, and indifferent to the country. And he died not as an emperor, but as an ordinary citizen, because abdicated.
  10. +2
    17 July 2013 11: 11
    Read Romanov’s diaries, laudatory commemorations will fade away at once, dullness and interest only in your family. The reaction to the death of Rozhdestvensky’s squadron is especially hardened. A brief condolences, and then pee with maman tea.
    1. +4
      17 July 2013 11: 30
      I’m reading comments and I understand the following: sympathy and kindness left your hearts, cruelty and anger reigned there. This I mean that any killed person .. whether the emperor or a small child is worthy of being remembered with a good word. You have forgotten the wisdom of the ancestors: about the dead either good or nothing. so stop gentlemen please stop watering the dead. None of us will ever know the truth who and how the last Russian emperor was. Through the prism of years, truth has long been worn out. Personally for myself, that I will go and put a candle for the repose of the Romanov family.
      1. +5
        17 July 2013 11: 36
        Quote: d1m1drol
        This I mean that any killed person .. whether the emperor or a small child is worthy of being remembered with a good word.

        Let us remember Hitler, Goebbels with a kind word .... Maybe this heresy is enough to fence? If a person is worthy, then he is remembered with a good word both during life and after death, and if Judas and the murderer then it is necessary to say so regardless whether he is alive or dead
        1. +3
          17 July 2013 12: 47
          Quote: seasoned
          Let us remember Hitler, Goebbels with a kind word.

          Lech. You generally fucked the Tsar of Russia with Hitler to compare, what are you sitting under the kaif?
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 12: 52
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            Lech. You generally fucked the Tsar of Russia with Hitler to compare, what are you sitting under the kaif?

            I’m not sitting normally, meeting tonight, and therefore not a drop ... And you better read what I posted my comment on
            Quote: d1m1drol
            It's me that any killed person.. whether the emperor or the little child is worthy to be remembered with a good word.

            And where am I wrong? Chikatilo was also killed (execution is murder), too, to remember him with a kind word? I understand everything, but when in my "missionary" they start to overdo it I can be rude
            1. +6
              17 July 2013 13: 58
              Quote: seasoned
              Chikatilo also killed (execution after murder), too, to remember him with a kind word?

              I read and did not understand you, completely.
            2. 0
              17 July 2013 15: 03
              I thought by default it is not worth comparing the Russian Emperor with Hitler and Chekatila. Read between the lines. It was not about a candle for the rest of it.
            3. +4
              17 July 2013 15: 19
              I believe that the Romanovs were destroyed as a symbol of Russia at that time. That they could not arrange a counter-revolution to overthrow the Bolsheviks. And what is written about the fact that he denied .. I think there are many ways to force a person to sign something.
        2. grafrozow
          +1
          17 July 2013 12: 57
          Yes, seasoned, the beer made you sick. I found someone to compare with. Or has the "squirrel" come to you?
      2. -2
        17 July 2013 11: 47
        Maybe And Hitler, Himler and further on the list do not need to touch?
      3. +3
        17 July 2013 12: 06
        No, really. It is not necessary to equate the Emperor and the Royal family with ordinary, ordinary people. The imperial crown, she not only gives rights, but also imputes duties. But with this, Nikolai Romanov was in no way. Absolutely. For which he himself and his family and the whole Empire paid.
    2. +1
      17 July 2013 12: 49
      Quote: Djozz
      Read Romanov’s diaries, laudatory commemorations will fade away at once, dullness and interest only in your family. The reaction to the death of Rozhdestvensky’s squadron is especially hardened. A brief condolences, and then pee with maman tea.

      Which ones? Censored by the Bolshevik agitprop?
      1. 0
        17 July 2013 14: 28
        Why, the site Chronos story, laid out uncensored.
  11. Perch_xnumx
    +2
    17 July 2013 11: 16
    Quote: seasoned

    Probably would have gone crazy, but "God does not give horns to a vigorous cow"

    You would chop wood, and you would get what you deserved for these firewood in the end.
  12. lexe
    0
    17 July 2013 11: 21
    That’s where the logic of the denunciators of the king? And people who have logic is absolute.
    But there is someone to compare with. Gorbachev is a great friend of the liberal forces. But the one who did not change his people and became a victim. But the tsar had the opportunity to survive, blood ties in Europe were not an empty phrase.
    What does it mean to bring to the revolution? The revolution was made by people who thoroughly studied the experience of pitting people. And it was not just an organization, but a closed world backstage-government with phenomenal levers of power.
    Russia would have won the 1st World War under Nicholas 2, and without disruption and monstrous losses as in 1945, there is also someone to compare ...
    The main sign of the success of power is the growth of the people. Well, and how was this with the king?
    You need to understand that the revolution in 1917 was against the backdrop of a sharp jump in scientific and technological progress. And all that was old seemed like an anachronism, stagnation. Notice exactly at the moment of a sharp jump in technology that revolution takes place. And this is not just a coincidence ...
    This is a method of struggle for the worldview of people.
    So in 1917 we were faced with a new phenomenon. Against which there was no antidote. But we know that then the owner of the Russian land stood at the post until the end. This is an example to follow. The people should know that the captain will not leave the ship in any case. And only then the team will repay the same.
    1. 0
      17 July 2013 11: 32
      Quote: Lexi
      So in 1917. we are faced with a new phenomenon. Against which there was no antidote. But we know that then the owner of the Russian land to the end stood at his post.

      This attack swept across Mother Russia in the second half of the 1905th century in the form of revolutionary, terrorist and strike movements. And in XNUMX there was a "dress rehearsal". And also against the background of the war.
      Quote: Lexi
      What does it mean brought to revolution?
      Renounced. And not because a direct revolution began. There were unrest, of which there were even in the prosperous 1911. Nikolai was simply tired, and his entourage urged him to renounce. The February "Revolution" began to be called a revolution after the abdication. Accordingly, Nikolai needed a reason to renounce, he found it ...
      Quote: Lexi
      The main sign of the success of power is the growth of the people. Well, and how was this with the king?
      I’m surprised, but in agricultural countries the growth is always large. In urban industrial - less. With this logic, Papua New Guinea is a superpower.
      1. lexe
        +3
        17 July 2013 12: 15
        1905 was the running-in of 1917. The officer corps prevented in 1905. Errors were taken into account. 1917 was the year of the terrible massacre of the officer corps. The Guard was almost completely exterminated in frontal attacks.
        It took a long time to prepare this attack. The creators were in no hurry. They were talking about breaking 1000-year-old traditions. And they were able to manage the riots in the monarchy. There was a gradual recruitment of the elite and the middle class by all means — literature, new ideas, angry calls of scientists about universal backwardness, provocation and terror. There was a clear attempt to intimidate the faithful supporters of the authorities. Stolypin’s murder, for example.
        I’m surprised, but in agricultural countries the growth is always large. In urban industrial - less. With this logic, Papua New Guinea is a superpower.

        You want to say that Guinea can feed the whole of Europe?
        Mindless industrialization-if you remove all the husk-this is an easy way to limit the number ...
        But Russia then had only 2 faithful allies. There was no nuclear weapons. The issue of quantity was decisive in the struggle for survival. That is why the issue of quality was not resolved. That's when the tsars began to solve these problems (economic growth, gentle industrialization, development of consumer cooperatives ) and all this at a high birth rate! - a revolution has occurred.
        The revolution was like a nesting doll. First in power, traitors are liberals, then Bolsheviks-Trotskyists, then Bolsheviks-Stalinists. And each with his own idea. And each new step is blood.
        Yes, Kerensky sobbed abroad, realizing that he was only the first stage of the booster rocket. You can pick up other words. Alekseev, seeing the chaos in all its glory, also regretted that he had betrayed the tsar.
        The king denied only when he saw total betrayal in his environment.During the war of his people, he could not hang the best military leaders!Arrange 1937 in 1915 it was suicide. But self-denial is also shrouded in mystery, apparently the groundwork for the fight remained once he was killed.
  13. +5
    17 July 2013 11: 22
    Well, you don't need to blame everything on the Bolsheviks either, in fact, he abdicated the throne against the will of the Bolsheviks, their own monarchists, democrats "begged", and there was no respect for him just at the top of the then empire, the people that he is always a good father He believed in the tsar, but about the execution, a separate song there in general the essers ran everything ... Yes, we always feel sorry for the children ... we just won't give examples of how many thousands of them died in tsarist "well-fed" Russia, where from diseases, where from hopeless poverty, where just a passing master I suppressed the little ones with their hooves, So our people will not understand that the USSR made people really equal, or you all would like it if you were all by birth and everything else ... with butter ...
    He, as the leader of a vast empire, had every chance of correcting many shortcomings (the rules were still in place at the end of the 19th century), but he didn’t want to .... because he was correctly told he didn’t care and he regarded his people as an application to the crown ...
  14. 0
    17 July 2013 11: 29
    I respect Nicholas II only because he stayed in Russia, he had the opportunity to go to his relatives abroad, but he stayed and was shot by representatives of the people he ruled before his abdication. As for "holiness"! the church has always kicked in on this money, be it a name or just relics.
    1. -1
      17 July 2013 11: 52
      Did not have! Not a single country in Europe announced his family.
      1. +3
        17 July 2013 12: 48
        Quote: Djozz
        Not a single country in Europe announced his family.

        would want to leave, left. he stayed here.
        1. Mikado
          -2
          18 July 2013 22: 01
          he wanted it, he’s only been in custody since the February Revolution, they agreed on Great Britain, but the king there sent the three-letter King Nikolashka
      2. +7
        17 July 2013 12: 54
        Quote: Djozz
        Not a single country in Europe announced his family.


        The homeland of Tsar Nicholas was not Europe but Russia, this speaks of his patriotism and devotion to the fatherland. But if he would leave Russia it would not be the church but the people would anathema him. I am not a supporter of any monarchy. My main outrage at the forum is that he didn’t do human things with his family and with him personally.
      3. +3
        17 July 2013 13: 45
        Quote: Djozz
        Did not have! Not a single country in Europe announced his family.

        How was it not? as far as I remember from history, negotiations were underway on the evacuation of the empress by her relatives. The main thing was to bring the empress and one of the children from Russia, and he was up to the bulb with the other children.
  15. soldier's grandson
    -3
    17 July 2013 11: 43
    about the king it’s not worth wasting time on nago, it’s a pity for the children, and the people who are tormented with this ruler
    1. +4
      17 July 2013 12: 50
      Quote: Soldier's grandson
      about the king it’s not worth wasting time on nago, it’s a pity for the children, and the people who are tormented with this ruler

      Oh, here he is a lover in quotation marks of the Jews. But weren't the majority of Jews overthrown the Tsar ????? a thousand questions to your person, and for whose money, who supported? Though read, maybe you will fool
      1. soldier's grandson
        -6
        17 July 2013 17: 23
        do you need a king get ready to follow my orders. and who the Jews removed there or the Germans do not care for me, if his system is rotten in the bud, then it’s his own fault that he kept such a rabble with him, and the Jews lived well
        1. -1
          17 July 2013 17: 28
          Quote: Soldier's grandson
          do you need a king get ready to follow my orders

          Well, you can talk about any leader, king, president, premiere, etc.
          1. +1
            17 July 2013 19: 26
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            Quote: Soldier's grandson
            do you need a king get ready to follow my orders

            Well, you can talk about any leader, king, president, premiere, etc.

            You at least start with the superintendent, the head of the workshop, and so on. And then immediately ministers, prime ministers.
  16. +3
    17 July 2013 11: 51
    I wonder why, when you talk about the First World War, the defenders of an ordinary citizen Romanov, who became the same ordinary person as the janitor Kuzmich or the locksmith Petrovich, say that there were no such losses in this war as the "bloody Bolshevik regime" allowed and the Germans did not go so far to Moscow as in the Great Patriotic War. So I am sure that if the tsarist army had faced the Wehrmacht in 41 years, the Germans would have reached much farther than Moscow, about Krasnoyarsk would have definitely reached. Let's not compare the different conditions of 1914 and 1941. Citizen Romanov did not even think about family, he knew the story of what happens to the overthrown monarchs and their families. The interim government was ready to release the whole family, why did you stay? If you are the Tsar, you care about the country, die but ensure its prosperity, if you are no longer the Tsar, then you care about family, die but ensure her safety. Nicholas did not do either the first or the second. And forgive why the royal family is better than thousands of other families that were cut out by white or red or bandits orCzechs or interventionists or nationalists, so the whole country is holy?
    1. +3
      17 July 2013 12: 24
      and the Germans did not go so far to Moscow as in the Great Patriotic War

      Moreover, in general, they fought little on their territory and were ready to take Berlin. But who was Nikolai’s wife?
      1. +3
        17 July 2013 15: 05
        Quote: klimpopov
        who didn’t fight much on their territory and were ready to take Berlin. But who was Nikolai’s wife?

        Klim. And if logically?
        1. +1
          17 July 2013 15: 35
          So hint at the logic wink Why deployed?
          1. +4
            17 July 2013 15: 47
            Quote: klimpopov
            So hint at the logic

            Klim.I am already tired today with you all. Take a look at what you wrote, which, according to your logic, prevented the empress from taking and pushing Nicholas not to intervene in the warrior. This is much easier. Why dissuade him from taking Berlin. Another tale, remember the recent history of Russia. Gorbachev ruled Rais, Yessltsin his wife. All the same, always.
            1. +1
              17 July 2013 16: 16
              Yes, and I'm a little tired. But for some reason they didn’t take Berlin ... Okay, I’ve all passed drinks
              1. grafrozow
                +1
                17 July 2013 17: 45
                hi
                Quote: klimpopov
                Okay all i pass drinks

                Yes Klim, you caught two aces on a meager.
                1. +4
                  17 July 2013 18: 05
                  And what of the empty grind? Yes, everyone will stay with them. I respect Sanya! Although he doesn’t agree everywhere, he is honest!
      2. soldier's grandson
        -3
        17 July 2013 17: 35
        in the 41st, all of Europe fought against us, and in the WWII, the EU had allies in Europe, so they didn’t even reach Moscow
    2. lexe
      0
      17 July 2013 12: 44
      Since I’m sure that if the Tsar’s army had collided with the Wehrmacht for 41 years, the Germans would have come much further than Moscow, approximately to Krasnoyarsk

      I think they would go further laughing -to Kamchatka and Vladivostok. Here in quality of whom laughing Correctly as prisoners. In general, with the Germans, living in peace in one country is not the worst option. We have many different neighbors.
      No wonder Putin showed Frau Merkel urban-type villages beyond the Urals laughing with Russian Germans.
      Article nationalism.-US figures-50 million Germans
      Theoretically in 1941. the king could have everyone under the scepter !!! Slavs and allied Germany without problems with the peaceful resettlement of German citizens on 1/6 of the land. But 1/6 with such an alliance is a convention. Rather, it is the fiery motor of the planet. laughing
    3. 0
      17 July 2013 13: 07
      Quote: Standard Oil
      I wonder why, when you talk about the First World War, the defenders of an ordinary citizen Romanov, who became an ordinary person like the janitor Kuzmich or the locksmith Petrovich, they say there were no such losses in this war as the "bloody Bolshevik regime" allowed and the Germans did not go so far to Moscow as in the Great Patriotic War. So I am confident that if the tsarist army had faced the Wehrmacht in 41, the Germans would have reached much farther than Moscow, approximately to Krasnoyarsk. Let's not compare the different conditions of 1914 and 1941.

      Oh, that commies that monarchists are nonsense. It is necessary to be able to compare two non-existent armies. But if you insist on a comparison, then the Tsar’s army in the WWI proved to be more organized, which can’t be said about the Soviet army at 41. Because of this, there are srach.
      1. 0
        17 July 2013 13: 23
        And the death of the whole Samsonov’s army, the top of the military art of the Tsar’s army?
        1. +2
          17 July 2013 13: 31
          Why did you write this?
          I noticed a general assessment of the actions of the armies. I can also say about the environment near Kiev in 41 and the deaths of more than 600 thousand people
          1. -2
            17 July 2013 13: 43
            This is about the organization of the imperial army.
      2. +3
        17 July 2013 14: 04
        What is more organized? they also fought heroically yes, this could not be taken away ... But because of the incompetent command they ended up in coppers and in Poland and in East Prussia, then they were left without shells at all ... almost with sticks and halberds the Austrian infantry attacks repelled ...
        1. -3
          17 July 2013 14: 37
          I beg your pardon with the Germans. correction.
        2. +4
          17 July 2013 16: 23
          Officers Then it was a more prepared caste of the population. The Red Army had problems with this, a well-known fact. The heroism of soldiers has been an example for us all over the centuries and the fears of the whole world.
          As soon as the officers were poked, the Germans in Kiev together with the Brest-Litovsk peace. Therefore, those who call the tsarist army worthless are fools. The tragedies of 1941 grow straight from the WWI and civilian.
          1. rereture
            +1
            21 July 2013 14: 55
            Damn, none of the people wanted to fight, how many cases of twinning with the Austrians.
    4. grafrozow
      +3
      17 July 2013 17: 38
      Quote: Standard Oil
      .I am so sure that if the tsarist army had collided with the Wehrmacht for 41 years, then the Germans would have gone much further than Moscow, approximately they would have reached Krasnoyarsk.

      Boris, you’re wrong. Let's still figure out what would happen if the Russian army collided with the Wehrmacht in 1812. on the Borodino field. Please explain to me, the Tsar was at war with the Germans, the USSR was at war with the Germans, but there were no Bandera, ROA, Muslim battalions, Latvian SS, forest brothers under the Tsar. There were Russians who fled from German captivity, even though a bloody soldier sent Nikolai to Kalyma ? Made a traitor to the motherland? Where did the so many traitors come from under the native Soviet power, the state of WORKERS? After all, the motherland of those and others was one. In 1914.-Tsar, in 1941.-Stalin, heaven-earth. Answer please.
  17. +6
    17 July 2013 11: 59
    “If some priests are very unworthy pastors, this does not mean that the very priesthood established by God for our salvation must be abolished. Once Bishop Theophan the Recluse said that if grace always sought only worthy pastors, then people would be left without baptism and would be deprived of eternal salvation. The same should be said of the king and kingship. " "Russia is a saving ark that keeps afloat before the eyes of mankind drowning in sin"
    Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev) is deeply revered in the Slavic world as a righteous seer through whose prayers miracles were performed and miracles are still being performed.
    Quote: Standard Oil
    Forgive us Tsar-Father! Forgive us the dark idiots who are tired of rotting in the trenches of the First World War for the interests of Great Britain and France, forgive us for not appreciating your good intentions when they shot at unarmed people and hanged peasants, forgive us for the merged Russo-Japanese war when your Tsar-Father played a point and you agreed to peace with Japan, which is on its last legs, forgive us, O great martyr, for the fact that we did not appreciate the purchase of domestic industry by foreigners, forgive the fact that the majority of the population was illiterate and lived worse Papuans in New Guinea, forgive us sinners for epic failures in foreign policy and in domestic policy too, we did not appreciate the sacred power of the "master of the Russian land." Forgive also their generals who dismissed you, O great commander! from the authorities, probably all of them were communists atheists, as well as their numerous relatives who threw your family at one time, those who had sworn allegiance yesterday. management, forgive us the king-rag for everything!





    Quote: Standard Oil

    Standard Oil
    (1)

    Today, 10: 33

    ↑ ↓ New


    If I'm wrong in something, then correct me, monarchies!

    And what to correct you ?! Why did you stop ?! Go on ...
  18. +5
    17 July 2013 12: 02
    Comrades! And in some part and - Gentlemen! I advise you to carefully read the cycle of novels of the remarkable Russian writer Dmitry Balashov "The Sovereigns of Moscow", as well as his very instructive historical novel "Balthazar Kossa" - about Pope John XXIII. And you will understand that the burden of power is not a game of strategy on the computer, where it is so easy to control units and move armadas of troops. And not a gaming forum, where you can maliciously call an experienced player a "sucker" who made a fatal mistake under certain circumstances.

    This is exactly the BURDEN. Painful, bloody. Sometimes - an overwhelming ... God's Gift. But a gift that many would instantly refuse, offer them now!

    It’s not for us, and for a second who hasn’t been in the shoes of, say, Nicholas II or Stalin, to argue about how we would act dexterously in this or that case ... To each - his own!

    It strikes another. In some comments, a pathological hatred for a person who has no doubt died a martyr, violent death skips. It reminds me of the times of the civil war in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Remember, Zoshchenko:
    - Let me shoot you!
    - For what!!!
    - And for courage!
    1. +6
      17 July 2013 12: 52
      Quote: nokki
      It reminds me of the times of the civil war in Russia at the beginning of the XNUMXth century.

      Yes, a warrior, but only fortunately on the site. The history of people has not taught anything.
      1. Ruslan_F38
        +3
        17 July 2013 15: 25
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Quote: nokki
        It reminds me of the times of the civil war in Russia at the beginning of the XNUMXth century.

        Yes, a warrior, but only fortunately on the site. The history of people has not taught anything.



        Unfortunately, the war is no longer just on the site. There is no faith - this is terrible. And they don’t understand who and what they spit about with their conclusions! How do they live without faith, without foundation, without truth, turning everything upside down? I can’t understand these characters, even though I can’t kill.
    2. Ruslan_F38
      +2
      17 July 2013 15: 31
      Quote: nokki
      It strikes another. In some comments, a pathological hatred for a person who has no doubt died a martyr, violent death skips. It reminds me of the times of the civil war in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Remember, Zoshchenko:
      - Let me shoot you!
      - For what!!!
      - And for courage!


      Yes, the fact of the matter is that in the majority, and not in some of the comments! Some kind of mockery, as if the "criminal" was given to be torn apart, and not a martyr for Russia, for the faith!
      1. -5
        17 July 2013 15: 36
        Quote: Ruslan_F38
        and not a martyr for Russia, for faith!

        They undoubtedly killed, but explain what death was for Vera, for Russia? !!!!!
        1. Ruslan_F38
          +3
          17 July 2013 15: 49
          Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
          Quote: Ruslan_F38
          and not a martyr for Russia, for faith!

          They undoubtedly killed, but explain what death was for Vera, for Russia? !!!!!


          And for whom ??? !!!!!!!!! It's a pity only one thing, that reading your comments, you understand - apparently in vain and there is only hope that your kind is a minority! Below there is another comment of mine, more detailed - especially for a group of comrades who do not believe in anything other than their own "I"!
          1. -3
            17 July 2013 16: 15
            Quote: Ruslan_F38
            And for whom ??? !!!!!!!!! It's a pity only one thing, that reading your comments, you understand - apparently in vain and there is only hope that your kind is a minority! Below there is another comment of mine, more detailed - especially for a group of comrades who do not believe in anything other than their own "I"!

            you do not ascribe your thoughts to others
            clearly and distinctly WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OF NICHOLAS DEATH FOR FAITH AND HOMELAND? !!!!!
        2. -1
          17 July 2013 15: 51
          only emotions and no analysis; you can’t answer a simple question except as a minus
          1. Ruslan_F38
            +1
            17 July 2013 16: 09
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            only emotions and no analysis; you can’t answer a simple question except as a minus


            I replied, read my comment below. I didn’t put you a minus, what kind of nonsense? But I won’t put a plus for emotions either.
            1. -1
              17 July 2013 16: 13
              and where did you get that I answered you? !!!
          2. grafrozow
            +2
            17 July 2013 17: 59
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            only emotions and no analysis; you can’t answer a simple question except as a minus

            Mind RUSSIA does not understand, RUSSIA needs to LOVE!
      2. +4
        17 July 2013 15: 37
        Quote: Ruslan_F38
        Yes, the fact of the matter is that in the majority, and not in some of the comments! Some kind of mockery, as if the "criminal" was given to be torn apart, and not a martyr for Russia, for the faith!

        And God bless him, I'm tired of them already. What peas against the wall.
  19. +9
    17 July 2013 12: 04
    Quote: Standard Oil
    so it turns out our whole country is holy?

    Of course - Holy Russia!
  20. Perch_xnumx
    +1
    17 July 2013 12: 13
    Quote: seasoned

    Did you go to the madhouse? hi Neighbor Napoleon is not bored?

    I did not invent this, but added up the statements of the ascetic fathers. Do you want to tell you what will happen earlier according to the holy fathers. Turkey will climb to Greece, with the tacit consent of the world shadow government. Russia will respond to Turkey, the Marine Corps will be landed in Istanbul, Istanbul will be captured, then a war will begin but not yet a world war, as a result no one will win, Turkey will be divided, some will go to Greece. Then a great Greek state will appear for a while.
    1. +4
      17 July 2013 12: 38
      Ohhhh. And let's do it again. I'm serious ... It's very interesting to know what will happen next.
  21. +2
    17 July 2013 12: 14
    It is very difficult to read and interrupt your comments comrades. And some are ashamed. How can you compare these nonhumans with the Emperor and the Russian Empire. It’s the president who chooses the president and the king from God. And impeachment easily passes, but the manarchy is more difficult, at least for us.
    Read the series of books "General-Admiral" there it is written in more detail, and very correct thoughts are given. Well, or at least the book "Russian Fairy Tales". Although this is an alternative, the thoughts are correct. Yes, and it goes on excitedly.
  22. 0
    17 July 2013 12: 23
     Alexander Romanov  Today, 12:07 ↑ New
    Quote: Uhe
    And he executed. Rumors about the softness of his domestic politics are a lie. A bunch of Russian people executed on the gallows
    This is you writing a lie! And if they executed those who organized terrorist acts at that time and led the troubles into the people. so there the Jewish people of the fatherland are also dear to them.
    Or maybe you read how the hungry peasant and labor riots were suppressed? Can you remember that the edge of the Stolypen wagon was also a Stolypin tie?
     bomg.77  Today, 10:12 ↑
    Quote: seasoned
    Remember whose weak-willedness led to such a situation ...
    The king was weak. Someone does not argue that his place was not, however, he was not a scoundrel or a scoundrel and did not deserve death, let alone the whole family.
    And on this site, many offer another good family man to be executed - Gorbachev, although under his power, his population, as under Nikolay 2, was not shot.
  23. shpuntik
    +4
    17 July 2013 12: 23
    For what I bought, for that I sell, gentlemen. I am inclined to this opinion: ritual murder. Therefore, Alexy the second did not come to the funeral. But Eltsin was in a hurry to bury, afraid that he would come up.
    "House of Ipatiev 1. Beginning." http://dvoynik-nikolay.livejournal.com/18377.html
    Here is another quote, a speech about Yesenin, but partially about the king:
    By the end of 1923, all the elements of the ziggurat were under the control of the OGPU. Crowned heads - in jars of alcohol. The head of a red-haired man is in Gorki. Still on the shoulders. But almost ready to eat. The artifact was found and brought by the expedition of Professor Barchenko, sent by order of Blumkin, to the Kola Peninsula. The poet was also ready. http://samlib.ru/s/shushakow_o_a/00a3.shtml

    Well, about the creation of Shchusev, the mausoleum, built like the Babylonian ziggurat, I will not.
    PS No one puzzled himself with the question of why the stars on the Kremlin towers (so far), on American planes (and not only) are one to one?
  24. -3
    17 July 2013 12: 30
    Lord, well, which of them are saints !!! ???
    I now read V. Pikul, respect him, and believe him. If anyone has read such a book - "Unclean Power" - Rasputin and in general the historical situation of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, he will fully agree with me.
  25. +1
    17 July 2013 12: 31
    experienced RU
    Sani Romanov has a good reason to "throw in" today drinks
    I feel sorry for the family, the tsar is not a bit ... In my opinion, the martyrs were counted in vain, the time was troublesome and more worthy people died terrible deaths.

    +100! And how many people died through his fault?
    Who doubts or rather does not know the "deeds" of Nicholas II, read the historical novel "Unclean Power" by Valentin Pikul, and all questions will disappear.
    1. series
      +2
      17 July 2013 12: 35
      Quote: ia-ai00
      read the historical novel "Unclean Power" by Valentin Pikul, and all questions will disappear.

      then NASA advise to read A. Tolstoy "Aelita", and not send "how much in vain hell-noble-why" rovers ... wink
      PS It is possible that they, too, "all questions will disappear at once" on Mars ...
      laughing
      1. +2
        17 July 2013 13: 19
        I did not understand, what has to do with a FANTASTIC novel and a HISTORICAL one. If you think that Pikul "sucked out of his finger about Nikolashka, although his novel is HISTORICAL, read in other documents that you believe, for example, about the events on the Khodynskoye field on 30.05.1896/XNUMX/XNUMX. And in general about the" life and being "of Nikalai II, and about how his wife - Victoria Alice Elena Louise Beatrice of Hesse-Darmstadt - hated Russia and its people.
        1. +4
          17 July 2013 14: 01
          Quote: ia-ai00
          I do not understand, and here is a FANTASTIC novel and HISTORICAL.

          Because the story today is more like a fantasy.
          1. 0
            17 July 2013 14: 32
            But we are about a story about YESTERDAY, and not about TODAY ...
    2. shpuntik
      +3
      17 July 2013 15: 22
      ia-ai00 KZ Today, 12:31
      Who doubts or rather does not know the "deeds" of Nicholas II, read the historical novel "Unclean Power" by Valentin Pikul, and all questions will disappear.

      So if it is read long ago? And at first I believed him. It writes interestingly, talentedly, the marine theme is good, but ... But there is a certain hatred of tsarism, a monarchy: it shows through everything, even when Sakhalin describes it seems that the king is to blame for these thieves and murderers.
      Ruggedly he breathed towards the church of Christ. Mocked down murals in a monastery request .

      Yes, and he himself in the introduction to the book said that his books are not historical, but journalistic, have a certain share of fiction.
      No one magnifies Rasputin, he ended up in St. Petersburg because of the Tsarevich’s illness, that's all.

    3. -1
      17 July 2013 16: 30
      That's right, I’m talking about the same book as a historian, I believe him, those memoirs about which he says in the book, which he refers to, I found on the network and read. I believe him is not an artistic, custom-made nonsense that Nicholas II is a bloody saint! It's ridiculous! We just found a hero for a people like remember the great past ... Ugh! God be with him, let him ... BUT ONLY IT IS ALL EQUAL AND NOT HOLY!
    4. grafrozow
      +3
      17 July 2013 18: 09
      Quote: ia-ai00
      +100! And how many people died through his fault?
      Who doubts or rather does not know the "deeds" of Nicholas II, read the historical novel "Unclean Power" by Valentin Pikul, and all questions will disappear.

      Better yet, read "Capital" K. Marx and the History of the KP SS.
  26. +7
    17 July 2013 12: 36
    Everything that our people know (including those who are actively minus the article) about the last Russian Emperor, is known practically from the words of his killers. I never generalize Russia under the bloody orgy of traitors who hit Stalin in the back of a warring motherland with Russia. Stalin and the faithful Leninist guard are two different forces that pulled the country in different directions, Stalin built the Power, and the Leninist Trotskyists tried to fulfill the promises made by them before the coup to their European-overseas sponsors.
  27. series
    +5
    17 July 2013 12: 39
    hi Mr. A. Romanov, you steadfastly defend the "honor of the uniform" of the House of Romanov!
    1. +3
      17 July 2013 14: 02
      Quote: S-200
      ., You steadfastly defend the "honor of the uniform" of the House of Romanov!

      Trying \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\, although there are too many hi
  28. Cat
    +5
    17 July 2013 12: 52
    But it is interesting, Emperor Paul I is counted among the royal martyrs? If not, then why?
    1. +5
      17 July 2013 13: 07
      Paul 1 did not sell his homeland to the British and French, and did not have sugary partretiks to which current adherents look with tears in their eyes and threaten their little fist with Stalin.
      1. Cat
        +1
        17 July 2013 13: 56
        threatening their little cam

        No, he's busy with them
        1. grafrozow
          +1
          17 July 2013 18: 18
          Quote: Gato
          threatening their little cam

          No, he's busy with them

          Everyone judges according to his licentiousness.
  29. Anonymus
    -4
    17 July 2013 12: 59
    What about the ritual burning of portraits of Nikolashka-rag and their shooting from airsoft rifles?
  30. +1
    17 July 2013 13: 08
    Regarding the abdication of Nicholas -2. Abdication in favor of his brother Michael, from the evil one in violation of the law on "presto inheritance" of Paul-1 proof, if you please: A. Mikhail was in a morganatic marriage with a woman not from the ruling European dynasty, which, according to the law, removed him from claims to the crown His wife was married and divorced in the past, which was contrary to the law "On succession to the throne." Those. in the event of Michael's accession to the throne and the end of the mess, Nicholas could declare the coronation of Mikhail illegal and be crowned again. And now the monarchists minus, a fact, a stubborn thing.
    1. -5
      17 July 2013 13: 26
      Monarchists, where are the facts.
    2. shpuntik
      +2
      17 July 2013 14: 43
      Djozz RU Today, 13:08
      Regarding the abdication of Nicholas -2. Abdication in favor of brother Michael, from the evil one in violation of the law on the "legacy" of Paul-1 proof, if you please ...

      Abandonment at the train station? On the train ?!
      Do not tell my slippers! lol
      Was it not a fake? This ceremony requires witnesses, normal paper with a coat of arms and so on.
      Keep the Soviet shelf with literature in the closet, it is not worthy for the history of the monarchy. Example? The six-volume edition of the Second World War of Khrushchev and Brezhnev differed a lot from each other. And "Khrushch", when he exposed Stalin, did not say that he had been sitting in ambush for many years, next to the villain, he was apparently ashamed to see ... laughing
      PS What is democracy? Sometimes it’s useful for the rabbi to listen:

      1. -6
        17 July 2013 15: 12
        On the fact of the law "on succession". what do you have to answer. Napoleon also abdicated the throne not in public on the square, but in the Fonteblov room the presence of 4 people And let your rabbi better read the Torah ..
        1. shpuntik
          +3
          17 July 2013 15: 42
          Djozz RU Today, 15:12 PM ↑ New
          On the fact of the law "on succession". what do you have to answer.

          And what is wrong with the law? If, in your opinion, the brother did not have the right to accede to the throne, then the abdication should have been in favor of the heir: Tsarevich Alexei, but the brother or anyone else could be regent until adulthood.
          It’s as if you don’t understand the situation: there are no remains (probably dissolved in acid),
          illegal abdication in favor of his brother, children were not even left alive, and so on and so forth.
          Brest agreement, "German" gold ... Is it all spontaneous, people's anger? request
          1. -2
            17 July 2013 16: 09
            Mingled in a heap, horses people. Moreover, acid, "German gold". popular anger. I am writing about the cunning of Nicholas in abdication, It is not ours that Michael had no right to take the throne, it is according to the law. Nikolai did not want to part with his son, and therefore passed it on to Mikhail.
            1. shpuntik
              +2
              18 July 2013 12: 39
              Djozz RU Yesterday, 16:09 ↑
              "I am writing about Nikolai's cunning in renouncing, This is not our way ...."

              "Oh, and cunning, infection! Well, nothing, did not get away from the" people's "anger, they got everyone: including four girls and a boy. So that there really are no heirs left. No dynasty, it's over!" So?
              Here, about renunciation, not with communist enthusiasm, but still:
              http://nordsky.livejournal.com/620080.html
              http://rasumov-ab.livejournal.com/131940.html
      2. -3
        17 July 2013 17: 32
        Quote: shpuntik
        Was it not a fake? This ceremony requires witnesses, normal paper with a coat of arms and so on.

        Allow fake and provocation, there was no renunciation, excuse me, but what in this case did the rest of the family? !!!!
        why didn’t anyone take responsibility for the fate of Russia, or was it easier to spend the actresses ?!
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. shpuntik
          +2
          17 July 2013 19: 38
          Vasilenko Vladimir (2) SU Today, 17:32 ↑
          let's say fake and provocation, there was no renunciation, excuse me, but what in this case did the rest of the family? !!!!

          Stolypin tried, and so what? How many assassinations were there before they finished? Vera Zasulich was acquitted (by jury) ... Terrorist! This is normal? Today, Kvachkov (secret meeting!) Was given 13 years of strict regime, that's how !!!
          The top rotted by then, it was too late to rock the boat, it was useless ... It was a mistake to enter the war on the side of England, yes. And most of those who supported the Duma, then found themselves in a white movement, understood what was happening, but it was too late. The same Kronstad rebellion.
          Films, what they were, highly artistic: "We are from Kronstadt", about the storming of the Winter Palace, a carriage flying from the stairs, in general, Eisenstein is solid, you can't get underneath. To overthrow the anointed of God, this is not for you kukhry-mukhry, Satanists quickly came to power, even Kerensky pulled off, not a stupid person.

          1. +1
            17 July 2013 20: 30
            Quote: shpuntik
            Stolypin tried, and so what?

            What does Stolypin have to do with it ?? !!!
            we are actually about the romanov family
            1. shpuntik
              +3
              17 July 2013 22: 44
              Vasilenko Vladimir (2) SU Today, 20:30 ↑
              Quote: shpuntik
              Stolypin tried, and so what?
              What does Stolypin have to do with it ?? !!!
              we are actually about the romanov family

              The Romanov family separately, Stolypin separately, Witte the same? Have you had the Romanovs in a vacuum, nothing depends on your environment?
              Witte calmly wrote his memoirs, and Stolypin was hunted, that’s the whole difference.
              What forces stood behind the 1905 revolution? Do you think it all started with the signing of the renunciation? Find on the net: how much Jacob Schiff allocated for the revolution, the history of Gelfand (Parvus), etc., etc.
              That you have rested in "renunciation", then? Dig into the symbolism, you will find a lot of interesting things.
              Something stars, some were inverted at the beginning. Probably the "mistake" came out ... lol


              http://oleg-leusenko.livejournal.com/481689.html
              http://oleg-leusenko.livejournal.com/481689.html
              1. -4
                17 July 2013 22: 57
                we do not discuss the environment, we discuss the Romanov clan and their specific actions, what they did or why they didn't
                specifically why they changed the country and abandoned it, I don’t remember that at least one of this clan had grown so much that I had to find out who might be considered the great prince and who couldn’t, they tried to rally the patriots of the Empire around them.
  31. +2
    17 July 2013 13: 09
    "Good family man", "kind", "God-fearing", etc., etc. There is no such position - "n..ty guy"! White and fluffy - there was no need to sit on the throne, let him continue to lead an exemplary family life and suffer greatly. The authorities do not tolerate hypocrisy and snot. Russia is not a family, and it doesn’t go through the “uti-paths” when managing it. The entire history of the world says that the tsars did not stand on ceremony when the hour of reckoning for power came. And to leave living direct heirs to increase their own hemorrhoids is not practical. This murder of the boy Vanya Ivanov is senseless cruelty. The murder of the heirs is rather a harsh necessity.
    1. Cat
      -1
      17 July 2013 14: 01
      Quote: IRBIS
      White and fluffy - it was not necessary to sit on the throne, let him further lead an exemplary family life and great torment

      That's it! He would have denied it before 1905 (at least in favor of his uncle).
    2. -2
      17 July 2013 14: 05
      Quote: IRBIS
      "Good family man", "kind", "God-fearing", etc., etc. There is no such position - "n..ty guy"! White and fluffy - there was no need to sit on the throne, let him continue to lead an exemplary family life and suffer greatly. The authorities do not tolerate hypocrisy and snot. Russia is not a family, the "uti-paths" do not go through when it is ruled

      Ohhh, Irbis, but I didn’t know that you weren’t smoking cigarettes.
      Quote: IRBIS
      The killing of heirs is rather a tough necessity.

      Yeah, come on, it’s not enough to see one grass.
      1. +1
        17 July 2013 14: 50
        ROMANOV
        A leader who at a critical moment withdraws from responsibility, who? By definition? Genius? Moreover, the specific situation in the country has developed precisely because of all kinds of "flirting" with democrats and liberals. Having absolute power in the state and not doing anything to preserve it - is it a feat or a betrayal? Now Putin is on fire that he is too liberal, because he does not have the power that Nikolai had. Nicholas was a tsar, a lord. And what did he do to preserve what was left to him by his father and why he was "anointed with the world"? Nothing!
        Well, and the heirs ... They are therefore called so as to fully share the fate of the crown bearer. They were a direct threat to the existence of the new state, with all the ensuing consequences. Nikolai did not want to "pay" the price for maintaining his power and power, the Bolsheviks were more decisive and practical.
    3. lexe
      +3
      17 July 2013 14: 17
      IRBIS your comments are always balanced and interesting.
      But here I do not agree with you.
      Take Stalin. Yes, there was a man with a phenomenal sense of danger. The upper echelon of power was the same Gulag with Beria dogs on the perimeter. But Stalin went through a rich and dark school of life. What should we choose now leaders from the godfathers from the zones ... I’m sure now there are phenomena. The 90s were very dashing. Someone must have developed intuition and will to the absolute.
      Stalin’s death is still a mystery. It means that he didn’t cope in the end. The instinct misfired.
      Was 1937. Well and citizen Vlasov suffered? No.
      There was no antidote in 1917. Cruelty to the enemies was needed to stop even more blood. But then the notion of friend or foe as under Stalin was not an enemy of the people. And the tsar did not want to solder the terms to everyone.
      That is, the monarchy of Tsar Nicholas 2 is an example of a completely just peaceful society that worked to correct its mistakes. And the deep interests of the Russian people were protected. The upper echelon of power was struck by treason, and even the tsar would have been educators from hard labor in childhood (explaining how much) the situation would be the same.People and kings learned to masterfully deceive.
      Can advanced detectors help? The question is who will be the first to apply them en masse laughing
      1. 0
        17 July 2013 15: 10
        Quote: Lexi
        There was no antidote in 1917; cruelty to enemies was needed to stop even more blood

        It all started much earlier than 1917. The revolution and the events after it are already the result, the closing link in the chain of Nikolai's rule. His shortsightedness and weakness, as a policy, led Russia to an agreement with the Entente and, as a result, to the country's entry into the war. He "gifted" the Russian corps to the "allies" and waged war at their direction.
        Even earlier, the country shamefully lost the war of Japan. But the king is the Supreme Commander! And he made the revolution of 1905 of the year. Although even during the war he could declare martial law in the country and crush all the rebels at the embryo according to the laws of wartime. Didn’t want to? Afraid of blood and condemnation? But this is - the weakness of power, which ultimately led him (with his family) to death. In principle - yes to hell with him, with the king, the existence of the state was at stake.
        1. lexe
          +2
          17 July 2013 16: 35
          His shortsightedness and weakness as a politician led Russia to an agreement with the Entente

          1939 Stalin agrees ... with Hitler about Poland.
          The Tsar agrees ... with the Entente (England, France, the friends of Russia have never been) about Constantinople! and the straits-The Black Sea would be inland. Moreover, the two main states in Western Europe are enemies. And how much blood Germany-France shed ... And the Vel could have arranged us again 2! Stalin went the same way as the Tsar hoping again for a blood bath France- Germany. The tsar succeeded, but they divorced Stalin. The French realized that they would have zilch from victory and lay down under Hitler (yes, they dug at first for a look).
          You know, when Russia won the WWI, the question arose of the division and presence of troops from France and defeated Germany. I think Russian power at the final stage of WWII was a very powerful argument against the background of weakened Europeans.
          What do we have? -The Tsar went to war, which would make Russia a superpower No. 1. There was already a victory in 1814. The Crimean War was reminded that victory was in the past. The kings learned the lessons ...
          The war of 1905 and the defeat of the fleet was arranged for us by England in order to prevent an alliance with Germany in the struggle for communication and the colony. And without the fleet, what enemies are we to the British. About the shame you are in vain. Do not be rebellion still not known as it was. And everyone has defeat .
          Although even during the war he could declare martial law in the country and crush all the rebels at the embryo according to the laws of wartime.

          And impressive garrisons in large cities? For what?
          Only questions of manning were in the hands of the elite who were intoxicated by new ideas. And for each part, there were clerks, cooks and reliable officers ... It was.
          What was needed was a strong punitive organ-military police. Stalin’s specialists are the lessons of those days.
          1917 was not a rebellion. The Tsar would have crushed the rebellion.
      2. soldier's grandson
        +4
        17 July 2013 17: 41
        Stalin died suddenly after the adoption of the order on the eviction of Jews from Moscow
  32. +6
    17 July 2013 13: 11
    Is the king weak or not? What should he have done and what not? Why disowned?
    I can only say that at that time his environment was not monarchical, but just completely liberal! In the white movement, people of such views, unfortunately, also were by no means a small part! Probably there is the Tsar’s fault in this, but it’s just as much, if not the least, on those who muddied the water with the temptation of all kinds of reforms and TAKI muddied up with such blood that they still come around now!
    Read Trotsky about the boys in leather jackets with Mausers! Probably the king made a mistake. I wouldn’t commit it, Vladimir Ilyich would not shoot bunnies in exile! I would not write in prisons with milk a wet pen in an inkwell of bread!
    The king was mistaken - yes! And all the others who committed or condoned or kept silent about the liberal infection ?!
    The Communists created the great power of the USSR, but they lost it all for the same reason! As the saying goes, this is no longer a hint!
    And the murder of defenseless people, children, women, murder insolent and unpunished has always been and will remain a crime, no matter how they try to justify it! People who boasted of this act also cannot be called people at all!
  33. +1
    17 July 2013 13: 20
    There was no renunciation read http://nstarikov.livejournal.com/1085420.html
    Emperor Nicholas 2 was none. And he is not Romanov. From whom Catherine 2 walked Paul really is not known, but from Peter there were no 3 children. The Social Revolutionaries, who were both Sverdlov and Trotsky, shot him and his family ... The Bolsheviks had nothing to do with the death of the emperor and his family. Bolsheviks Lenin, Stalin and their entourage. By the way, the White Guards started the Civil War, not the Bolsheviks. And they fought for their noble privileges.
    1. +1
      17 July 2013 14: 43
      Re-telling the history of Russia in a history lesson in 7th grade.
  34. The comment was deleted.
  35. 0
    17 July 2013 13: 22
    Yes, I'm afraid that a single history textbook will never be written, because in Russia people are judged not by their deeds, but by the principle "I like" or "I don't like".
  36. The comment was deleted.
  37. grafrozow
    -2
    17 July 2013 13: 31
    Gentlemen, comrades, let's calmly, without beer. The Tsar was "weak-willed" - let's look at the map of the Russian Empire in 1913. and on the map of Russia 2013. Is there a difference? And if the people gladly accepted the abdication, then who fought in the Civil War? Where did the Basmachis come from? Why did the empire feed half of the world with grain until 1917, and now the "bush legs" and in Canada, from the Eskimos, Russia buys grain, beef from Australia ? Remember "to Moscow for sausage" Was that when the king? And there is no justification for the failure of the Bolsheviks. Let's remember the innocent victims. No need to water them with mud, not in a human way.
    1. +3
      17 July 2013 14: 12
      Oh well. We looked. Result on the face ...
      And let's look at the map of the 1949 of the year ... And in addition to the USSR, we also note the zone of influence of the USSR.
      1. grafrozow
        +3
        17 July 2013 16: 10
        Let’s look and remember the restoration of order in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, it’s a pity there is no map of the zones of influence of the Russian Empire, with which then would you compare?
        1. 0
          17 July 2013 16: 18
          Yes, all with the same world map in 1949 year ...
    2. Sanyl
      -1
      17 July 2013 14: 49
      1. During the reign of Nikola, the territory of Russia decreased significantly in the west and east
      2. The civilian people fought not for the king, but for freedom and prosperity, which the king could not and did not want to. Unlike the Bolsheviks.
      3. Now Russia is also the world's largest grain exporter. And we almost no longer import chicken. (and beef in Australia is simply better for steaks than ours)
      4. About the sausage. Under Nicholas, people only ate meat on holidays. Especially in the village.
      1. grafrozow
        +2
        17 July 2013 20: 41
        Quote: Sanyl
        Now Russia is also the world's largest grain exporter. And we almost no longer import chicken. (and beef in Australia is simply better for steaks than ours)
        .

        Dear, you did not say everything about everything. -It is also the largest exporter in the world of lard, horseradish, cars, TVs, machine tools.
    3. 0
      17 July 2013 21: 24
      about the purchase of grain in more detail who, from whom, for what, when
  38. -2
    17 July 2013 13: 59
    do not care. Thousands of more worthy people died over 95 years. Both on the white and on the red sides. And this very nicholas led to such an outcome ...
  39. +1
    17 July 2013 14: 00
    they did it right and did what they shot - and the export of grain "to half the world" was because Russian people and children, including chronically malnourished
    1. grafrozow
      +2
      17 July 2013 19: 03
      Quote: dojjdik
      they did it right and did what they shot - and the export of grain "to half the world" was because Russian people and children, including chronically malnourished

      They were malnourished during the USSR, the famine in Ukraine, the famine in the Volga ... coupons under the Hump ... Why didn’t kindergartens exist under the Tsar? Yes, because the husband’s salary was enough to support his family. An example? The Ulyanov family-father worked as an inspector, such as our GORONO, mother is a housewife, 3 children, a maid, rented a 2-storey house, and they lived so poorly, there was no bread, butter had to be smeared directly on sausage. And you can imagine that in the USSR the brother of a terrorist who attempted to assassinate the Secretary General of the CPSU is studying at the university as a lawyer. Read the biography of V.I. Lenin. The man is 45 years old and only 4 months of work experience and the bloody Nikolai did not put him for parasitism. If I lie, throw a stone at me.
      And on the bill, the Tula workers ’letter to President R. Reagan was malnourished. Mr. President, we know that in America you have millions of people who are undernourished. Convincing request, send us all that they are undernourished. Minus, comrades.
  40. 0
    17 July 2013 14: 21
    how does Medvedev look like him ...

    In general, of course, shooting the whole family was as savagery for a modern person as the shooting of the presidents of Afghanistan ... It would be better to be sent somewhere. Yes, even in to us. Ours was exiled to Belarus and nothing.
    1. -2
      17 July 2013 14: 47
      Well, why did the Romanians (Europeans) shoot Ceausescu with his wife and do not complex anything. Speak barbarism, savagery.
  41. +4
    17 July 2013 14: 24
    Myths and myths again, we didn’t feed half the world grain, just for the Russian treasury it was one of the main sources of export revenue, this grain was collected literally in bunches, plus our grain was not quoted on the world market, it was of poor quality, which is what not one-time publications, during the Soviet Union grain was purchased fodder, so there was a huge herd of cattle, pigs ... as evidenced by the ruins of farms throughout modern Russia ...
    1. grafrozow
      +2
      17 July 2013 19: 20
      Quote: Isk1984
      , during the Soviet Union grain was purchased fodder, so there was a huge herd of cattle, pigs ... as evidenced by the ruins of farms throughout modern Russia ...

      Where was the meat?
  42. +5
    17 July 2013 14: 30
    [quote] [quote] grafrozow (1)
    , and now the "legs of the bush" in Canada, from the Eskimos, Russia buys grain, beef from Australia? Remember "to Moscow for sausage" Was that when the king? [/ Quote]
    For the legs of the bush "thank the Humpback and Yeltsin. And under the tsar people ate sausage???? I only read that under the tsar, people worked for 14 hours, (this is what Prokhorov dreams of) ate chaff, and even then they were not full, they lived in wooden barracks with earthen floors, absolutely without rights to the manufacturer or landowner, as indeed now, after events of 1991, only the children of the rich could study, again, as, incidentally, we are going to the same ... the PEOPLE lived "very" well "under the tsar ...
    1. grafrozow
      +3
      17 July 2013 19: 31
      Quote: ia-ai00
      I only read that under the tsar people worked for 14 hours, (dreams of Rohor) and ate chaff, and then they weren’t full, they lived in wooden barracks with earthen floors, but

      Donetsk oblast Nikitovka, Izotov mine, people live in stone huts that were built by the former owner of the mine, then for miners the housing was FREE, and now they pay as a hotel *****, despite the fact that the water and toilet are on the street.
      Worked for 14 hours + time for work, from work, to eat. Where did the families of 10 children get in time when, by the way, compare the birth rate before and after.
  43. tt75tt
    +2
    17 July 2013 14: 56
    article is a huge minus. what kind of Russia are they martyrs for? that just passed .. here they wrote that the murder of royal children is fascism. but unless under their power less people perished. author-pop gabon.
  44. Consmo
    -3
    17 July 2013 15: 03
    Aspen stake to bloody Nikolai. He brought the country, brother went to his brother. They feel sorry for the family humanly. But they destroyed the Romanov Dynasty, they tore it out with blood and without a trace. Otherwise, another 20 years the Civil War would have gone. I called myself a load in the back of the truck. Our ancestors were no worse than us. I doubt that 30 years after the execution We would have won the dynasties war against all of Europe, and after 40 years, the satellite launched and became a super power.
  45. georg737577
    -1
    17 July 2013 15: 03
    Shooting a family is no doubt a crime, but not a mistake. It was important to "break off" the dynasty, thereby saving the country from the possibility of reviving the monarchy. In the place of the Bolsheviks, I would have done the same ... And personally, Nikolai earned the bullet in full. Everything is fair!
  46. Ruslan_F38
    -3
    17 July 2013 15: 15
    I read the comments and am amazed, but the people are crumbling - and the Tsar is a "dummy" and weak-willed for them, and the fact that they shot him correctly, and he is not a saint, and they do not believe in God and they have no values ​​other than their own "I". How to live then if you don't believe in anything and in anyone? If you deny everything? If you live only by your own conclusions? I see no people left at all, some talkers, but Satanists! The times of trouble have come. I really hope that such empty, narcissistic, pompous, narrow-minded people are in the minority in this country, on this site, and there are still more good, whole, believing people.

    “The emperor wanted a truly Christian, free, prosperous Russia. This is his will.

    Today our task is to get out of the stupor and begin a intelligible activity for the embodiment of the royal desire. Only this will become a genuine repentance, an excuse for indifferent alienation, into which our ancestors fell through their own and not through their own fault 95 years ago. "- I would add -" and have not come out of this torpor and indifferent alienation until now! "Glory to the Tsar ! Glory to Russia!
    1. +2
      17 July 2013 15: 40
      I watch no people at all, some talkers, but Satanists! The troubled times have come. I really hope that such empty, narcissistic, pompous, narrow-minded people are in the minority in this country, on this site, but there are more good, whole, believing people.

      And now education will be completely reformed before it starts ...
    2. grafrozow
      +2
      17 July 2013 20: 21
      Quote: Ruslan_F38
      “The emperor wanted a truly Christian, free, prosperous Russia. This is his will.

      Ruslan, can you imagine the hero of the RUSSIAN EMPIRE-Pavlik Morozov? I can not. Grandfather died, and the business lives on; it would be better if it were the other way around.
  47. -3
    17 July 2013 15: 30
    The Bright Memory is innocently killed, and the main troublemaker will continue to lie like a mockery.
    1. 0
      17 July 2013 15: 56
      Quote: zollstab
      the main troublemaker will lie like a mockery

      To whom the troublemaker and to whom the spokesman of the voice of the people, at that time the beggar disenfranchised and uneducated, will be buried by 2020
  48. -3
    17 July 2013 15: 33
    Forgive us, Tsar Father Nicholas, and you and your whole family have been tortured by damned sids. Now we are suffering without a good housekeeper of the Russian land, we observe with bitterness how her native is crap and vilified, scooped up by its barbaric nature, plagued the Russian people - the real owner of her untold wealth. Forgive us our betrayal and God will give us a good shepherd decisive in the fight against sucking blood-tick ticks, glossy from the anticipation of the death of the previously undefeated Russian people.
  49. +1
    17 July 2013 15: 45
    As soon as all for the king and the fatherland! 70 years were commies to the core and party members and now suddenly bam and Orthodox.
    And the former Komsomol members are building churches ... It is false and hypocritical ... Those who told us how to live under the councils now tell us that we did not live right ... That the councils are bad ... Mikhalkov became an Orthodox and a monarchist and makes such films about the tsar for folk (!) money! And his dad and uncle ... you know yourself ...
    So where did everyone suddenly become the king so suddenly? Just do not tell that you "saw the light" - do not be hypocritical. At least ask yourself, don't have to answer me - this is a rhetorical question ...

    1. -1
      17 July 2013 15: 54
      Quote: klimpopov
      As soon as all for the king and the fatherland! 70 years were commies to the core and party members and now suddenly bam and Orthodox.

      Also shocked by such a metamorphosis ... They did not go to parish schools, "God Save the Tsar" was not sung every day, moreover, they studied history and passed exams on it, where autocracy was condemned. Personally, I do not see anything good for Russia and myself from the reign of Nicholas, but the harm from his reign, on the contrary, is enough in abundance. And then there is some kind of madhouse on the road, a hard hack is worth it, and for what? I do not understand... request
      Well, well, tomorrow instead of GDP some kind of PPV will come and worship Perun and burn icons, and why will everyone, like a herd, start jumping over fires and make sacrifices to idols?
      1. +1
        17 July 2013 16: 21
        Perun is worshiped and icons are burned, and why all, like a flock, will also begin to jump over bonfires and offer sacrifices to idols?

        I think yes! They will say that these are true roots and so on! They will make them repent.
        But rather, not Perun, but something else and it is already close ...
    2. Yarosvet
      -4
      17 July 2013 16: 41
      Quote: klimpopov
      Mikhalkov became Orthodox and a monarchist and makes such films about the tsar for popular (!) Money!

      But is it not clear why?
  50. 0
    17 July 2013 15: 54
    И formerthe tsar and his family members were essentially responsible for the mistakes of their reign (family members as probable heirs and users of good benefits and persons influencing decisions), it’s a pity the servant, but there was such a time, many millions are sorry there, and Nicholas 2 wanted to get off for the state he cheated on the bill, climbed into the war with obscure goals, didn’t win victories, squandered the treasury, the people brought it and wanted to get off, no guys, the ruler of Russia would be honorable and satisfying, but it would be terrible to pay if it didn’t grow together.
  51. Alexandr2510
    +2
    17 July 2013 16: 16
    “It is becoming more and more common that the Russian people are preparing for the day of special commemoration of the holy Royal Martyrs. It could not be otherwise - they gave themselves in the name of saving Russia. The time has come for the seed that became the royal sacrifice to sprout in the soul of the people. It is a great happiness to know that after decades of lies, slander and oblivion in thousands of churches in countless homes on this day, July 17, a grateful prayer is said, bright in its sadness."
    I didn't even read further. The death of a family is of course a tragedy, BUT Nicholas II himself is to blame for the death of his family, because they offered to take him to England to his uncle, but no. I categorically disagree with church canonization; a purely political decision of the Church (although it seems to be separated from the state) with the same success can canonize several thousand more worthy people.
    Nicholas II should have been firmer, maybe there wouldn’t have been such upheavals, and if he turned out to be a weakling and was knocked off, then leave with dignity, save your family (since this is the most precious thing) and don’t pretend to be a sufferer. IMHO hi hi
  52. 0
    17 July 2013 16: 16
    Gene. Dragomirov about Nikolai-2 "Able to command a regiment, but not an empire."
  53. The comment was deleted.
  54. Yarosvet
    0
    17 July 2013 16: 30
    _______________________________________
  55. Yarosvet
    -5
    17 July 2013 16: 47
    ________________________________
  56. +3
    17 July 2013 17: 48
    Whether the sovereign was good or bad, I don’t know, but! Gentlemen and comrades, can you tell me more simply, in which state would you like to live? In an estate where there are masters and slaves or... I personally want to live in a socialist, yes! socialist, where it is ruled not by one, but by society and from each according to his abilities, to each according to his work.
  57. -1
    17 July 2013 17: 54
    Quote: Imperial
    In the class where there are masters and slaves

    you are greatly exaggerating, there is nothing wrong with classes as such if there is the main thing - social elevators
    1. +2
      17 July 2013 19: 21
      Yes, I’m exaggerating, I don’t want to describe it, but I think you understand me. Of course, there is casteism, it is visible even now and we need to fight it, but after reading some comments that advocate for us to have a monarchy..hmm I’m surprised! I think that I and people like me, Homo-Soviet, have a heightened sense of justice, and slogans like: every cricket, know your nest are not for us. and lastly: No one will give us deliverance:
      Neither god, nor king, nor hero.
      We will achieve liberation
      With your calloused hand. Threat, are there elevators for the estates? right word, as in that joke - the General’s son asks:

      - Dad, dad, will I become a Marshal?

      - No son!

      - Marshall has his own children!
  58. +2
    17 July 2013 19: 54
    The Tsar alone fought the battle for Orthodoxy, Autocracy and the People

    How did he achieve this, that he fought alone? Have you come across a bad kingdom, full of fools and villains? Were there no honest people at all?

    He provided the army with the necessities of sabotage and theft.

    How does the “turning point of sabotage” fit in with In the midst of general decay, betrayed daily and hourly by dignitaries, ministers, entourage, generals и с And for all this he was basely betrayed. ?
    This “was betrayed” is not sabotage in the army and the state?

    Forgive us, Sovereign

    Yes, the bad people and saboteurs forced the Tsar to sign a renunciation (this version is still accepted). Just as a mother tells a child that he is behaving badly and she will leave him, so the people behaved badly along with the nobles and the Emperor decided to leave them. Is this what the author says?

    And after the even more vile and evil Bolshevik usurpers installed their dictator, the country received the news of the regicide with dull indifference.

    What should the people or “country” do? Should we have marched en masse to Petrograd as soon as we learned about the “renunciation”?
    One crowd of millions from the front, the other from the rear and begging on their knees to believe? Or what to do? What exactly did the people or the “country” need to do, if not to reason?

    Why is everyone talking only about this Emperor? Is it because Sverdlov and even more vile and evil Bolshevik usurpers?

    Recently there was an article here about Emperor Paul. The conspiracy would not have taken place and the country could be completely different today and in a different world. Why is there so little crying for him? Why didn't he come out to be remembered so often? Sverdov did not participate? Is this the point? He is not the only one either; history is full of examples.

    And what about the country after the “apoplectic blow to the temple with a snuff box”? Words the country received the news of the regicide with dull indifference do they treat her too? After all, there was no Sverdlov then?

    Does the author think that “country” is something united? That she can only be completely happy or completely indifferent? Can't one group of people rejoice and drink champagne, while another group grieves?

    etc.
  59. +2
    17 July 2013 20: 02
    Well, you give it, my friends. I served my Motherland for 25 years and never took off my grandmother’s cross, although I had a party card and this did not stop me from honestly fulfilling my duty. Yes, we are Russian people and despite any changes in power, we are Orthodox... And those who change their beliefs are like weathervanes and candlesticks...
  60. +3
    17 July 2013 20: 03
    Quote: klimpopov
    For 70 years they were commies to the core and party members, and now suddenly, bam, they are Orthodox.

    better commies than fascists, better Orthodox than same-sex
  61. +4
    17 July 2013 20: 14
    Guys, reading all this bacchanalia here, you can’t help but wonder what’s going on in our souls.. (how deeply we were dug) I, born in the USSR, remember that we were taught by the tsarist regime.. Bloody Nicholas.. etc. It’s just Ivan the Terrible Peter! They revived Russia... they wrote in textbooks... I don’t like to write down the facts too much. I have a proposal to just stop jumping and abuse the murdered.. (The last Russian Emperor ruled for 300 years and not badly).. THIS IS OUR HISTORY DON'T HUMILIATE YOURSELF SLAVS!!!
    1. +3
      17 July 2013 20: 45
      The last Russian Emperor ruled for 300 years and not badly).. THIS IS OUR HISTORY DO NOT HUMILIATE YOURSELF SLAVS!!!
      You are right to scoff at history is not a trace, BUT! I don’t want to be RULED, I’m not a horse, but a person and that sounds PROUD! I am against leveling, but I want WORK and WORKING PEOPLE to be respected, and not by birthright, and this only comes from socialism, not a monarchy!
  62. DZ_98_B
    -6
    17 July 2013 20: 39
    They killed Nikolashka. and they did it right! SORRY FOR THE CHILDREN! Yes, it’s a pity, the girls are beautiful!!! Yes, I read that the surname of the novels was given only to real Romanovs. Before the Revolution! This is true? Somebody knows?
  63. -3
    17 July 2013 20: 56
    The murder of the royal family is truly a tragedy, but we must not forget that it was the royal weakness of will that brought Russia to impossibly greater victims...
  64. Supervision
    +3
    17 July 2013 21: 05
    History has been rewritten so many times to suit itself, so where do you get arguments about whether they were killed in vain or not?! Have you been there, Victims of the information war!?
  65. +2
    17 July 2013 21: 08
    This thread needs to be closed..people went crazy and then the crows flew in..peck at the troupes..(((
  66. lexe
    +2
    17 July 2013 21: 16
    The All-Russian Emperor, the Polish Tsar and the Grand Duke of Finland, the last Emperor of the Russian Empire, together with his family, were brutally murdered.
    The new government has shown in practice that the concept of court does not exist for it.
    No trial...
    Monarchy in the 21st century. should be without classes. Reliance on the believing middle class.
    80% of Russians believe in God. This means there is hope...
    I mourn and remember.
    I think discussions are unnecessary. It’s enough to see representatives of these 80% and read simple words -I mourn and remember.
    1. +1
      17 July 2013 21: 42
      Monarchy without estates? belay and what exactly is this? parliamentarism? Do you need a decorative monarchy of Britons? but why exactly? What is all this for? We are still people, not a herd, and some of us want, if not ourselves, but to see the president in our children, or does the sun warm us differently, some are warmer than others? Are rain, air, grass not equally created for everyone? or does someone have more rights to this?
  67. +1
    17 July 2013 21: 58
    I read somewhere that when Alexander the Great invaded India, he met either yogis or magicians, it doesn’t matter. So they began to stomp their feet and Alexander asked: what kind of crap is this and they answered him that this is how they explain that a person owns as much land as is under his feet. How much should belong to the sovereign? state? But what about the people? to become subjects of one person, surname, no, excuse me, I would prefer to be a subject of the USSR, but not for the estate of Russia.
    1. soldier's grandson
      -1
      17 July 2013 22: 26
      I remember a few years ago, a huge crowd of the heirs of the Romanov Tsar came from the West to some event, so on the screen I didn’t see a single Russian face, one viper, all some pockmarked ones that looked more like lizards, rather than people, or impostors, or indeed heirs, but for their own I wouldn’t take them, it’s better to kick them in the ass and away from our Motherland
  68. Zhuchok
    +2
    17 July 2013 22: 28
    Thanks to the author for the article.

    It's time to finally move away from the Soviet approach to the history of Russia and Tsar Nicholas II.
    It's time to forget nonsense like "weak king", "indecisive leader", "subject to influence" and so on.
    It's time to finally open our eyes and see the history of our country in all its depth.

    Here are excerpts from the book by Sergei Sergeevich Oldenburg “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II”


    During the twenty years of the reign of Nicholas II, the population of the empire increased by fifty million people - by 40%; Natural population growth exceeded three million per year. Along with natural growth, the general level of well-being has increased noticeably.

    Thus, sugar consumption from 25 million poods per year (8 pounds per capita in 1894) exceeded 80 million poods (18 pounds per capita) in 1913. Tea consumption also increased (75 million kg in 1913; 40 million in 1890).

    Thanks to the growth of agricultural production, the development of communications, and the expedient supply of food aid, the “hunger years” at the beginning of the twentieth century have already become a thing of the past. A crop failure no longer meant famine: the shortage in certain areas was covered by the production of other areas.

    The grain harvest (rye, wheat and barley), which reached an average of slightly more than two billion poods at the beginning of the reign, exceeded in 1913-1914. four billion.

    The amount of manufacture per head of the population doubled: despite the fact that the production of the Russian textile industry increased by one hundred percent, the import of fabrics from abroad also increased several times.

    Deposits in state savings banks increased from three hundred million in 1894 to two billion rubles in 1913.

    Coal production increased continuously. The Donetsk basin, which produced less than 1894 million poods in 300, already produced over one and a half billion poods in 1913. In recent years, the development of new powerful deposits in the Kuznetsk basin in Western Siberia has begun. Coal production throughout the empire more than quadrupled in twenty years. In 1913, oil production approached 600 million pounds per year (two-thirds more than at the beginning of the reign).
    1. soldier's grandson
      -1
      17 July 2013 22: 37
      were you there? the paper will endure everything, but the increase due to small nations when they began to do accounting
      1. grafrozow
        +2
        17 July 2013 23: 19
        Quote: Soldier's grandson
        were you there? the paper will endure everything, but the increase due to small nations when they began to do accounting

        You are wrong, it’s just that at that time there was no “five-year plan in four years”, and the right-hand glove shop did not compete with the left-hand glove shop. There was no point in the postscripts.
        1. +1
          17 July 2013 23: 30
          But you are right, there were postscripts, BUT you can’t fly into SPACE with postscripts alone, you can’t make a powerful bomb, but I ask you not to ask for forced labor, it’s not as productive as it seems, after all, the flight of thought is not cutting down the forest.
  69. Zhuchok
    +2
    17 July 2013 22: 29
    Next excerpt:

    The metallurgical industry grew rapidly in Russia. Iron smelting has almost quadrupled in twenty years; copper smelting - five times; production of manganese ore also increased fivefold. In the field of mechanical engineering, rapid growth has been evident in recent years: the fixed capital of the main Russian machine plants in three years (1911-1914) increased from 120 to 220 million rubles. The production of cotton fabrics from 10,5 million poods in 1894 doubled by 1911 and continued to increase further. The total number of workers in twenty years has moved from two million to five.

    From 1 million at the beginning of the reign, the budget reached 200 billion. Year after year, the amount of receipts exceeded estimates; the state always had free cash. Over ten years (3,5-1904), the excess of ordinary income over expenses amounted to over two billion rubles. The gold reserves of the State Bank increased from 1913 million (648) to 1894 million (1604). The budget grew without introducing new taxes or raising old ones, reflecting the growth of the national economy.

    The length of railways, as well as telegraph wires, more than doubled. The river fleet has also increased - the largest in the world. (There were 1895 steamships in 2, 539 in 1906.)

    The Russian army grew in approximately the same proportion as the population: by 1914 it consisted of 37 corps (not counting Cossacks and irregular units), with a peacetime composition of over 1 people. After the Japanese War, the army was thoroughly reorganized. The Russian fleet, which suffered so severely during the Japanese War, was revived to a new life, and this was the enormous personal merit of the Emperor, who twice overcame the stubborn resistance of Duma circles.

    The growth of public education is evidenced by the following figures: by 1914, expenditures by the state, zemstvos and cities on public education amounted to 300 million rubles (at the beginning of the reign - about 40 million).

    The following data is available on the number of books and periodicals in Russia in 1908: there were 2 periodicals, including 028 daily. Books and brochures were published in 440 titles, 23 copies, worth 852 million rubles.
  70. Zhuchok
    +4
    17 July 2013 22: 31
    Next excerpt:

    The economic activity of the broad masses was expressed in the unprecedentedly rapid development of cooperation. Before 1897, in Russia there were only about a hundred consumer societies with a small number of participants and several hundred small savings and loan partnerships... Already by January 1, 1912, the number of consumer societies was approaching seven thousand... Credit cooperatives in 1914 increased their fixed capital by seven times compared to 1905 and numbered up to nine million members.

    Against the background of the overall picture of the mighty growth of the Russian Empire, the development of its Asian possessions stood out. Over the course of twenty years, about 4 million migrants from the interior provinces found a place for themselves in Siberia.

    In the twentieth year of the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia reached a level of material prosperity unprecedented in it... Foreigners noted the change taking place in Russia. At the end of 1913, the editor of the Economist Europeen, Edmond Théry, carried out a survey of the Russian economy on behalf of two French ministers. Noting astonishing successes in all areas, Thary concluded: “If the affairs of European nations continue from 1912 to 1950 as they did from 1900 to 1912, Russia will, by the middle of this century, dominate Europe both politically and economically.” and financially."

    Here is what Winston Churchill wrote about the last days of the reign of Nicholas II: “Fate has never been as cruel to any country as to Russia. Her ship sank while the harbor was in sight. She had already weathered the storm when everything collapsed. All the sacrifices have already been made, all the work has been completed. Despair and betrayal took hold of power when the task was already completed...

    In March the Tsar was on the throne; The Russian Empire and the Russian army held out, the front was secured and victory was undeniable.

    According to the superficial fashion of our time, the tsarist system is usually interpreted as a blind, rotten tyranny, incapable of anything. But an analysis of the thirty months of war with Germany and Austria should have corrected these facile ideas. We can measure the strength of the Russian Empire by the blows it suffered, by the disasters it survived, by the inexhaustible forces it developed, and by the recovery of which it was capable.

    In the government of states, when great events happen, the leader of the nation, whoever he may be, is condemned for failures and glorified for success...

    They're about to kill him. A dark hand intervenes, at first invested with madness. The king leaves the stage. He and all those who love him are given over to suffering and death. His efforts diminish; his actions are condemned; his memory is being defamed... Stop and say: who else turned out to be suitable? There was no shortage of talented and courageous people, ambitious and proud in spirit, courageous and powerful people. But no one was able to answer those few simple questions on which the life and glory of Russia depended.”
  71. lexe
    +3
    17 July 2013 23: 14
    Speaking of stripes...the more monarchist you are, the darker the shoulder straps are.
    We need to remember this and not forget to give a plus. Otherwise, people have quite sound ideas/thoughts and are in the debate.
    I read this from some people... The slave system (not even communism) is kind of good. Limiting the number of peoples is also kind of good...
    And all the gold chasers laughing
  72. Cat
    0
    17 July 2013 23: 47
    It is becoming more and more common that the Russian people are preparing for the day of special commemoration of the Holy Royal Martyrs. It could not have been otherwise - they gave themselves in the name of saving Russia. The time has come for the seed that became the king’s sacrifice to sprout in the souls of the people.

    What kind of nonsense is this, did the author hit his head or was he stoned on something too strong?
    What kind of sacrifice, to Benya’s mother, is this? When Nicholas II faced the question of saving Russia, what did this Nicholas do? That's right - he abdicated the throne. He got off the hook, so to speak, from responsibility, made his legs, got on his skis, jumped into the bushes, and so on. I chose the simplest and most cowardly option, although I could have tried to at least somehow influence the situation, at least change and correct something. But he didn’t want to, or he wasn’t smart enough, or most likely, he was afraid. Not to mention the fact that it was he who brought the country to revolution and a fratricidal civil war. Even if this is not only his merit, but nevertheless, it was Nikolai who was most to blame, since he had more power than all the others combined. An absolute monarch, after all, hereditary and for life - and not some kind of temporary president promoted to power with the money of the oligarchs.
    And the fact that he died from a Bolshevik bullet - what kind of sacrifice is that? Did he, himself, voluntarily go to the bullets, with a bayonet at the ready, at the head of the defenders of the Fatherland? No, he sat stupidly and waited for his fate, like a lamb in a cage, which some priests were going to slaughter on the altar in the name of some deity. But no one considers a sacrificial ram to be a saint and a great martyr - why then would Nicholas be so scared of such honors?

    By and large, Nicholas II did exactly the same thing for the Russian Empire as Gorbachev M.S. - for the USSR. Or maybe Hunchback, too, should be declared a great martyr and included among the saints? And what... will happen to our church leaders, if not right now, then in half a hundred years.

    The article is a big and fat minus.
  73. soldier's grandson
    -5
    17 July 2013 23: 54
    You need to remember your parents. and the author himself got stoned or .
  74. Tver
    0
    18 July 2013 09: 49
    This is my first time here... I like the discussion - you can feel a lot of service people. I would like to add the following: the last emperor belonged to the Gottorp dynasty (with the addition of a drop of Romanov blood). The first of the Gottorps, Peter the Third, became famous for his idiotic (from a Russian point of view) admiration for Frederick II, his attempt to introduce Lutheranism in Rus', the conclusion of an insane peace with the loser Prussia, etc. etc.. Such was the founder of the dynasty!!! Maybe he was a good German, but what does Russia have to do with it??? His son, Pavel the First, is not far from his father. I will NOT describe his art in detail, that’s not what we’re talking about. This is why I don’t like the article. The terrible crime in Yekaterinburg does not justify the mistakes of Nicholas II personally, and besides, the mistakes of the dynasty, state and society accumulated over decades (and Ilyin believed even centuries). The tragedy of 2 is a rebellion, the collapse of a great country has many roots and these are topics for separate discussions. It is only worth adding that Metropolitan John of Petersburg, known for his patriotic position, was against hasty canonization. Metropolitan Nicholas of Nizhny Novgorod (a veteran who served at the throne of God without a leg (!!!) for 1917 (!!) years) also expressed bewilderment at the haste. Ultimately, the Russian bishops recognized the martyrdom of the former tsar, but only for his private life. The hysteria of the faint-hearted admirers of Nicolas 50 is just evidence of the spiritual weakness of modern monarchists
    1. 0
      18 July 2013 10: 38
      Quote: Tver
      His son, Pavel the First, is not far from his father. I will NOT describe his art in detail, that’s not what we’re talking about

      well, write it down, otherwise it’s somehow not very good, they accused me of blaming, but I won’t be able to prove it, with Peter 3, not everything is clear either
      as a rule, the more you mess up, the faster you will be called either great or saint and vice versa
  75. 0
    18 July 2013 10: 22
    Guys, I downvoted the article, because I myself am an atheist), and I can’t look at that story from that angle. But I don’t understand many people here on the site who are screaming = kill the whole family, that’s what the time demanded, that’s what was needed, that’s what he needs, that’s right, etc. Let's cut your family down to the 4th generation? A? What prompts you to say these words? You probably don’t understand that this means killing the WHOLE family. And you don’t understand what a family is, a father, a mother, brothers, sisters... I don’t understand what was happening in history then, all opinions are subjective, we weren’t there when all this happened and history has been rewritten. I don’t want to believe that killing the king’s family was right, and is relevant even now. There is a king, there is no king, there are laws of society, there are laws of morality, there is honor, so what do you have to give a damn about and what do you have to go through to do this and consider that it is right? It’s a pity, it seems that what’s left of our society is losing its humanity more and more, overshadowed by the fact that they don’t tolerate gays, which means they preserve the institution of the family. I will really respect a person here on the site who, without lying, remembers his family back to his great-great-great-grandparents, but I doubt it. I’m tired here of cheers for patriots and those who hate what they don’t understand in politics, since journalists and their articles spin this opinion as they want. But guys, before you dig into this politics, you ask your father, mother - about their parents, and grandparents - about their parents. How they lived, what they lived with. Support and understand the history of your family, maybe this will return humanity to someone, truth to someone, family to someone.
  76. I. Timofeev
    +2
    18 July 2013 12: 09
    The article is provocative, unfortunately, it has misled many in the wrong direction
  77. +1
    18 July 2013 12: 24
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Lenin in oblivion, Nicholas to the face of saints, history has put everything in its place!

    Nicholas was canonized - and who today remembers that Nicholas is indirectly to blame for the death of his brother, whom he pushed into the hold of a ship, about his orders to shoot workers, about his incompetent leadership of the army in the Russian-Japanese and World War I ? At that bloody time, everyone had their own truth - the monarchists had theirs, the Bolsheviks had theirs. We have no right to judge that time; we only know about that time what we were told at school before; I won’t say anything at all about today’s interpretation of history. A good and beautiful film was made about Kolchak - what an officer, a scientist he was, how he loved and so on! At least paint an icon! And my grandmother told me how, on Kolchak’s orders, they shot the men in their village, how they flogged everyone with ramrods and left them tied naked in the taiga to the greying of the vile people! The Scripture says: leave the dead to the dead!
  78. The comment was deleted.
  79. I. Timofeev
    +2
    18 July 2013 13: 11
    The article is correctly downvoted. But the Tsar and family did not deserve bad words and accusations.

    In Russia we have a sect of Tsar-worshipers who take the role of the Tsar to the point of absurdity, they say that he is an atoning sacrifice thanks to which Russia lives, that we need a new Tsar - this is not so. They also call on everyone to repent of what they did not do (the execution of the royal martyrs), etc. The author, apparently, is one of those people who belong to it, or those who share their views. The goal is to cause another wave of anger, slander against the king and others like him, so that people will sin against the Truth and stop feeling where the truth is and where the lie is.

    There are quite a lot of people on the site who have retained a sense of Truth. And it pleases. But not everyone.
    It’s hard to get confused on secular topics, but on religious topics it’s two and two, because we do not have sufficient knowledge in this area and spiritual experience. So these kinds of articles are thrown in to damage a healthy mind (if you accept slander, the mind turns around and easily accepts not the truth, but a lie). There are spiritual laws at work that we do not know about.

    This is not the first article of this kind. I wanted to warn you earlier, but I was unable to send a message.
  80. Zhuchok
    0
    18 July 2013 14: 43
    The article is absolutely correct.
    It's time to move on to real business.
    It's time to remove the names of the founders of world terrorism from the streets of our cities.
    It’s time to remove the statues from the squares in honor of the atheist, who still stands and shows us the path to the underworld with his bloody hand.
    And of course, it is necessary to remove the temple with the remains of the same atheist (to put it mildly) from the main square of the country.
    And we need a change in public opinion regarding Tsar Nicholas II.
    Now we largely continue to live by the Soviet legacy, including in our views on history. But there are already many documents and entire studies that completely refute the Soviet lies about the last Russian Tsar. He was one of the most successful Russian leaders. Under him, the triumph of Russia - military, economic, political, civilizational - was literally on the horizon. But the ruling elite and the elite of society did not want this triumph, they wanted to live differently. And they healed, but they didn’t live long. The prophecy of St. Seraphim of Sarov came true: “...all the rebels will perish.” After October 1917, former criminals came to power. This is where the effect of spiritual laws is clearly visible: if you don’t want to be ruled by a holy man, criminals will rule over you.
  81. +2
    18 July 2013 20: 37
    At the time of the execution of the Romanov family, Nikolai had already officially renounced the throne and therefore he was no longer a king... so guys, when talking about the execution of the “royal” family, make corrections. Now on the subject of holy martyrs...I, of course, could be wrong, but I believe that HOLY MARTYRS are people who accepted death for the sake of...IDEAS...FAITH...HOMELAND in the end. I wonder how Mr. Romanov distinguished himself?...by the fact that he died? So during the Civil War, many worthy people died on both sides. His only distinction was that he renounced the throne at a difficult time for Russia. which, by the way, did not slightly set up the future white movement; in the memoirs of former white officers on this matter, you can read a lot of unflattering things about him.
    1. Zhuchok
      -1
      18 July 2013 21: 12
      There is no official reliable information that the king “abandoned the throne.”
      There is no genuine Renunciation Manifesto.
      The document-telegram “Headquarters. To the Chief of Staff” is extremely strange, not corresponding to any rules for the preparation of such documents that existed at that time.
      The royal seal is missing on this document, and the signature is made in pencil.
      Holy martyrs are those who accepted death for the sake of Christ.
      The family of Nicholas II is glorified as passion-bearers, that is, they endured suffering for fulfilling the commandments of God.
      Glorification as a saint is carried out by the Church on the basis of a detailed study of materials about a person’s life.
      It can be counted in different ways, but the Church has studied and determined that Emperor Nicholas II, his wife and children are saints. The way it is.
      The White movement set itself up by betraying the Tsar. Generals Alekseev, Ruzsky, Kornilov and others are traitors, and their fate was thereby sealed.
      The fact that some of them who survived wrote slander against the Tsar is explained precisely by the fact that they realized their involvement in this betrayal, and sought to lay the blame on the Tsar, that he was supposedly “to blame,” which looks disgusting. The Emperor correctly wrote on the eve of these tragic events: “There is treason, cowardice and deception all around.”
      1. Cat
        +1
        18 July 2013 22: 28
        Quote: Zhuchok
        It can be counted in different ways, but the Church has studied and determined that Emperor Nicholas II, his wife and children are saints. The way it is.

        What exactly was the church studying, the “lack of authentic documents”? And when did she start this study - in 1918, or in the early 90s, when the fashion for religion and love for “lost Russia” arose? That's it.
        Even if we ignore the fact that the holiness of this or that person is determined not by God or his messenger, but by the banal vote of certain church leaders - even in this case, they are declared saints, according to the mind, for some godly actions. Why did the king do this? He brought the country to revolution - yes, a historical fact. He tried to change something, or maybe at least suffered in the name of this country - but who knows, there are no supporting documents, as you say. Where then did holiness come from?
        1. Zhuchok
          -1
          19 July 2013 11: 37
          Glorification as a saint is always preceded by popular veneration, which began soon after it became known about the villainous murder of the royal family. In the 80s, the tsar and his family were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, and in 2000 by the Russian Orthodox Church.
          The holiness of a person is determined precisely by God, who created the Church. Recently there was a feast of the Holy Trinity - this is precisely the birthday of the Church. 2000 years ago, the Holy Spirit descended on the Apostles, and after that they began to preach Christ throughout the world, and Christian communities began to form. Since then, the Church has been living by the Holy Spirit, and the decisions it makes at the Councils are sanctified by Divine Grace. That is, the Church and Christ are a single whole in the spiritual sense.
          As for the documents, mainly political documents relating to the so-called abdication of Nicholas II and everything connected with it were destroyed. The correspondence of members of the royal family with each other and with the outside world was also falsified.
          The question “What did the king do?” is, apparently, a question for backfilling.
          If you are really interested, there are books written in different periods; above on this forum I cited excerpts from the book by S.S. Oldenburg.
          The country was brought to revolution by those who really wanted it.
          The king suffered greatly for the country, both morally and, in the end, suffered martyrdom.
          He didn’t go abroad and didn’t recognize the new government.
          He accepted death face to face because he was a king, the Anointed One of God.
  82. The comment was deleted.
  83. VkadimirEfimov1942
    -3
    20 July 2013 09: 14
    The article is so-so. It’s a pity for the children and relatives, but Nicholas II himself got what he deserved, although he should have been judged, it would have been fair. He was a narrow-minded politician, and hardly a good person, he was a puppet of the Masons: in a difficult time for Russia, under external pressure, he started a war with Japan, and then with Germany, having antediluvian weapons (sometimes almost without weapons, with pikes for an advantage against machine guns), he supplied “cannon fodder” to please the allies.
    And he was no commander in chief. So there is nothing sacred in it. And the fact that he is being made a saint is for one reason: while our rulers cannot offer another ideology (Is it just the bestial ideology of the West and the abuse of our recent history, in order to justify the worthlessness of our legislators - turn the arrows to the past!)
    1. Anthony98
      +1
      21 July 2013 23: 32
      What I feel most sorry about in this story is the political regime. Monarchy itself is no worse than any other form of government (if there is a good ruler, of course). With the introduction of the constitution, it was possible to preserve the monarchy and protect the people from the shocks of the revolution, to preserve the already established production (after all, in the absence of specialists trained under the tsar, who were killed by the proletariat, not a single plant, not a single factory could work) ...
      1. Zhuchok
        +2
        22 July 2013 10: 07
        The biggest pity is that as a result of the conspiracy and coup d'etat of 1917 and all subsequent events, historical Russia was destroyed.
        A huge number of people were physically destroyed, and the rest of the population was “recoded” in the national-cultural sense, that is, the population’s value orientation was replaced.
        If earlier the national idea was the idea of ​​holiness and spiritual and moral perfection, then the exact opposite was imposed on the people - materialism.
        As a result, present-day Russia and Russia before 1917 are two different countries and two different peoples.
        We know almost nothing about that Russia and that people.
        And if we learn something, we don’t understand the meaning.
        If the people return to their roots, there will be Russia, but if not, other peoples with strong traditions and a national idea will live on this territory.
  84. Sergey Tregubov
    +4
    22 July 2013 23: 47
    1974 I serve in the SA guarding the district headquarters in Sverdlovsk... a year earlier at the end of July on Sunday, a tour of the city at the monument to the fallen Komsomol members, the guide whispers... look across the road to Ipatiev's house where the royal family and HIM were shot... I ask why they killed me...and a lump comes to my throat...grandmothers sell flowers, I buy flowers, I walk across the road...cars let me pass???I lay down the flowers and oh a MIRACLE, I make the sign of the cross...three times and make a BOW. ..coming back...I’m 18 years old...a family WITHOUT...God in the head...Komsoml member...pray for me, servant of God Sergius, saints of God Nicholas, Marie, Olga, Tatiana, Anastasia...heir to the throne Alixy...for you are praying before the throne of God for the REVIVAL of the RUSSIAN land.
  85. +3
    23 July 2013 06: 27
    Nah.... It’s actually sad... I haven’t been here for a long time and I’m sad to see who’s on the site now. People who are absolutely incapable of analyzing anything and judging by the results.
    So, Nicholas II is to blame for renouncing? Did he renounce his Motherland, the Monarchy? NO! HE renounced his power in favor of his brother Constantine!
    And maybe that’s why the renunciation was signed in pencil on regular paper and not stamped paper?!
    Nikolai lost the War?! Have you even heard about the Brusilov breakthrough of 1916 and about the fact that Germany was already at its last edition? Have you read the endless correspondence of the English lords about how they are afraid of the sharp strengthening of Russia? About how they dream of Russians cutting each other’s throats? You, gentlemen who are so knowledgeable, do not be lazy to read the writer Kuprin (if you have ever heard of such a thing), his story about the Dome of St. Isaac's Cathedral. Maybe at least something in your heads will clear and you will understand how global betrayal can sometimes be.
    I don’t even want to talk about the standard of living under Nicholas. Okay, with today's money, a worker received about 60 thousand rubles a month, and a lieutenant - almost 300 thousand. Don't believe me? Have you even heard that under Nicholas, women did not work at all, and a male worker supported a family of 5-7 children? Moreover, during the reign of Nicholas II, the population of Russia grew by 2 million!!!
    Ah, your eternal question - since everything was so good, why did they make a revolution!!!??? So why did EBN come to power in 1991? Was it bad under the USSR? And then what did they throw off Gaddafi? So why are “his people” fighting against Assad now?
    Why then was Caesar such a “horse” that his own friend Brutus killed him?!
    We have one problem in Russia, we are not only a nation of Meresyevs, Gastellos, Solnechnikovs, Matrosovs and Panfilovs, we are also a nation of Vlasovs, Trotskys, Lenins, Chubais, Kokhs, Kudrins, Yeltsins and other traitor freaks who are ready to sell their Motherland for 30 pieces of silver to the applause of the crowd and their foreign hosts. Just as they sold Nicholas and his Holy Family at one time.
    Passion-bearing Nicholas, pray to Christ God for our country and its crazy people.
    1. -1
      23 July 2013 11: 26
      Quote: Magadan
      So, Nicholas II is to blame for renouncing? Did he renounce his Motherland, the Monarchy? NO! HE renounced his power in favor of his brother Constantine!

      and brother Kostya was really eager to take the power into his hands
      Quote: Magadan
      I don’t even want to talk about the standard of living under Nicholas. Okay, with today's money, a worker received about 60 thousand rubles a month, and a lieutenant - almost 300 thousand. Don't believe me? Have you even heard that under Nicholas, women did not work at all, and a male worker supported a family of 5-7 children? Moreover, during the reign of Nicholas II, the population of Russia grew by 2 million!!!


      you accused everyone of lacking logic and common sense, so explain
      1) in a prosperous country, everyone is fattening and relaxing in the Maldives with cows, why the hell are they running into the Emperor?
      2) the emperor’s country is prospering wonderfully, the enemy is defeated, why sign a renunciation?
      1. Zhuchok
        0
        23 July 2013 14: 21
        A conspiracy was formed against the emperor from the military and Duma members, who were supported by ambassadors of foreign states and representatives of transnational capital.
        Their goal was to prevent Russia from winning the First World War, since Russia would eventually become the No. 1 country in Europe with the foreseeable prospect of world championship.
        The Orthodox monarch also aroused hatred among some representatives of the conspirators due to the latter’s belonging to various kinds of satanic sects and Masonic lodges.
        Also, internal revolutionary forces sought to prevent victory in the war, since victory would greatly reduce their chances of further struggle.
        As a result, after the tsar left for Headquarters at the end of February 1917, the military actually blocked him. The tsar's order to restore order by the Petrograd authorities was not carried out, and the order to move units from the front to the capital was not carried out.
        Then a strange document was issued in the form of a telegram to the chief of staff, signed in pencil, the signature itself also looks strange.
        Only the Manifesto can testify to renunciation, which does not exist, so there is no reason to claim that the king renounced.
        Until his death, the king was in a complete information blockade, so there is also no information about his abdication during this period.
        By the way, Nicholas II could not abdicate in favor of his brother Mikhail because he was married in a morganatic marriage and violated the rules of succession to the throne.
        And the tsar could not abdicate in favor of Tsarevich Alexei, since Alexei was ill and the tsar, as a loving father, could not leave him alone with all that turmoil, for moral reasons.
        Therefore, the abdication of the king from the throne was practically impossible to carry out, especially since there were no legal grounds for this; the laws did not provide for the possibility of abdication.
        1. -1
          23 July 2013 14: 29
          Quote: Zhuchok
          A conspiracy was formed against the emperor from the military and Duma members, who were supported by ambassadors of foreign states and representatives

          Is he a college student?!!!
          Apart from the fact that the rest of the family also washed their hands of the family, I ask again why not one of this family led even a civilian regiment. Everyone except the Romanov family proclaimed themselves “rulers,” although God himself ordered them to come to the front, but at 41 they called for a fight against Bolshevism, this was when the very existence of Russia was in question
          1. Zhuchok
            +1
            23 July 2013 22: 05

            Is he a college student?!!!


            You don't believe in the possibility of a conspiracy? But this is a fact.
            Why did the king allow him? Betrayal. Those who were obliged to take measures to restore order did not take them.



            Apart from the fact that the rest of the family also washed their hands of the family, I ask again why not one of this family led even a civilian regiment. Everyone except the Romanov family proclaimed themselves “rulers,” although God himself ordered them to come to the front, but at 41 they called for a fight against Bolshevism, this was when the very existence of Russia was in question


            Here you yourself answered your own question: “part of the family also washed their hands of it.”
            Some thought that they were thereby saving the monarchy, while others directly participated in the betrayal (like V.K. Nikolai Nikolaevich).
            Some were deceived by the fact that Nicholas II allegedly abdicated in favor of Michael.
            Regarding 41 years, it is difficult to assess the motives of everyone who called for the fight against Bolshevism.
            Apparently, this is exactly how they imagined this war at that time, namely as a fight against Bolshevism, not knowing Hitler’s true motives; propaganda then also worked.
            1. -1
              23 July 2013 23: 07
              Quote: Zhuchok
              You don't believe in the possibility of a conspiracy? But this is a fact. Why did the king allow it? Betrayal. Those who were obliged to take measures to restore order did not take them.

              I’m talking about a college girl in her purest form, she’s already been taken to a brothel, but she still can’t understand
              Here you yourself answered your own question: “part of the family also washed their hands of it.”
              Some thought that this was saving the monarchy
              either stupid people or scoundrels, I don’t even know which is better
              Apparently, this is exactly how they imagined this war at that time, namely as a fight against Bolshevism, not knowing Hitler’s true motives; propaganda then also worked.
              after all, they are stupid people, which means they don’t need a surname like a monarch
  86. lesnik340
    -2
    23 July 2013 09: 19
    Let’s remember how we lived under the primitive communal system, how good it was.
    Fans of the Romanov boyars, tell me why they rewrote history, they sold Alaska.
    And what a shame it was when Romanov sent a rotten fleet to defend Sevastopol,
    and Tsushima. You will say that there were victories. But who did these victories? People!!!
    Yes, I feel sorry for Nikolai and his family, but “oh times, oh morals.”
    By the way, Lenin demanded a trial of the tsar and was against such execution.
    What the church has decided is not for us to judge.
    What happened has passed, but we must remember. And it’s also not worth ascribing to what didn’t happen.
  87. The comment was deleted.
  88. Tver
    0
    23 July 2013 23: 47
    “There is cowardice, treason and betrayal all around” - my poorly informed contemporaries like to repeat these words of the former emperor. But doesn’t this apply to Nikolai himself? A little-known episode from the First World War: the king comes with his heir to the front (to raise the morale of the troops - a good idea!). But he doesn’t come closer than 20 kilometers to the front line - he’s afraid of German heavy artillery. He’s a bit of a coward, but that’s not so bad, he also awarded the Tsarevich the most honorable award in the army - the Cross of St. George!! The whole army grumbled...The list could go on for a long time. Millions have died, and we don’t know what’s going on in the rear. Naturally, normal people drew conclusions from the current situation. And the decision to remove the German Tsar was quite logical. By the way, kings have been deposed before and the state did not fall apart as a result. There was more than one cause of the disaster. And why are these honored generals entirely traitors?? I think everything is much more complicated... Has anyone seen a photo of the last tsar next to... a swastika? Very expressive!!! Empress Alexandra sculpted this all-German “amulet” everywhere: appropriately and out of place. Even on the clichés of banknotes (the Soviet government printed money for several more years on these clichés). What would have happened then at 41? All of Europe knows that the Second World War is a continuation of the First. The Germans were better prepared, and everything started again! If Nicholas had remained on the throne, in 41 we would have stabilized the front somewhere beyond the Urals, and not near Moscow. In Byzantium, dozens (!) of emperors died: during assassinations, coups, and already being removed from power. This is the price of power. A soldier takes risks in battle, but an emperor takes risks all the time!

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"