Military Review

"Shot from the US Embassy!"

124
"Shot from the US Embassy!"Yes! The US military was on the roof of the US Embassy in Moscow!


The phrase attributed to Socrates that “all secret things sooner or later become clear” has never been fully historically justified. Looking back, not even on the last couple of hundred years, but at least on the last decades, it is obvious that not everything secret becomes obvious and not always. We will hardly ever know the secret of Rudolf Hess's flight, the riddle of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, or how, in fact, the “attack on America” of 11 of September of 2001 was organized.

When we read about the secrets in interstate relations, this also, as a rule, concerns the days long past. However, the bloody events in Moscow 1993 of the year and the role of the USA in the constitutional coup in Russia remain equally unexplored.

According to official data, in the bloody events of October 1993, two US citizens suffered. 26-year-old American lawyer Terry Michael Duncan was killed in Ostankino around October 21 on October 3 while assisting the wounded. Friends say about him: “He has always been like that, and politics has nothing to do with it. People just died. ” The last one to whom Terry Duncan tried to help get out of the fire was the wounded New York Times photo correspondent Paul Otto. Another US citizen, Julia Brooks, was wounded in the stomach and thigh. (Recognized as a victim in the criminal case No.18 / 123669-93 about the riots in Moscow 3-4 October 1993 of the year).

But what to do with numerous eyewitness accounts of shooting by the US Embassy? What, in particular, should be done with this statement made during the meeting of the special committee of the State Duma 8 September 1998 of the year, General Viktor Sorokin, who in October 1993 was the deputy commander of the Airborne Forces, whose units participated in the execution of the Russian parliament: "Where around 8 hours, the units moved to the walls of the White House ... During the nomination of the unit to the regiment, 5 people died and 18 were injured. Shot from behind. I watched it myself. The shooting was carried out from the building of the American embassy ... All the dead and wounded were shot from behind ... "

And here we see the memoirs of Wayne Merry, employee of the political department of the US Embassy in Moscow (2013-1991) published in 94 on the private website of the American Association of Diplomatic Studies and Training (4-1993) about a gunshot wound to a Marine, Corporal Bell 20. XNUMX th. What did Corporal Bell do on the roof of the American Embassy during the storming of the House of Soviets? Was he there alone or with other marines? What exactly did they do there: did they launch pigeons into the Moscow sky? Did Bell get a bullet in his neck in a shootout - in response to the shelling of the House of Soviets and the Russian military? Why was the injury of Corporal Bell not officially documented, like the death of Duncan and the injury of Brooks, and kept secret for XNUMX years? Diplomat Merry, for obvious reasons, does not answer either these or many other questions ...

"We support democracy and reform, and Yeltsin is the leader of the reform movement."

(Briefing at the White House 21.03.1993)

“Cursed days” of 1993 fall caught me in America. In the fall semester of 1993, I was a Fulbright scholar and did research at Harvard Law School, gave lectures at several other universities, and prepared for teaching at Cornell University in the spring of 1994. Many of the materials I used in this article were collected at that time.

It seems very symbolic that the President of the Russian Federation B.N. Yeltsin made the first open coup attempt exactly two months after the inauguration and taking office of Bill Clinton - 20 March 1993. The appearance of Yeltsin on Russian television (also retransmitted on CNN's American channel) with a decree on “special procedure for governing the country” (OPUS), which called for the dissolution of the Congress of People's Deputies and the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation "The first real crisis" for the new American administration.

Clinton and his team faced a dilemma, the solution of which largely depended on the further development of not only Russian-American relations, but also purely internal events in Russia. The following point of view prevailed. According to Stephanopoulos, “maybe Yeltsin acted outside the framework of the new constitution [Stephanopoulos is mistaken: before the adoption of the“ new ”constitution, 9 months remained in Russia. “A.D.], but he seemed to be doing this in the name of democratic reforms.” Clinton's fellow on probation at Oxford in 1969-1970. Strobe Talbott, "insisted" that "Yeltsin was the only horse of the reformist forces" in Russia.

The meeting resulted in the following ugly formula, officially voiced by Stephanopoulos at the March 21 1993 briefing: “We support democracy and reform, and Yeltsin is the leader of the reform movement.” In other words, there is no god but the “reform movement”, and Yeltsin is his prophet. Thus, the US administration fully agreed with Yeltsin and gave him a sanction on the coup d'état. It did not work out in March - it will turn out in six months.

"The confrontation in Moscow: the United States supports the actions of the Russian leader to overcome the crisis"

(New York Times, 22.09.1993)

The coup of 1993 and the execution of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation were widely covered by the American media. Between September 22 and October 5, only the New York Times published about fifty articles and materials, ranging from 600 to 2500 words each.

About the same number of publications were devoted to events in Russia in all other leading print media. So, if the 22 of September, the newspaper of the American business community Wall Street Journal published only one article about what is happening in Moscow, then the next day there were already six of them.
The first article in the New York Times (of the six published in that newspaper that day, including the editorial), published on September 22, 1993, entitled “Confrontation in Moscow: US Supports Russian Leader in Overcoming the Crisis,” contains a detail that does not coincide with formulated later (and, in particular, reflected in the memoirs of Strobe Talbott) an official picture of events. According to a newspaper reporter Elaine Sciolino, citing a statement by then Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Decree No.1400 in the White House was not learned from Newsand “an hour before” Yeltsin’s television appearance on September 21, 1993.

Bill Clinton himself writes in his memoirs that he watched Yeltsin talk about the introduction of OPUS on one of the televisions installed in the Oval Office of the White House. In a different way, at the same time, a basketball game was broadcast between university teams from New York and Arkansas, Clinton's home state. “In both cases,” the ex-president writes, “there were teams for which I was a fan.” A very figurative comparison ...
Yeltsin's reforms are "an investment in US national security."

(US Secretary of State Warren Christopher 22.09.1993)

On September 22, the president of the United States and "other White House officials" called on European leaders to make similar statements in support of Yeltsin. Clinton personally contacted German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to retell the content of his conversation with Yeltsin.
According to Clinton, he “almost with a sigh of relief” took Yeltsin’s promise to hold new “free and fair” elections in December “in the name of democracy” and “to ensure peace, stability and an open political process this fall”. Refusing to recognize the publication of Decree No.1400 as a constitutional coup, Clinton said that, on the contrary, Yeltsin’s actions "underscore the complexity of the reform process he is conducting" and are themselves caused by a "constitutional crisis that has reached critical urgency and paralyzed the political process" in Russia. In the eyes of Clinton and the members of his administration, Yeltsin appeared to be "the best hope for democracy" in Russia, "a kind of Russian Charles de Gaulle, resorting to authoritarian powers to save the country from chaos."

Clinton was echoed by his party colleagues. The leader of the Democrats in the Senate, elected in November 2008 th US Vice President, Joseph Biden, with all the cowboy straightforwardness, called the President of Russia "the only horse that [we] can ride".

21 September 1993 anonymous source made an exceptionally curious confession, actually being the answer to the question of whether the US administration knew about the upcoming constitutional coup in Russia. According to him, even 13 of September, that is, 8 days before Yeltsin promulgated the notorious decree No.1400, who was in Washington at the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement "Dear Andrew" Kozyrev recalled to his American counterpart Secretary of State Warren Christopher and warned him about “Dramatic events” that were to “happen” soon. "It is clear" that "Kozyrev tried to give the Secretary of State a signal," wrote the New York Times.

The Wall Street Journal made an important clarification: Kozyrev not only informed the Americans about the plans of the President of the Russian Federation, but also called on the US government to provide him with the necessary support. Kozyrev’s confidence message was undoubtedly communicated to Clinton, and a sanction was obtained.
“Yeltsin’s retention of Russia in the pro-Western course” is “an imperative ... for our own interests.”

(From a speech in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steny Hoyer 22.09.1993)

The constitutional coup in Russia was warmly supported not only by the President of the United States, but by an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress.

22 September 1993, that is, the day after the decree No.1400 was issued, a congressman from Maryland, Steny Hoyer, who held the fourth most important position among Democratic congressmen at that time, delivered an exemplary speech in the House of Representatives. Acknowledging that the decree dissolving the Russian parliament was "technically ... illegal", Hoyer argued that Yeltsin "acted in accordance with the spirit of democracy, breaking the letter of the law." However, “the main reason for the continuing Western support for Yeltsin” in his opposition to the legislature, according to the congressman, was not even the supposedly democratic nature of the Yeltsin regime, but that “Yeltsin is a frankly pro-American, pro-Western, pro-market politician, while the Supreme Council "Accuses the West of seeking to undermine and weaken Russia" and "opposes the Yeltsin privatization program." Thus, Hoyer summed up, “carrying out the necessary reforms” by the Yeltsin government and “keeping Russia on the pro-Western course” is “an imperative ... for our own interests” [highlighted by me. - A.D.].

Congress Congressman from California and one of the main Russophobes on Capitol Hill Tom Lantos announced his desire to "wish good luck to Boris Yeltsin." Why? Because "the first for 1000 Russian years stories the democratically elected president is now fighting against the forces of darkness, evil, and totalitarianism, seeking to turn back the clock of history. ”

The circumstances of accepting the “aid” package to Yeltsin give reasonable grounds to doubt the sincerity of the assurances of US senior officials that after the end of the Cold War, the priority goals of American foreign policy included “supporting Russia in transforming its political, economic and social institutions” [ . - A.D.], unless “transformation” in this case means decomposition and destruction. Who could seriously take the characteristics of Russian-American relations (in particular, reflected in the Moscow Declaration of Clinton and Yeltsin, signed in 14 on January 1994) as “a new stage of a mature strategic partnership based on each other’s national interests”? In fact, in 1990-s, the fundamental principle of US foreign policy was not support for Russia as such, but assistance to “reforms” in Russia, which, according to the US General Control and Financial Department, are “critical for US purposes” [highlighted by me. - A.D.], not the promotion of the democratization of Russia and its movement towards a rule-of-law state, but specifically “assistance to Russian reformers,” which is by no means the same thing.

The American CNN channel defined the purpose of 12-15’s January 1994 Clinton’s visit to Moscow: “To demonstrate support for Yeltsin and reformers who suffered a shock as a result of the victory of ultra-nationalists and communists in the December parliamentary elections.”

The visit of the president of one state to support a group of persons in another country (even when this group is in power) loses the character of a “state” visit, acquires the character of collusion and interferes in the internal affairs of such a country.

"Communist fascists disguised as parliamentarians."

(“Boston Globe” about the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation 06.10.1993)

The very first article in the New York Times set the tone for US attitudes toward the legislative branch of power in Russia. The Supreme Soviet and the Congress of People’s Deputies were called nothing less than the “parliament of the Soviet period” [read: the “communist” period; for Americans, these words are synonymous. A.D.], “elected by the electoral rules of the Communist Party and generally hostile to Mr. Yeltsin’s reforms.” In the second article (of Serge Schmemann in the same issue of the newspaper), the Russian parliament was already called "a conservative, mainly consisting of Communists, legislators, who had moved from political struggle to a total battle for the fate of Russia."

In general, in the coverage of events in Russia, the American media either consciously or not from general ignorance made many factual mistakes. So, the same Serge Schmemann in the second article in the New York Times on September 22 referred to the election of Yeltsin as the first "democratically elected" President of the Russian Federation to 1990 year (instead of 1991), and the election of the Russian parliament to 1989, or "the era of Mikhail S. Gorbachev, when the Communist Party was still the supreme ruler." According to Schmemann, the election "rules established by the party guaranteed the election of many communists and extreme nationalists who, at every opportunity, blocked Mr. Yeltsin's legislation." That is, in 1990, when allegedly the election of President Yeltsin took place, according to Schmemann’s statement, it was already possible to hold “democratic” elections in Russia? Indeed, it was possible! So after all, it was then that the elections of deputies of Russia took place - in March 1990! And a year before they were elected deputies of the Union ... As the American saying goes, Schmemann himself "shot in the foot."

“Parliament was elected before the collapse of the USSR,” the Wall Street Journal correspondent echoes Schmemannu. Yes, before the crash. And the president - in June, 1991 - no?

In some regional editions of the newspaper from 22 September, the number of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation was given as 25 (!) Deputies. A typo or another attempt to make naive readers feel that these 25 villains should be removed from power and the “progressive” Yeltsin reforms will continue their course?

October 11 1993 was an editorial in the Boston Herald newspaper that called the Supreme Soviet of Russia “the anti-democratic bastion of the old regime” created by Gorbachev [???] and “elected as a result of fraudulent [or tampered” rigged. - A.D.] elections.

The coordinated position of the American media and the overwhelming majority of Sovietologists at that time acted as ideological support for the constitutional coup and the subsequent execution of representative government in Russia.

The first democratically elected Russian parliament was called nothing less than an “anti-democratic, anti-Western, anti-market, anti-Semitic” “red-brown coalition” (CRS Report for Congress, 93-884 F, 06.10.1993), a “nationalist-communist bloc” (The Boston Globe, 23.09.1993), the “nationalist, crypto-Soviet opposition” (The New York Times, 24.10.1993), the “gang of communist apparatchiks” (The New York Times, 30.09.1993), the “gang of communists and fascists” (The Boston Globe, 30.09.1993) and even “ communist fascists [exactly like this: "communist fascists". - A.D.], disguised as parliamentarians ”(The Boston Globe, 06.10.1993).

The previous Constitution of Russia was characterized as a “farcical document” (Portland Press Herald, 06.12.1993) and as a “fundamental problem of Russia until December 1993 of the year” (Foreign Affairs, No. 5, 1994). Defenders of the Constitution, respectively, were declared “a strange alliance of old communists, nationalists, monarchists and anti-Semites” (The Spectator, No. 8622, 09.10.1993).

The very standoff between the Yeltsin regime and his opponents was served only as a conflict between “democracy” and “demons”, as the headline of the editorial article published in the Boston Globe on the day of parliamentary elections in Russia 12 December 1993 of the year.

I remember such a case. At the end of his diplomatic career at the end of Clinton’s second presidential term, and apparently not believing in the victory of Democrat Gore in the 2000 presidential election, Strobovich traveled around leading US academic centers in search of a soft landing after retirement. In February, 2000 Talbott was enthusiastically accepted at the law faculty of New York University, where I was teaching at the time. Presented to Talbott by the dean of the Law School (now the president of the entire university) John Sexton, as the first visiting law professor from Russia in the history of the faculty, I could not help myself and not pay attention of the undersecretary of state to the fact that in 1990-1993. worked as a leading and then chief specialist of the Committee on International Affairs of the Supreme Soviet of Russia. “If you believe that the first Russian parliament was really“ a gang of communists and fascists, ”then I am one of them.” “I never talked about the fascists in the Supreme Soviet,” Talbott said coldly and pointedly turned away, letting his whole mind understand the dean of the faculty that his choice of a Russian visiting professor was not the best.

I confess that the first thing I did after the release of Talbott's memoirs was to open the pages dedicated to the Supreme Soviet. And what do we see? Numerous references to the "red" and "brown" in the Supreme Council, which blocked Yeltsin's "reforms" at the beginning of the 1990-s according to the recipes of the American advisers and the IMF. How so, Mr. Talbott? That the "fascists", that the "brown" - no difference! Even Clinton in his memoirs does not allow this, and in the worst case calls Yeltsin’s opponents (for some reason in the Duma, the Russian parliament) “reactionary elements” or “old communists and other reactionaries”. (And, by the way, I was no longer invited to teach at New York University).
In the fall of 1993, the State Department considered the possibility of a US military contingent to support Yeltsin.
(From the book of Assistant Ex-President Nixon "Nixon in Winter").

In the book “Nixon in the Winter”, the assistant to the ex-President Nixon in the last years of his life Monika Crowley reveals a detail that is not known not only to the Russian reader, but also to most Western observers. On the days of confrontation between the President and the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation, Richard Nixon was invited to the US State Department to participate in the discussion of Washington’s official response options and returned completely depressed from this discussion, as one of the options suggested ... sending a US military contingent to Moscow to support Yeltsin.
Nixon spoke out strongly against this idea. “What are these assholes from the State Department thinking about?” - Crowley recalls the emotional words of Nixon. - You can not send troops to Russia ... When we did it to fight the Bolsheviks [meaning the US participation in the intervention of the "allies" 1918 of the year and the landing of American troops in Vladivostok and Arkhangelsk - A.D.], this turned out to be a disaster. In addition, we simply cannot interfere in their internal affairs, especially by military means. Oh my God!"

Nixon was not the first time to speak so impartially about American diplomacy in the Russian direction of the Clinton presidency. “These guys are just nuts. They do not understand that by encouraging Yeltsin’s autocratic inclinations, they are playing with fire, ”recalls Mr. Simes Nixon’s reaction to Talbott’s speech at the Appropriations Committee of the 19 House of Representatives April 1993 in support of financial aid to the“ reformers ”in Russia. Triumphantly supporting "President Yeltsin, who threw the glove at the parliament," allegedly "controlled by the reactionaries," Talbott prepared the ground for Yeltsin's dissolution of legislative power in Russia, and for supporting such dissolution in Washington.

An episode from Crowley’s book, firstly, once again underlines how high Washington’s stakes were during the days of the crisis and, secondly, makes it necessary to take a fresh look at the numerous eyewitness accounts of third-party snipers in the Moscow massacre. Perhaps, “assholes from the State Department” at least partially nevertheless realized their plan?

The list of speeches in support of the constitutional coup in Russia that sounded in those truly “damned days” of September-October 1993 in the walls of the Congress and the White House could be continued. But for us in this case, the very fact of the frank confessions of the US leadership is important not just as being permissive, but expedient of using American “help” as an instrument of interference in the internal affairs of Russia. The very “help” that, with the removal of a large part of Yeltsin's reformers from power in 2000-s, was transferred to the sponsorship of the opposition “shaking the foreign embassies” and “agents of change”, as part of the Russian “non-governmental organizations” in Washington is frankly called.

The American support of such anti-democratic and anti-constitutional actions of the Russian president as the shooting of the federal parliament, the dissolution of legislative bodies in the regions and localities, the suspension (for a year and a half) of the work of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (which, in Senator Pell’s opinion, was apparently the "consolidation of democratic reforms in Russia ”) clearly demonstrated that, despite the official assurances of the US administration in its interest in seeing Russia prosperous, respected and the democratic “partner”, the “Washington Regional Committee” was quite pleased with the transformation of Russia into a client state, controlled by a corrupt authoritarian leader.
Author:
Originator:
http://zavtra.ru/content/view/strelyali-iz-posolstva-ssha/
124 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. venaya
    venaya 2 October 2015 05: 09 New
    +35
    Please note: the new US Embassy in Moscow, opposite the government house. And the largest embassy complex in Europe, located in Kiev. Oh, not by chance, not by chance.
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 2 October 2015 05: 35 New
      +25
      Please note: the new US Embassy in Moscow, opposite the government house.


      A great place to install various beacons and tracking equipment for all incoming and outgoing .... mess ...
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 2 October 2015 05: 47 New
        +56
        US Yeltsin puppet in Russia, it’s like the current US Poroshenko puppet in Ukraine.
        In both Russia and Ukraine, the United States staged a coup d'etat using traitors in both Russian and Ukrainian society.
        And these traitors are still in the power of Russia, they influence and make the modern state policy. But this is dangerous in the current confrontation between the United States and Russia. When will Russian power be cleared of the 5th column?
        1. Volzhanin
          Volzhanin 2 October 2015 07: 31 New
          +10
          Apparently, it is not so soon that we will not survive ...
          smile
          If we do not headlong to change the Constitution and some laws, we will be crushed. Already crush. Even such a stupid layman as I see it.
          And Donbass will certainly merge. Everything goes to this ...
          1. Tra-ta-ta
            Tra-ta-ta 2 October 2015 08: 05 New
            +1
            Apparently, it is not so soon that we will not survive ...
            About this more than once the "topic" was raised here ... And everything is chewed on the site of E. Fedorov: the reasons, the consequences, and even the "what to do" ...
            The Muscovites, who actively supported the EBN, now do not want to change anything ...
            Thanks to them at least for the fact that the "swamp storm" was stopped.
            1. fzr1000
              fzr1000 2 October 2015 10: 02 New
              +14
              Again Muscovites dragged. None of my acquaintances supported EBN, and even then they knew how to count voices "correctly." You better ask Zyuganov, why did he get scared and sell himself to the Democrats?
          2. NordUral
            NordUral 2 October 2015 09: 57 New
            +14
            We, the country and the people, have a lot to change in order to live a life worthy of the people and the country. Oligarchic capitalism should disappear, and it remains so, despite all the make-up of liberals in power. A fair nationalization of the stolen must take place and a planned economy with market elements in the sphere of consumption should return. There is much more to come. The Soviet system of education and healthcare must return so that an educated and healthy people can build their present common and truly bright future. And the core idea of ​​the country - social justice - should return.
            1. Uncle Joe
              Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 07 New
              +2
              Quote: NordUral
              Must pass fair nationalization
              01.10.2015

              The Russian authorities are not going to nationalize anything and are ready to take certain steps to privatize large state-owned companies, said Russian President Vladimir Putin.

              http://ria.ru/economy/20151001/1294596808.html
          3. Uncle Joe
            Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 03 New
            +4
            Quote: Volzhanin
            If we headlong we don’t change the Constitution
            What is the point of changing what is not respected anyway?
            1. veksha50
              veksha50 2 October 2015 17: 21 New
              +2
              Quote: Uncle Joe
              What is the point of changing what is not respected anyway?



              And it has already reached the point that you can poke a finger at random into any article of the Constitution, and it will not correspond to reality ...

              PS Honestly, I read the article, my heart felt sick ... And when I look or listen to these fat balabol-boyars, "servants of the people" - it's even nauseous ...
            2. EvgNik
              EvgNik 3 October 2015 06: 30 New
              +1
              Quote: Uncle Joe
              What is the point of changing what is not respected anyway?

              We do not observe not only the Constitution, but also all other laws. And it comes from the top. The top considers itself outside jurisdiction.
              1. Uncle Joe
                Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 15: 08 New
                0
                Quote: EvgNik
                We do not observe not only the Constitution, but also all other laws. And it comes from the top. The top considers itself outside jurisdiction.
                So about the speech that the constitution is not a problem (all the more so since the ban on ideology, independence of the Central Bank and the supremacy of international law supposedly present in it is nothing more than bullshit)
          4. kotvov
            kotvov 2 October 2015 11: 48 New
            -2
            And Donbass will certainly merge. Everything goes to this ... ,,
            Do you think so? I do not agree.
        2. Mahmut
          Mahmut 2 October 2015 07: 31 New
          +9
          Puppet USA Yeltsin ....
          Come on, why is the Supreme Council better? Who ratified the collapse of the Union, who adopted the law on privatization? In 1993, two American puppets Yeltsin and Khasbulatov clashed for power. Yeltsin’s decree on the dissolution of parliament followed his impeachment. The United States arranged for any winner in this mess. The defeat of Yeltsin even suited them to a greater extent, since the next president would be a completely disenfranchised statistical figure and, as a result, the destruction of the one-man power in the country and the collapse of Russia among the principalities. But the Maidan in Russia did not pass, Yeltsin resisted, and all these American notes of support for Yeltsin were nothing more than a smokescreen in order to hide his involvement in the attempt to break up the country. In words, the Americans and their allies supported Yeltsin, but in fact, exactly one year later, they supported the Chechen separatists.
          1. andrew42
            andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 23 New
            +16
            Khasbulatov was a puppet of the USA-? You want to think that typing on the clave. On the one hand, the puppet of the United States (or rather, the owners of the United States) could be anyone flattered for primacy on the ruins of the richest Soviet heritage. that’s why it is also structureless management (up to Raisa Maximovna and Naina Iosifovna, with scumbag friends a la Egor Gaydar and “friend” Andrei Kozyrev). On the other hand, no one took Khasbulatov to this gang. Maybe Khasbulatov would not refuse, although I doubt very much, because the "core" of this person was visible to the naked eye. In any case, no one invited Khasbulatov there. And about the fact that "In words, the Americans and their allies supported Yeltsin, but in fact, exactly one year later they supported the Chechen separatists." - This is how they do it everywhere. Classics of the genre - Iraq and Afghanistan. But this particular, just technology, at the level of "throwing over the shoulder", anyone can master, for this you do not need seven spans in the forehead.
          2. Uncle Joe
            Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 20 New
            +4
            Quote: Mahmut
            The United States arranged for any winner in this mess. Yeltsin’s defeat even suited them to a greater extent, since the next president would be a completely disenfranchised statistical figure and, as a result, the destruction of the one-man power in the country and the collapse of Russia in the principalities
            Without unity of command, we all die, yeah laughing

            According to the system of our Constitution there should not be a sole president in the USSRelected by the entire population, on a par with the Supreme Council, and able to oppose the Supreme Council. The collegiate president in the USSR is the Presidium of the Supreme Council, including the chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, elected not by the entire population, but by the Supreme Council and accountable to the Supreme Council. The experience of history shows that such a construction of the supreme organs is the most democratic, guaranteeing the country from undesirable accidents.
            I. Stalin T.14 s.144

            On March 15, 1990, the sole president appeared in the USSR - since then there have been more and more undesirable accidents every day.
            1. jjj
              jjj 2 October 2015 12: 13 New
              +5
              Quote: Uncle Joe
              According to the system of our Constitution, the USSR should not have a sole president, elected by the entire population, on a par with the Supreme Council, and able to oppose the Supreme Council. The collegiate president in the USSR is the Presidium of the Supreme Council, including the chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, elected not by the entire population, but by the Supreme Council and accountable to the Supreme Council. The experience of history shows that such a construction of the supreme organs is the most democratic, guaranteeing the country from undesirable accidents.
              I. Stalin T.14 s.144

              It's like that. Only in the USSR was there one party with one secretary general who could manage the entire collective president. Moreover, the experience of the war showed that for effective management one-man management and a small governing body - GKO - is absolutely necessary
              1. Uncle Joe
                Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 12: 47 New
                0
                Quote: jjj
                Only in the USSR was there one party with one secretary general who could manage the entire collective president
                And on what grounds could he do this? smile

                war experience has shown that for effective management, one-man management and a small governing body - GKO - are absolutely necessary
                1 For the period of war.
                2 A small collegial body.
                3 Appointed authority and appointed Commander-in-Chief (now the Supreme Commander-in-Chief is one of the functions of the presidency, and during the Second World War - a separate post)
                1. Sergej1972
                  Sergej1972 2 October 2015 23: 54 New
                  +1
                  The PVS of the USSR routinely executed the decisions of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the party. Plus, several members of the Politburo who were not members of the USSR Council of Ministers were elected to its composition. And the Secretary-General, if he was not the Presovmin or the Chairman of the PVS of the USSR, was elected a member of this collegial body. The Secretary General of the Central Committee played a dominant role in the Politburo. It was he, and not the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, who was the de facto head of state. Kalinin under Stalin played a role, but rather, as one of the members of the Politburo. By influence he was somewhere 5 or 6 people in the country. Shvernik was generally a candidate member of the Politburo. After the death of Stalin, from 1953 to 1977 (that is, until the time when the General Secretaries were elected Chairmen of the PVS of the USSR) the Chairmen of the PVS of the USSR Voroshilov, Brezhnev (first election), Mikoyan, Podgorny were, as the case may be, second or third people in the state by influence. In the Union republics, the Chairpersons of the PVS were second or third parties (according to the situation, somewhere second after the first secretary was the Presovmin, somewhere the Chairman of the PVS).
                  1. Uncle Joe
                    Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 00: 04 New
                    -2
                    Quote: Sergej1972
                    The PVS of the USSR routinely executed the decisions of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Party ...
                    The Secretary General of the Central Committee played a dominant role in the Politburo. It was he, and not the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, who was the de facto head of state. Kalinin under Stalin played a role
                    And all together amicably obeyed the Martians ...

                    What will be your evidence of all this crap written by you?
                    1. Cat man null
                      Cat man null 3 October 2015 00: 13 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Uncle Joe
                      What will be your evidence of all this crap written by you?

                      But a colleague is right .. but you are not ..

                      Do not confuse what was written in the laws and how it really worked. And stop being rude already ..
                      1. Uncle Joe
                        Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 01: 01 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Do not confuse what was written in the laws and how it really worked
                        Where am I? Lyalyaki are not interesting to me.
                      2. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 3 October 2015 01: 08 New
                        0
                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        Where am I? Lyalyaki are not interesting to me.

                        Uncle Joe, Uncle Joe .. well, isn’t it funny yourself? What docks are there ..

                        Memories of relatives .. I had all sorts, up to the second secretary of the city committee of patria, in the city - the center of not the last in Russia region .. my own experience of communication and the "principle of democratic centralism", finally laughing

                        And docks - where are the docks from? These features did not write docks no
                      3. Uncle Joe
                        Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 01: 45 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        What docks are there?
                        Tady do not try to pass off your speculation for something serious.

                        Memoirs of relatives
                        For the same reason, you can already be called a husbandman.

                        in short - sucks negative
                      4. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 3 October 2015 01: 53 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        For the same reason, you can already be called a husbandman.

                        Deep thought .. you can’t see it in the depths negative

                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        in short - sucks

                        Yes of course laughing

                        No more (sucks) than the assertion that the scheme that worked under Stalin retained its efficiency even after it.

                        I'm talking about the "collective president" and "chairman of the Supreme Council," yes.

                        It did not work after Stalin. The role of the individual - she is such a role yes
                      5. Uncle Joe
                        Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 02: 47 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Deep thought
                        The main thing is true.

                        Not bigger (sucks) than the assertion that the scheme that worked under Stalin retained its efficiency even after him.
                        You are completely lost in words.
                      6. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 3 October 2015 02: 50 New
                        0
                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        You are completely lost in words

                        Oh well, nafik, everything is exactly there with words ..

                        I repeat: you are losing shape .. in short -

                      7. Uncle Joe
                        Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 15: 02 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        everything is right there with words
                        Nope - everything is crooked there laughing

                        More times:

                        "...the assertion that the scheme that worked under Stalin retained its efficiency even after... "

                        Either find such a statement in my comments, or .... (crammed down) smile
                      8. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 3 October 2015 17: 04 New
                        0
                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        find in my comments such a statement

                        Um .. I see .. "I'm not me, and the priest is not mine .."

                        Okay. Can you add two and two?

                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        According to the system of our Constitution, the USSR should not have a sole president, elected by the entire population, on a par with the Supreme Council, and able to oppose the Supreme Council. The collegiate president in the USSR is the Presidium of the Supreme Council, including the chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, elected not by the entire population, but by the Supreme Council and accountable to the Supreme Council. The experience of history shows that such a construction of the supreme organs is the most democratic, guaranteeing the country from undesirable accidents.
                        I. Stalin T.14 s.144

                        That is - under Stalin - the way it was? Let us suppose wink

                        Quote: Uncle Joe
                        Quote: jjj
                        Only in the USSR was there one party with one secretary general who could manage the entire collective president
                        And on what grounds could he do this?

                        And then it broke (people say. And Baba Yaga Uncle Joe against - "everything works") ..

                        SchA Uncle Joe the fool will start to turn on ..
                      9. Uncle Joe
                        Uncle Joe 3 October 2015 19: 13 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        clear
                        Is it really laughing

                        Can you add two and two?
                        Yes, but not your clumsy tsifiri.

                        That is - under Stalin - the way it was?
                        Let's find out - the fact of non-fulfillment can lead?
                        No?
                        Then absolutely logical questions arise - where did this crazy delusion come from, and on what grounds could he do this?

                        Shcha Uncle Joe will start to fool
                        You do not turn it off.


                        Z.Y. And once again - either find such a statement in my comments, or ....
  • kazak08
    kazak08 2 October 2015 17: 52 New
    -2
    I agree, and now they come up with the idea that they shot the people’s parliament like a power, they divided the people among themselves, didn’t support either
  • The comment was deleted.
  • 16112014nk
    16112014nk 2 October 2015 18: 28 New
    +2
    I read Khasbulatov’s memoirs not so long ago. In them, he tells how Yeltsin twice at critical moments tried to escape to the US Embassy, ​​and what difficulties it cost him to persuade Yeltsin to stay in the White House. Sneaky coward, not the president!
  • the polar
    the polar 2 October 2015 08: 35 New
    +7
    Quote: vladimirZ

    And these traitors are still in the power of Russia, influence and make the modern policy of the state ...
    When will Russian power be cleansed of the 5 column?

    Well, you are like a child, you yourself say that traitors are in power, and then ask when they will clean themselves up.
    Of course, the power of traitors in itself will not voluntarily go away, as long as there is something to steal and whom to rob, and its cleansing will occur only after the collapse of the social subsistence level of the employed working population.
    And in connection with the recent gestures of the authorities in politics and economics, it is precisely this scenario of events.
    1. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 2 October 2015 09: 17 New
      +8
      Well, you are like a child, you yourself say ...
      - polar (7)

      They made fun. This is a reminder, especially to our "cheers-patriots," so that they know and do not forget whose and what kind of power we have. And then praises sing, as they once sang "Gorbachev and Co.", "Yeltsin and Co.", and now they swear and water them, waking up from the old dope, but plunging into the new "Putin and Co."
    2. ma_shlomha
      ma_shlomha 2 October 2015 10: 06 New
      0
      The Chinese sage Mao Tse Dong knew this, and therefore said: "The rifle gives rise to power!"
      1. veksha50
        veksha50 2 October 2015 17: 28 New
        +1
        Quote: ma_shlomha
        Chinese sage Mao Tse Dong knew this, therefore, he said: "The rifle gives rise to power!"


        Ghm ... You already put it on the level of Confucius ...

        As for the wise man ... Read Vladimirov's book "A Special Region of China" ... An interesting thing, it is especially interesting to read about Mao ...

        Sage ... The leader - yes, and far from ordinary ... The cunning diplomat - yes, but not exceptional.

        The ability to subjugate millions of people is not an indicator of wisdom ... Then Mussolini, Hitler, and Kim Ying Cher, and who is there in Cambodia - forgot - atrocities - wise men ???
  • Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 2 October 2015 09: 19 New
    +12
    Never. For this, the USSR was destroyed. Voluntarily, no one will abandon the current neo-serfdom. The authorities will not give up those wealth that is being drained from our country. That is why they hate Stalin and carry out all these "de-Stalinization" that they are afraid of even simple references to him. The reason for the hatred lies in the fact that Stalin made everyone equal before the law and in society. And the authorities need serfs. the main resource of capitalism.
    1. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 33 New
      +1
      Quote: Mareman Vasilich
      That is why they hate Stalin and carry out all these "de-Stalinization" that they are afraid of even simple references to him.
      30 September 2015

      Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree on Wednesday to erect a memorial in Moscow to victims of political repression "Стена sorrow "

      http://www.interfax.ru/moscow/470328
      1. Mareman Vasilich
        Mareman Vasilich 5 October 2015 14: 08 New
        0
        There is nothing good in this. Who spits in their past is completely deprived of the future. Putin is no exception. But he could not make another, for he made a bet on the oligarchy, and not on the people. Unlike Stalin. But such methods will not get rid of Western control.
        1. Uncle Joe
          Uncle Joe 5 October 2015 16: 32 New
          +1
          Quote: Mareman Vasilich
          But he could not make another, for he made a bet on the oligarchy, and not on the people
          "Betting" on anyone is possible only in accordance with the goal - what goals, such and bets.

          “Betting” on the oligarchy (a group not controlled by the majority, which has political power) can only be pursuing personal goals - otherwise it is at least schizophrenia.
          So the invented Western control has nothing to do with it.

          Unlike Stalin
          Stalin had one goal, Putin has exactly the opposite.
  • bastard
    bastard 2 October 2015 14: 08 New
    +1
    Quote: vladimirZ
    When will Russian power be cleansed of the 5 column?

    This, sorry, how? She is the 5th column, with few exceptions. And one more provocative question: where did you see representatives of the Russian people there? Again, with a few exceptions. They were shot or squeezed out for a long time, there is no place for them at the trough with such a delicious bruise.
    As Sharikov said: "The air is more pleasant in the kitchen."
    I agree with the rest. hi
    1. veksha50
      veksha50 2 October 2015 17: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: villain
      I agree with the rest.



      Well, poisonous you, Scoundrel ... However - see above ...

      What to do ??? Forced to agree ...

      PS And the sediment is still unpleasant ... True - it is always so bitter and indigestible ...
      1. bastard
        bastard 2 October 2015 18: 18 New
        +3
        Quote: veksha50
        Well, poisonous you, Scoundrel ...

        Quote: veksha50
        But the sediment is still unpleasant ... True - it is always so bitter and indigestible ...

        I am not poisonous. People say: “Better is the bitter truth than a sweet lie.”
        Bertrand Russell said: "In the world, it is possible for such political systems and orders to exist to which to tell the truth it means to commit a crime. And cowardice, disguised as a mask of prudence, will become a national character." hi
        1. veksha50
          veksha50 2 October 2015 21: 53 New
          +2
          Quote: villain
          I am not poisonous.



          Well so ... True, I do not argue ... And I about the same thing - the truth is often oh how bitter ...
  • kot28.ru
    kot28.ru 2 October 2015 14: 15 New
    +3
    While the oligarchs and heads of corporations are sitting in the Government, never! Actually, never! As a student, I collected signatures for candidates in 2004, of course, I was paid, since there were no problems with collecting in student dormitories, I was interested in the time that they, successful businessmen, are torn to power in such a way? It seems like they have a lot of money, they have everything, but give a mandate! And they all care for Russia, get sick, do not sleep at night! If only to get a chair! In general, until our GDP either radically cleans the ranks of its civil servants or a strong leader comes to power, like Stalin, Russia will go from bread to water, depending on global vagaries of energy prices! hi
  • venaya
    venaya 2 October 2015 06: 00 New
    +10
    A great place to install various beacons and tracking equipment for all incoming and outgoing .... mess ...

    I add: there is such a device, called a "microphone", and so, as many people know, it consists of a diaphragm (such a plate) and a reader (formerly an electromagnetic coil, now it’s just an "electret"). When people talk in the room with glasses, the inner glass fluctuates a little under the influence of sounds inside the room, like a membrane. How to read this info ..., here I simply will not explain darkness to specialists in VO.
    1. veksha50
      veksha50 2 October 2015 17: 36 New
      +6
      Quote: venaya
      here specialists in VO just will not explain the darkness.



      These are already obsolete methods ... And the glasses are not easy in the House, and the equipment at Amers is already more modern ...

      It’s just clear - NECROW AN EMBASSY of any country should be near the state institutions of the Russian Federation ...

      PS And that no one remembered how Kurkin Bakatin, as Chairman of the KGB, handed over to the amers a new embassy, ​​stuffed with OUR equipment, and even with all the diagrams and drawings ???

      And the name of such Judas is the legion ... to this day ... they just don’t do it so openly ...
  • Dimka999
    Dimka999 2 October 2015 09: 55 New
    +1
    The US Embassy is necessary beyond the MKAD))
  • Skif83
    Skif83 2 October 2015 10: 42 New
    +8
    But nothing that the Siemens CIA affiliate built two huge buildings in the center of Moscow? For what? To listen to all of Moscow?
    And more
    General Viktor Sorokin, in October 1993, deputy commander of the Airborne Forces: “At about 8 o’clock, the units advanced to the walls of the White House ... 5 people were killed and 18 were injured during the promotion of the unit to the regiment. Shot from behind. I myself watched it. Shooting was conducted from the building of the American embassy ... All the dead and wounded were shot from behind ... "

    I don’t understand and never understand, the same Sorokin had the opportunity to remain in history in a different guise than the man who commanded the shooting of the White House.
    Snipers are firing at your fighters from the building of the US Embassy, ​​there are dead people, and you are leading the convoy further to the White House ... ??? Instead of gouging snipers !? The embassy is the territory of the United States, fire is fired from there on army units, in fact it’s a war in your territory, unleashed by ameri braids, you need to fight in a war, you need to destroy the enemy killing your soldiers!
    Especially if you are a general of the Airborne Forces !!!
    Gloomy things happened, and are happening in our Invincible and Legendary ... (remember at least the death of the paratroopers in the collapsed barracks)
    Taburetkin can impose a selective obscene word on the Hero of Russia at the RVDKU training center, but for this it is necessary in the REPU, despite any regalia and ranks, the people would defend.
    I don’t understand ... Are we degenerating?
    1. veksha50
      veksha50 2 October 2015 17: 38 New
      +4
      Quote: Skif83
      I don’t understand ... Are we degenerating?


      It would be better if I did not ask this question ... I think a lot of people in Russia also thought about it ...
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 2 October 2015 23: 57 New
      +1
      It is amazing how senior military officers Grachev, Kobets, Shaposhnikov de facto switched sides to Yeltsin even before the August events? Why did Yeltsin seduce them like that?
  • Sterlya
    Sterlya 2 October 2015 18: 20 New
    +1
    from the us no need to expect benefits ever. it's such a bastard. and in Syria, this must be taken into account. we know the outskirts. Usa naturally abscess. they have everything just for the buck. which gives them the opportunity to be among the leaders. and so garbage country. and and is conveniently located geographically.
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 2 October 2015 19: 44 New
    0
    and vice versa)) is not a fact yet who will be lucky ..
  • SmileSimple
    SmileSimple 2 October 2015 11: 20 New
    +3
    for comfort
  • Baloo
    Baloo 2 October 2015 20: 59 New
    +3
    I remember that after these events, this version was timidly discussed in the media. Then they were silent for many years. Why not the Prosecutor General’s Office to institute criminal proceedings on newly discovered circumstances?
  • leo3972
    leo3972 2 October 2015 05: 13 New
    -41
    And where did he dig all this from? Everything is strange somehow.
    Yeltsin is understandable, well, I do not believe that he sold himself to America.
    1. Cube123
      Cube123 2 October 2015 06: 02 New
      +14
      Rogozin repeatedly wrote about the shooting of snipers from the roof of the American embassy in his books. http://nstarikov.ru/blog/33515
      How Americans "leaked" Gorbachev and helped Yeltsin can be found in the books of Doctor of Historical Sciences former director of the Institute of the USA and Canada Anatoly Utkin. For example, "Cheating Secretary General: Escape from Europe." A lot of links to historical documents. http://www.e-reading.by/bookreader.php/150120/Utkin_-_Izmena_genseka._Begstvo_iz
      _Evropy.html
    2. andj61
      andj61 2 October 2015 08: 01 New
      +5
      Quote: leo3972
      And where did he dig all this from? Everything is strange somehow.
      Yeltsin is understandable, well, I do not believe that he sold himself to America.

      This is by no means news - eyewitnesses wrote a lot about this. It is difficult to say whether Yeltsin was sold or not, but there were a bunch of American consultants in his government, and the government did everything according to their recommendations. without stepping back a single step - it's a fact! yes
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 2 October 2015 08: 28 New
        +7
        Yeltsin himself doesn’t think. But Gaidar, Yakovlev, and a number of other people were agents of influence. Like there were reports of deputies of the State Duma of the 5th and 6th convocations about the decisions taken at the US Embassy. And the betrayals of Bakatin and Kalugin when they surrendered our agents.
      2. venaya
        venaya 2 October 2015 08: 51 New
        -1
        Quote: andj61
        ... Yeltsin has sold or not, it’s hard to say, but there were a bunch of American consultants in his government, and the government did everything according to their recommendations. without stepping back a single step - it's a fact! yes

        "only here are a bunch of American consultants"- if there weren’t, how would Yeltsin get to power? This is the problem, and not only of our country. All these revolutions are held under the strict guidance of from abroad. The only question is what in the end it turns out, a lot depends on us, including how we deny it.
      3. taram taramych
        taram taramych 2 October 2015 09: 24 New
        +4
        Quote: andj61
        hard to say

        There is something, a kind of “identical identity”, stereotypicity that kindred EBN and “Petro”. It is called - the sale of the homeland!
    3. DenZ
      DenZ 2 October 2015 09: 06 New
      0
      Should drink less. Forever with a hangover, he himself did not fully understand what he was doing.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 2 October 2015 09: 40 New
      0
      It may not have been directly sold, but merely enjoyed their support and fully took into account their interests. Is this easier for us?
      1. Baloo
        Baloo 3 October 2015 07: 23 New
        0
        What do we know about Masonic clubs at least in Moscow?
        I would not be surprised if it turns out that ebn was a masson, like Kerensky. By the way, remember the Dudai in the camera boasted to reporters that he reads documents before Yeltsin signs them. In 1917, the Naglosaks had a “couple” Trotsky-Sverdlov, and then Gorbachev-Yeltsin under the supervision of Yakovlev.
        As for the GKChP, I remember that the provision on the GKChP was published in the Komsomol in a few months. I went on vacation the day before and the personnel officers asked me only once in my life where I will be, my address and telephone number, although my profession is purely civilian.
    6. Starik72
      Starik72 2 October 2015 16: 53 New
      0
      Leonid, open your eyes and clean your ears, Thomas is not a believer, scratch your brain if you have one. And for the fact that you don’t think and closed my eyes, I put MINUS to you!
  • Gray 43
    Gray 43 2 October 2015 05: 19 New
    +13
    The article-mirror of American foreign policy hasn’t changed since then, until the Maidan
  • Wolka
    Wolka 2 October 2015 05: 27 New
    -28
    and the custom article, I will not comment on anything, it was, it was, but not everything as described in the article, apparently the imagination author does not interfere with life, but in vain, I heard a ringing, apparently from the wrong angle ...
    1. venaya
      venaya 2 October 2015 05: 36 New
      -20
      Quote: Volka
      ... it was, it was, but not everything is as described in the article, apparently the imagination author does not interfere with life, but in vain, I heard a ringing, apparently from the wrong angle ...

      We will be a little lenient to the "pianist", who knows, maybe he wants to write at least one more article. Siyo does not know us.
      1. Babr
        Babr 2 October 2015 08: 56 New
        +9
        Quote: venaya
        Quote: Volka
        ... it was, it was, but not everything is as described in the article, apparently the imagination author does not interfere with life, but in vain, I heard a ringing, apparently from the wrong angle ...

        We will be a little lenient to the "pianist", who knows, maybe he wants to write at least one more article. Siyo does not know us.

        The country, with a magnificent army, with the most fraudulent intelligence services, with an iron curtain, where the fly does not slip, was ruined by one or two.
        Outside enemy? I doubt it. This internal enemy defeated this war. But any war is waged for territories and resources, for slaves. Everything is on the face. The state-forming people, without territory. The resources are selected. And the people, fooled by media propaganda, applaud their invaders. But someone needs to be exposed as an extreme. So they write off everything to the United States. One crime less, one more, they will not die from them. And themselves aside.
        1. venaya
          venaya 2 October 2015 09: 48 New
          +7
          Quote: Babr
          The country, with a magnificent army, with the most fraudulent intelligence services, with an iron curtain, where the fly does not slip, was ruined by one or two.
          Outside enemy? I doubt it. It is the internal enemy who won this war. But any war is waged for territories and resources, for slaves. Everything on the face. State-forming people, without territory. Resources selected. And the people, fooled by media propaganda, applaud their invaders. But someone needs to be put extreme. So they write off everything to the United States. One crime less, one more, they will not die from them. And themselves aside.
          It’s hard to disagree with you. I practically agree on everything, with the exception of a not very noticeable trifle. If you carefully read religious literature, then it is very clearly indicated (which Berezovsky repeated by the way) that "no need to buy all, only a guide to buy". So the study of our scientists shows that the lion's share in the organization of the coup was carried out precisely by the head of the KGB, Yu.Andropov, as if this did not seem surprising. In this I can refer to the work of Professor Froyanov (and not only him). Unfortunately his priceless books don’t even get into the “public”, he saw it himself, but Zyuganov appreciates him very much and also refers to him. Unfortunately, we have very little of this kind of information, which is not surprising, it is carefully hidden. that in order to defeat the country, it turned out to be enough to introduce your man into the state security leadership. It seems that you did not know this, otherwise you would not write about "fraudulent intelligence services". But in general, I did not understand you, and nobody seems to understand me either.
          1. Babr
            Babr 2 October 2015 11: 53 New
            +2
            Quote: venaya
            , it turned out to be enough to introduce your person into the leadership of state security
            В

            Here, however, you are mistaken. It is impossible in a healthy country to ruin it for one person.
            Here is the article. showing the reasons for the collapse of the country.
            You can agree, you can disagree. But to the best of my understanding, I think that it was so.
            http://skalozub52.livejournal.com/761687.html
            Much has been missed here. But in general terms, it is.
            1. venaya
              venaya 2 October 2015 12: 10 New
              0
              Quote: Babr
              Here, however, you are mistaken. It is impossible in a healthy country to ruin it for one person.
              Here is the article. showing the reasons for the collapse of the country.
              You can agree, you can disagree. But to the best of my understanding, I think that it was so.
              http://skalozub52.livejournal.com/761687.html
              There is a lot to be missed. But in general terms, it is.
            2. venaya
              venaya 2 October 2015 12: 55 New
              +3
              Quote: Babr
              here you are however mistaken. It is impossible in a healthy country to ruin it for one person.
              Here is the article. showing the reasons for the collapse of the country.
              You can agree, you can disagree. But to the best of my understanding, I think that it was so.
              http://skalozub52.livejournal.com/761687.html
              There is a lot to be missed. But in general terms, it is.
              Sorry, the program crashed. You will have to restore the text:
              The events described in the article are also familiar to me, for me this is not news. Igor Froyanov’s position fully coincides with the event described in the article, and Zyuganov agrees with her. Describe them fully, this is a volume of works, there is not enough space here. I can only add that I “helped” Andropov and his hands. Agitation Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU Yakovlev, as well as many less senior "figures". So the article in no way contradicts my claims. I hope you agree with me.
              Sincerely.
              1. Babr
                Babr 2 October 2015 13: 31 New
                +1
                Quote: venaya
                I can only add that I “helped” Andropov and his hands. Agitation Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU Yakovlev, as well as many less senior "figures".

                These are all particulars. Even the article I have cited is to some extent a particularity. Although it could be discussed with a larger number of VO users. But they won’t miss such an article. It’s very close to the question. And who rules us?
                But you need to look deeper.
                This is the “Biblical project.” Without understanding this, it is impossible to understand all the intricacies of politics. General Petrov helped me, a simple engineer who was never interested in politics. hi
                1. venaya
                  venaya 2 October 2015 13: 44 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Babr

                  This is the “Biblical project.” Without understanding this, it is impossible to understand all the intricacies of politics. General Petrov helped me, a simple engineer who was never interested in politics. hi
                  I hope that you understand that I am familiar with this issue and that our positions coincide completely, only the language used is different, this is the reason for these misunderstandings.
                  1. Babr
                    Babr 2 October 2015 13: 47 New
                    +1
                    hi ..........
          2. veksha50
            veksha50 2 October 2015 22: 06 New
            +2
            Quote: venaya
            But in general, I did not understand you, and nobody seems to understand me either.



            Hmm ... Let the old stump wedge ... And what kind of coup, the lion's share of which you ascribe to Yu.V. Andropov, are you talking about? ... In 1982 he became Secretary General, in 1983 he died ...
            He headed the KGB from 1967 to 1982 (!!!) years ... And what, all this time he was preparing the destruction not only of the USSR, but also of Russia ???

            Well and then ... And what age were you when he was Secretary General for a short time ??? And what can you recall from his anti-Soviet actions ???

            My question is not an attack, but an attempt to learn the truth ... What are you talking about ...

            PS You cited Berezovsky as an example ... It seems to me, in the time of Andropov, such as the BAB, it would simply have been impossible to exist ... Both the earth and the bowels would remain popular ...
  • Stelth1985
    Stelth1985 2 October 2015 05: 34 New
    +27
    I know enough about these events to understand what was happening there. And the phrase: "acted in accordance with the spirit of democracy, violating the letter of the law" - means: acted in the interests of the Jewish elites who now rule the world. That is, he went against his people. Betrayed him. EBNka is an enemy of the people like all its followers! For those who do not know ... democracy translates as the power of the elites. What are these elites, I think, you yourself know. The rule of the people is ochocracy from the Greek.

    If it were my will that day, the Americans who shot our people would be taken alive and executed under the sights of the cameras so that the whole world sees what happens to the enemies of Russia. Well EBNa too. Attach to a gun and fire a salvo to the west. Let them fly home.

    For the Honor and Glory of the ancestors!
    1. a housewife
      a housewife 2 October 2015 15: 40 New
      +1
      Demos is a people. Ohlos is the crowd. Did you study bad at school?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • tomsk
    tomsk 2 October 2015 05: 40 New
    +8
    it was a no brainer that the events of the 93rd in our country could not have done without the help of the Americans ...
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 2 October 2015 05: 45 New
      -1
      Quote: Tomsk
      it was a no brainer that the events of the 93rd in our country could not have done without the help of the Americans ...

      Then in 1993, the American ambassador in Moscow sat and fucked up with what was happening, not understanding who in Russia currently belongs to the government.
      1. iwakura
        iwakura 2 October 2015 07: 04 New
        +9
        rather, he didn’t “fucking go,” but joyfully rubbed his dirty paws, watching all this mess
  • Riv
    Riv 2 October 2015 05: 57 New
    -18
    "These guys are just nuts." - in my opinion this is about the author. Heaped everything together: the embassy, ​​Yeltsin, the coup ... If Yeltsin liked the Americans so much, then why should he stop him from making a coup and shoot at the paratroopers? And so that Khasbulatov and the company of Americans are not satisfied - well, this is all nonsense. The then Duma was exactly the same embryo of the Maidan as in Kiev, and let Bora Yeltsin be forgiven half of sins in the afterlife for dispersing this riffraff.
    1. Cube123
      Cube123 2 October 2015 06: 54 New
      +13
      Quote: Riv
      If Yeltsin liked the American so much, then why stop him from making a coup and shoot at paratroopers?

      Analogy with the "heavenly hundred" does not arise?
      1. Riv
        Riv 2 October 2015 07: 51 New
        -3
        What analogies can there be?
      2. andrew42
        andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 52 New
        +3
        The analogy is complete. Amers 40 years old manuals do not change.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. valokordin
      valokordin 2 October 2015 07: 02 New
      +10
      Quote: Riv
      authorities in the regions and localities, the suspension (for a year and a half) of the work of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (which, in the opinion of Senator Pell, apparently was the "consolidation of democratic reforms in Russia") clearly demonstrated that, despite official assurances The US administration was interested in seeing Russia as its prosperous, respected and democratic “partner,” the Washington Regional Committee was quite satisfied with Russia becoming a client state controlled by a corrupt authoritarian leader.
      Author Alexander Domrin
      Original source http://zavtra.ru/content/view/strelyali-iz-posolstva-ssha/
      Article rating
      17
      0
      -
      +

      You, as the mother of Teresa, forgive all sins to St. Boris, forgive him for the destruction of the country, for the millions who died in our country from the division of profits and positions, and for someone because of hunger and alcohol, the “piano”, for unborn children, for wars in the vast USSR, for Ukraine. All who forgive Judah Boria are just ,,,.
      1. Riv
        Riv 2 October 2015 07: 55 New
        -21
        Incidentally, the president of the USSR was by no means Yeltsin. Hamsters have a short memory.
        You will appreciate the phrase itself: "President of the USSR." And Yeltsin was already taxing what he got. How I managed. This is not to say that it is very bad, since today our planes are bombing terrorists in Syria.
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 52 New
          +6
          "Our planes bomb terrorists in Syria" not because of EBNu, but contrary to his criminal acts.
        2. SibSlavRus
          SibSlavRus 2 October 2015 15: 44 New
          +2
          President of the USSR - from March 5, 1990, the position was established by the Congress of People's Deputies.
          The post of President of the USSR ceased to exist together with the Soviet Union on December 25, 1991. The first and only President of the USSR was Gorbachev.
          President of the RSFSR ( those. Russia!) from June 12, 1991 - Yeltsin.
          That's why a bet on him was made.

          Your words “what he got” and “how he really did”, sorry, but completely inappropriate in the context of the historical retrospective of the events of 1991-93. And judging by the results, then you simply show ignorance. Sorry, but so understood your comment.
        3. a housewife
          a housewife 2 October 2015 15: 50 New
          +1
          And who said "president of the USSR?" President of the Russian Federation, back in the USSR. And why was it introduced? Why in one country a bunch of presidents? He got power! Yes, he stole it !!! And now this heap of presidents should not be. There are governors. And in the national republics it is necessary to call a different post. They also have ministries! Embassies in Moscow. WHAT FOR?!
      2. Uncle Joe
        Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 42 New
        +3
        Quote: valokordin
        All who forgive Judah Boria are just ,,,.
        Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin:

        "Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, along with the new Russia, has gone through a difficult but necessary transformation. He has led the process of radical changes that have led Russia out of the impasse. Russia has received a rebirth. It has become a civilized open state, and the role of the first president in the formation of this state is huge.
        It was at this time that Russia was born open and thinking about people, democratic institutions were formed, the Russian Constitution was adopted, which proclaimed the highest value of human rights and freedom. "

        http://top.rbc.ru/society/01/02/2011/536637.shtml
    4. nadezhiva
      nadezhiva 2 October 2015 07: 29 New
      -1
      Quote: Riv
      If Yeltsin liked the American so much, then why stop him from making a coup and shoot at paratroopers

      So, Misha did not suit them. On the political front, yes, launched the bastards. And I didn’t give a full robbery to the country.
      Looking for money wink For their sake, for the sake of seizing the country's resources, such coups are being made.
      Blame the previous government for all deaths. conveniently.
      1. Riv
        Riv 2 October 2015 09: 02 New
        0
        Tagged Americans could not but suit. How can you not arrange your own agent of influence?
        You also have a short memory. Gorbachev was removed by force. Yeltsin was very popular then. The Americans had only to come to terms with him, or receive, as an alternative, the restoration of the CPSU. In fact, that coup is also waiting for a thoughtful analysis. Personally, I believe that it was he (although the attempt was completely mediocre) that became the point after which the return of the pendulum began.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • 1goose3
    1goose3 2 October 2015 05: 58 New
    +13
    Quote: Volka
    and the custom article, I will not comment on anything, it was, it was, but not everything as described in the article, apparently the imagination author does not interfere with life, but in vain, I heard a ringing, apparently from the wrong angle ...


    So what ? Do you know the customer? And Volka heard the jingle from the right angle, and the parliament was shot to applause correctly, and the marsh was dispersed incorrectly, and all its allies were surrendered correctly, and in Syria Russia is doing wrong, and .... The article is a developer.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 2 October 2015 06: 00 New
      -1
      Quote: 1goose3
      The article is a developer.

      What is the developer?
      1. GRAY
        GRAY 2 October 2015 07: 51 New
        +4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        What is the developer?

        More likely than anyone smile

        “Boris is not to blame,” “the Americans didn’t need this,” - the liberal detective.
        1. Asadullah
          Asadullah 2 October 2015 08: 54 New
          -2
          “Boris is not to blame,” “the Americans didn’t need this,” - the liberal detective.


          The question is not to blame or not, the question of what is to blame. The fact that in the struggle for power he launched into this very power a zoo with which he could not fight, where on the one side of the scales, along with state interests, were the interests of the family, and very insignificant, in comparison with even simpler functionaries? But the compromising evidence was the most significant. Is a fool to blame for his stupidity? Rather, it is his misfortune and the unconditional guilt of all smart people who allowed a fool to decide for himself. Today, the darkest moment in history is the coming to power of Putin. You called the liberalist factor, considered it as a passing figure, which Gusinsky and Berezovsky mentioned in due time. Did Yeltsin share their opinion? I doubt why then it was to ask Putin for guarantees for himself and his family. In this case, others should have given guarantees. And Putin would not have moral obligations to preserve the integrity of the history of his predecessor. Apparently he understood very well why.

          If anyone remembers those times, then I advise once again to revive the memory, this is the power of bandits in the cities sharing it with the local municipal. These are commodity relations based on offsets, which brought the first billionaires to the Russian economy. It is this factor, not the theft of privatization, as many people think. This is an absolutely disenfranchised position of ordinary citizens and the legal activity of Western experts on the analysis of the country. Did Yeltsin contribute to this? Did not know about it, did not see? I thought, knew, saw, but did not contribute. He simply could not do anything, was not able to change anything. The fault is his weakness and stupidity, which we all must share.
          1. andrew42
            andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 49 New
            +3
            What? What hangover is it, "should we all share"? So you share. But the question is, what to do with EBN as the ashes of False Dmitry (and he essentially did the same thing), namely, to load the ashes into the cannon and shoot to the West - do you "agree" with this?
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 2 October 2015 10: 26 New
              +1
              I agree with Asadudullah completely, but not with you. Just because they don’t fight the dead. But for the rest, no one understood anything, especially on the ground. Special services are disorganized. Skilled personnel are not just fired, they are being expelled. And believe my word, by a miracle, Russia’s nuclear potential and carriers were preserved, they didn’t let Chubais and his assistants destroy what was left after the START-1 agreement. It was not Yeltsin, Gobachev who proclaimed the conversion of military factories and ruined our industry. Because all industries worked for the military, and due to this they received new highly productive equipment.
            2. Asadullah
              Asadullah 2 October 2015 13: 56 New
              0
              What? What hangover is it, "we all must share"


              And what, you share only the joys and victories of your country? And in all other respects, the innocent lambs that were confused, again led the wrong way, cut to the goal? Asadullah personally, your "non-separation" on the drum. For misunderstanding as stupidity, personal tragedy of the bearer of such. As the Chinese say over the past five thousand years, a fool is worthy of being deceived. I speak only for myself, and for sharing these views. When, many years ago, he stood on the pier, and looked like under the guidance of a handful of fat men in trainings and gold chains, they cut Jeyrana into a tsvetmet, and his hands itched to discharge the clip into these fat faces. Then, together with the Jeyrans, he buried his country, and went to die for a stranger, albeit a brotherly one. This was my betrayal and weakness, the same as running away from the bed of a dying father, so as not to see the demise. It would be better if I traded underpants in the market. Then they called me back, and like a beaten dog, in full understanding of my guilt, I will tear anyone, with my teeth and nails, any threat to my country that could make me survive a second time like that. For the miracle of the resurrection of my homeland, which happened right before our eyes. You are sinless, well, your right, I hope you have done everything for your country, for the Russian world, and soon we will see you on what a miraculous icon.
  • Bthuk
    Bthuk 2 October 2015 06: 03 New
    +1
    When will Russian power be cleansed of the 5 column?

    First of all, it is necessary to destroy the foundation of the 5th column. And who said that the authorities will do this?
    Well, I do not believe that he sold to America

    People betray either consciously or out of stupidity. The second option is even more scary than the first.
  • nomad74
    nomad74 2 October 2015 06: 14 New
    +18
    History will put all the points, but this is not easier for us! The last decades of Soviet power have nurtured the comprador elite in all sorts of district committees of the Komsomol and the party. Something was still missing back in the late 60-70s when the front soldiers began to be replaced by the Major Front, which did not care about the people, whose main task was "not to get a bad job," social and social values ​​were replaced by private-possessive ones. Well, the Yankees could not help but notice such a shift, though they created it with the help of Radio Liberty, Voice of America, the Air Force, and, of course, everyone's favorite Hollywood with American culture. They began to court the perestroika. Here it is a color revolution, for a phantom, cola jeans and cassettes! I went to school, I remember the series of deaths of the general secretaries and all the absurdities in the form of passing the baton of death to the next. Gorbach began to openly surrender the country's interests - an analogue of Yanukovych, well, and after him EBN, this is already a complete disaster! Just in 1993, he came from the army and such a sur on TV: a tank shoots at the White House! I want the trial of Gorbach as a traitor! EBNovskih feedings here! Here at the process and hear about the role of America! Let them answer for the orderly ranks of the graves of youth in the 90s in the country's cemeteries! For unborn children! For spoiled youth!
    1. killganoff
      killganoff 2 October 2015 06: 48 New
      +3
      I agree with you. While such figures as Chubais are at the side of the country's leadership, there will be no full confidence in the president.
    2. andrew42
      andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 46 New
      +6
      "I want the trial of Gorbachev as a traitor! EBNovskie feedings here!" - Yes, most of the country wants this.
    3. Amurets
      Amurets 2 October 2015 10: 02 New
      +2
      In many respects, you are right, but not right in one thing. It all started not in the 60-70s, but much earlier. Read the “Steep Route” to Evgeny Ginzburg. In the first part, she writes how the leadership of the government began to stratify and decompose in the 30s. and then the war slowed down this process and Stalin, while he was alive, restrained this process. In all its glory, the advantages and charms of Western life appeared in 1937 and the Khrushchev thaw. And then everything was shut for the people, and for the elite there were Beryozka stores, Stalin's were restored distributors.
  • sv-georgij
    sv-georgij 2 October 2015 06: 31 New
    -9
    EBN, of course, was not sold to the United States, he had a bestial grasp of power and now in the struggle for power he was ready for anything. And his environment was pro-American. One of them is Mr. and Minister of Foreign Affairs Kozyrev, who still lives and lives in the United States.
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 2 October 2015 06: 42 New
      +8
      Having started the phrase, you yourself deny yourself - EBN certainly did not sell to the United States,
      Quote: sv-georgij
      he had a bestial grip on power and in the struggle for power he was ready for anything. And his environment was pro-American.


      Of course, he sold himself and the country sold K. Ozlin, so that he would turn over a hoopoe in a coffin
  • killganoff
    killganoff 2 October 2015 06: 44 New
    +8
    It is time for the Supreme Council to return, not always the American model of democracy in the Constitution of the Russian Federation will be fundamental.
  • kostik1301
    kostik1301 2 October 2015 06: 55 New
    +6
    So all points are falling into place, this is where the beginning of the birth of the current liberal oligarchic vertical of power .................. and who their curators are .......... ....
  • KOH
    KOH 2 October 2015 06: 58 New
    +9
    Back in the 91st GKChP tried to eliminate the humpback, but there were so many traitors at the top that they themselves were arrested ... and the brains of the people were so clogged that they clapped their hands after their arrest, although the GKChP was the last thread to save the USSR .. .
    1. viktor_ui
      viktor_ui 2 October 2015 07: 15 New
      +6
      KOH - in Moscow, “white bellies” of the 90s sample clapped their hands, and in Siberia there was bewilderment at all this shitty “performance” mixed up with blood, there was anger at the tankers who shot the GKChP - a disgrace and shame. I was 27 years old then.
      1. KOH
        KOH 2 October 2015 07: 24 New
        +4
        I, too, at that time, was 28 years old. Moreover, we were called up for training camps in August, and mocked ... to the place where I would give the command to disperse this rifle ...
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 39 New
          +4
          But it would be nice. Use a couple of dozen flashlights in August 1991. The first is for Tagged. I still regret that the GKChP did not win. It was not necessary to listen to the Marked One, but to seize control. Labeled - according to the version of "Beria". And clean the Central Committee with hot iron. And then include the “Chinese version”, only without the Gorbachev’s talking room.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. ARS56
      ARS56 2 October 2015 08: 45 New
      -4
      GKChP - pyro cartridge of the collapse of the USSR. GKChP organized itself labeled under the control of the United States. It was after the speech of drunks from the GKChP that the republic rushed from the central government, like a plague. It was the GKChP that buried the results of the referendum, in which the people in each republic of the USSR spoke out for the preservation of a great power. What was the mere decision to take away all radios and tape recorders from the population ...
    3. andrew42
      andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 44 New
      +3
      I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, the “quality” of GKChP-stov (first of all, the ability to make sober independent decisions, the ability to take risks) was insufficient. A couple of people there were decisive, - the rest led party-function amoebas who looked at Gorbi in the mouth. And Gorby them - at an expense. It was necessary for Gorby to drown nafig in this Foros, to dump everything on the amers, and to restore order by the KGB troops.
    4. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 10: 52 New
      -3
      Quote: CON
      and people are so clogged with brains
      How he allowed himself to clog them.
  • sledge
    sledge 2 October 2015 07: 07 New
    -8
    Enemies, Enemies Around
    1. ARS56
      ARS56 2 October 2015 09: 12 New
      +4
      Are you joking?
      And all around are enemies.
      Take off the liberal-tolerant glasses, and you will see that this is so.
      1. sledge
        sledge 5 October 2015 13: 34 New
        0
        Have I put a smile somewhere? Why did everyone decide that this was jerking?
    2. I am human
      I am human 4 October 2015 21: 28 New
      -2
      Apparently you are also one of them ...
  • 1goose3
    1goose3 2 October 2015 07: 28 New
    +5
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Quote: 1goose3
    The article is a developer.

    What is the developer?


    If someone does not want to understand and explain it is pointless.
  • Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 2 October 2015 07: 42 New
    +8
    Having been in contact with Americans of different positions for many years, I can conclude that over the past two decades, the attitude of their "elite" towards us Russians has not changed. They represent us in the form of a kind of narrow-minded, gloomy white Papuans brandishing clubs under the leadership of a totalitarian leader-king, who still need to be taught and taught democracy, and indeed to teach everything, since the Russians are at a primitive level of development, despite their military-technical achievements . They sincerely believe that the Russians "do not develop" mentally and morally-type are stuck in their thinking at the level of the 19th century. It may seem strange, but the vast majority of ordinary Americans believe that the current Russians are still communists with "Bolshevik" manners, trying to export their "Russism-communism" to other "free" countries and that America's task is to stop this "expansion" .
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 2 October 2015 07: 45 New
    +6
    Shooting was conducted from the building of the American Embassy ...

    I will not be surprised at this. At that time, Americans felt at home in Russia. Without control meetings, movements, privatization management, distribution of advice to everyone and everything, etc. EBN completely surrendered Russia to its environment and the United States.
  • 1goose3
    1goose3 2 October 2015 07: 53 New
    +6
    Quote: Sanya
    Enemies, Enemies Around


    Statement or irony? Rather, the second. Under the slogan that now we all have friends and destroyed the army, as a result, the country and its industry. Indeed, why the army, if all around friends. Yes, and industry is useless, friends will feed. Yes, and such a territory is not needed, hand out.
    When, then, they’ll come up with some kind of “dust” that would cure naivety, but destroy the “naive” and “well-wishers”.
    PS Naive please pay attention to where the quotation marks are and where not.
    1. sledge
      sledge 5 October 2015 13: 53 New
      +1
      I don’t understand why you decided that irony? Because of brevity, cut off the phrase? So what is there to add when it is already clear that they are everywhere - in the government, the Central Bank, the Ministry of Finance, etc. It's time to come up with something from narcissism !!!
  • Andryukha G
    Andryukha G 2 October 2015 08: 18 New
    +2
    "Yeltsin was the only horse of the reform forces" in Russia - if it is more correct then "the main rat of the reform forces of Russia."
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 57 New
      +1
      Well, for sure, there were also "reserve rats." Zionist comrades never put their eggs in one basket. Always in several and different colors, from red to brown.
      1. Ladoga
        Ladoga 3 October 2015 22: 08 New
        0
        So it was - Messrs. Gusinsky and Khodorkovsky sponsored the Communists. So, just in case ...
        You never know how to turn around ...
  • ava09
    ava09 2 October 2015 08: 27 New
    +5
    (C) We are unlikely to ever find out the secret of the flight of Rudolf Hess, the mystery of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, or how, in fact, the "attack on America" ​​was organized on September 11, 2001.

    I wonder who the author means by the pronoun "We"? If these are ordinary people, then they certainly will not know. Those who form public “knowledge” and public order do not at all presuppose Knowledge for this section of society. The average person is obliged to BELIEVE in the UNPREDICTABLE, and NOT TO KNOW THE OBJECTIVE. A vivid example is RELIGION, not to be confused with FAITH.
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 2 October 2015 08: 33 New
    -3
    More than 20 years have passed, now you can write everything that comes to mind. At least blame the Martians! smile
  • Engineer
    Engineer 2 October 2015 08: 56 New
    +1
    Quote: Bayonet
    More than 20 years have passed, now you can write everything that comes to mind. At least blame the Martians! smile

    I support. In the current situation, writing off everything to vile America is a knowingly winning position. It is a shame to admit to your own dope or inaction.
  • Begemot
    Begemot 2 October 2015 09: 04 New
    -11
    I recall with horror those days, how hard it was to look at the tanks firing at the building in the center of Moscow, at the killed people, no matter which side. It’s especially disgusting that neither EBN, nor Rutskoi with Khazbulatov, Mokashov and the others even thought that they were leading people to death in those days. They needed power. Logically, the victory of EBN became a lesser evil for Russia, because in those days the Armed Forces was just a bunch of clowns, and the Constitution was such that the decision of the Armed Forces immediately became the LAW, binding on the whole territory of Russia and we all saw in which booth, these laws were adopted. Where these throats from the Sun would lead us is scary to think. But EBN, that fruit, did a lot of things.
    As for the Americans, it was more profitable for them to win the EBN, because they gained access to the riches of Russia, gained leverage over the top authorities, while they had guarantees of weakening the country itself and absolute guarantees of their own security on the world stage. Do what you want, no one will shake. Actually, this is what happened. But the victory of such people as Mokashov, Umalatov, Rutskoi, Khazbulatov could well lead the country to a full-scale civil war, disintegration into small principalities, in the territory of which there were conventional and nuclear weapons and no one would undertake to guarantee its non-use. In this situation, intervention would be as inevitable as catastrophic for America itself. And everything else that the author writes about is already details and tactics. Who would doubt the US’s participation in such an enchanting self-defeat of a geopolitical adversary. Honestly, I was glad that it ended that way, more because the fratricide stopped. Talking about whether it could be better was pointless, there were no real, ready-to-act political forces besides EBN and Arsenal. I agree that the victory of EBN brought many troubles to Russia, but if he lost, then it would be a disaster.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 34 New
      +5
      "..VS in those days was just a bunch of clowns .." -? And now, to whom? Not clowns or what? Parliament is not the Government, there a crowd of managers is not obligatory, and the notorious "managers" are simply harmful - they don’t have a place at all (get out!). Parliament is such what is primarily the moral "content" of parliamentarians. He must set goals and audit the means of achieving them proposed by the government. The main issues of the work of the Parliament should fully comply with the functionality of the highest public "caste": "where to go," "why," and "to whom it will be beneficial." The current Russian parliament, from the point of view of the "quality of these guys", is before the RF Armed Forces as before China with cancer.
      1. Begemot
        Begemot 2 October 2015 10: 14 New
        -3
        I wanted to put a plus for you, but here is the last line. If you look at my comments, you will understand that my attitude to the current deputies and senators is much more negative than yours, I criticize them harshly and believe that I have the right to do so, because I profess the principle of compliance with the law and therefore I know to what extent it is debility, however , I was "lucky" to watch live meetings of the Armed Forces and get acquainted with the documents of that time. Therefore, I did not understand: "to China with cancer" is it for better or worse?
  • Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 2 October 2015 09: 08 New
    +3
    Quote: leo3972
    And where did he dig all this from? Everything is strange somehow.
    Yeltsin is understandable, well, I do not believe that he sold himself to America.

    Sorry, I’m sincerely sorry that you still maintain such a childish naive. For many, this has already passed. My grandmother, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the former Pens somehow immediately believed this a long time ago, although at first she hoped for EBNik’s party conscience .. Really humpbacked did not disappoint?
    Thanks for the article, the picture came out. Better late than never.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 2 October 2015 09: 27 New
    +3
    I really liked the wording from the article: “... the Russian parliament was called only“ anti-democratic, anti-Western, anti-market, anti-Semitic ”“ red-brown coalition ”(CRS Report for Congress, 93-884 F, 06.10.1993/XNUMX/XNUMX). Ay thanks to Amer’s congressmen, as their old wording is today, it’s a recipe ready to use! A guide to action! This is what the Russian parliament should be like today! I think so.
  • 1goose3
    1goose3 2 October 2015 09: 33 New
    +3
    Quote: Engineer
    Quote: Bayonet
    More than 20 years have passed, now you can write everything that comes to mind. At least blame the Martians! smile

    I support. In the current situation, writing off everything to vile America is a knowingly winning position. It is a shame to admit to your own dope or inaction.


    Yes, it was impossible to understand that situation, the layman. Everything was planned, grammatically implemented, informationally prepared. We did not want the collapse of the country, we did not want its weakening, we only wanted a change of leadership that would quickly restore order. We wanted the best, but it turned out .... Everything that happens today in Ukraine is a copy of the situation of those times, plus a successfully played nationalist card.
  • da Vinci
    da Vinci 2 October 2015 09: 41 New
    +1
    IMHO You know, citizens, after the events of 1993 in Moscow, I perceive Rutsky only as a professional f ** who, by his actions before, during, and especially after these events, crossed out (as a politician and a man) all his military merits. Worse is only Makashov, who was yelling "beat the bastards," and now he is going to Israel. No, I don’t have anything against Jews and Israel, but the guys - bl * di, who built themselves into cool truth-tellers and patriots, cause me disgust, while some corrupt women - pity and understanding. Sorry for the rude syllable. hi
  • Erg
    Erg 2 October 2015 09: 47 New
    +3
    Yes ... Under Stalin, such a mess would not have passed. He did not sell. And now? .. Yachts, planes, castles ... Already sick of these moral monsters. After the death of the great Leader, only a pair of goat boots remained. And the front tunic ...
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 2 October 2015 10: 03 New
    +1
    Twenty-five years later, we learned what the American embassy in Moscow did in 1993! The vile essence of the Americans is to quietly stab in the back, "substitute the leg," and then scream the loudest about their commitment to democracy and International Law, and they recognize the Law only as "the law of the strongest"! But it seems that these times are slowly fading into the past, as the Syrian policy of Russia unequivocally says: it looks like we will not ask anyone or anything about anything, but we will act in accordance with International Law and UN Directives! "Finita la comedy" gentlemen democrats, the train has left, in the sense your time is over! And for the shooting from the roof of the American embassy sooner or later have to answer!
  • andrew42
    andrew42 2 October 2015 10: 17 New
    +9
    If you look at the history of Russia for 1000 years, then worse than Judas Gorbachev M.S. There was no one. Unless the “seven-boyars” of the 16th century — so there were at least a few, such as “collective responsibility”. :)) If we take other negative identities of the rulers of Russia, then all of them together did much less, much less treacherous harm. 1) Vladimir "saint" put Russia under the Byzantine priesthood, killed his brothers, drank to the "red sun" on the face and contained up to 1000 concubines. But even if the state didn’t break up with it, and breaking up subsequently retained the ability to resist for a very long time. 2) Anna Ioannovna, of course, I swear on the throne, but even the Germans Ostermany, Minikh, Biren willy-nilly "worked" for the state, even more so in their own pockets. At least they had no complete will anyway. 3) Nicholas II, - although this wimp, he himself fell a victim of a coup, did not hand over the country to foreigners, although he allowed the elite to decompose and did not realize that the empire was intended to be a sacrifice to a world banking syndicate. Here is simply INCAPABILITY. In the case of Gorbachev, such an impudent, cynical and cruel deception, treachery and betrayal, our land never knew before. Having the 2nd economy in the world, the 2st army in the world, which covers this economy from "robbery lovers", the 1st social system in the world, it simply agreed with the geopolitical enemy and surrendered its state. He surrendered on purpose, prudently, step by step, in front of the people who had entrusted him with the highest authority. Guilty of death! Definitely.
  • Mordvin 3
    Mordvin 3 2 October 2015 10: 45 New
    +2
    In my opinion, it all started with the landing of Rust. Trial ball.
    1. Erg
      Erg 2 October 2015 10: 58 New
      +1
      It is difficult to say ... But there is an opinion that the USSR was sold by recognizing the lunar offer of the Americans.
  • Mstivoy
    Mstivoy 2 October 2015 11: 30 New
    +3
    Gorbachev is nonsense, and after all that he has done, he comes to Russia and publishes his memoirs ... no words, only emotions, does he even understand that the lives of millions depended on the USSR? 2 Chechnya, Georgia, Transnistria, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Serbia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Ukraine millions of crippled fates, millions of Russians outside the Russian Federation not of their own free will, and all these consequences of what he did and then the ice ax did not overtake him? instead, they give him a medal in England. Even assuming the idea that he did not know what he was doing and was not a traitor, didn’t he himself understand that he was incapable of managing such a country and had to resign himself voluntarily. As regards the activities of Americans in Russia, there was never any doubt here, I don’t understand your surprise, didn’t you know the history of the Americans how they lied and destroyed the North American Indians with the help of clothes infected with diseases and about their cruelty scalping them to prove that Native American dead ?? And how do we differ from the Indians for the Americans ?? And one should not naively believe that work to overthrow the power in Russia and just do it anywhere else is not underway.
    1. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 2 October 2015 12: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: Mstivoy
      Gorbachev is nonsense ...
      ... but instead they give him a medal in England
      Gorbachev Mikhail Sergeevich, awards:

      The Order of the Holy Apostle Andrew the First-Called (March 2, 2011) - for his great personal contribution to strengthening peace and friendship between peoples and many years of fruitful social activity.

      Order of Honor (February 28 2001 of the year) - for his great contribution to the development of democratic transformations and in connection with his seventieth birthday.

      Vladimir Putin:
      Dear Mikhail Sergeyevich!
      Congratulations on your birthday.
      Fruitful public, research activities, active participation in popular charity, educational projects have rightfully earned you deep respect. It is important that you pay unremitting attention to the implementation of significant initiatives in the field of international cooperation, with your multifaceted work, strive to help increase Russia's prestige in the world.
      I wish you health, prosperity and all the best.
      http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/letters/17612
      1. dmb
        dmb 2 October 2015 13: 35 New
        +6
        Well, yes, our naive public requires some kind of court, the restoration of some kind of justice. Let me remind you that the current Garant and loyal to him Shoigu and Rogozin, as well as protch members of the co-operative Ozero, found themselves in power exclusively thanks to those whom the public needs to judge. Yes, they kissed, kissed and will kiss them in the w ... until the end of his days. Otherwise, the legitimacy of their own power is even more dubious.
  • lukke
    lukke 2 October 2015 12: 00 New
    +7
    “At about 8 o’clock, the units advanced to the walls of the White House ... During the promotion of the unit to the regiment, 5 people were killed and 18 were injured. They were shot from behind. I myself observed it. Shooting was fired from the building of the American embassy ... All the dead and wounded were shot from behind "

    I would not want to serve such a "deputy commander" ....
  • bbss
    bbss 2 October 2015 12: 04 New
    +2
    I happened to (in other words, "the lot fell") to spend the alarming days of October 1993 in the service. Our unit was located 100 meters from the metro station Barrikadnaya. I spent the night from October 3 to 4 in the building of the Moscow City Council on ul. Gorky (provided security). On the afternoon of the 4th, I was called into the unit and I made my way on foot to the Uprising Square. When I went to the square I found a wild picture. A dense crowd of onlookers stood in the corners, and several submachine gunners were languidly exchanging fire with someone shooting from a high place in the square. What kind of fighters I can’t say. They were without insignia in balaclavas. I spoke with one shooter. I needed to seep past the high-rise to the subway. He told me that there was a shot area. There were several buses along the sidewalk. It was necessary to slip 50 meters and then from the column of buses about 50 meters to the subway. I ventured to run across ... They opened heavy fire at me from a skyscraper. And more than one shooter shot at me. About ten minutes I sat behind the wheel of the bus and pulled back. Apparently, they were waiting for me on the other side of the convoy near the metro, and at the departure they were late with firing ... I returned to the unit through the zoo ... But that's another story.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • python2a
    python2a 2 October 2015 17: 47 New
    +1
    Yolkin from college worked for Uncle Sema.
  • erseer
    erseer 2 October 2015 18: 56 New
    -1
    yes really. the truth, like the awl in a bag you can’t hide.
    sooner or later everything comes out.
    really sorry everything crawls out not online.
  • alone
    alone 2 October 2015 21: 11 New
    +3
    ))) I wonder if this is true, then why have they been silent about this for 22 years and have hinted just now? Why did the current Supreme Court and the President of the Russian Federation keep silent about this for so many years? He was the director of the FSB in 1998-1999 and probably knew about it. Why then did he keep silent about this? For this, it was necessary to wait for American sanctions for the oligarchs and their concerns?
    1. Ladoga
      Ladoga 3 October 2015 22: 28 New
      +1
      ,, Why did the President of the Russian Federation keep silent about this for so many years? He was the director of the FSB in 1998-1999 and probably knew about it. Why then did he keep silent about this ?,
      And he still laughs when he says that Chubais had a lot of advisers (exactly like that!) From the CIA.
      You see, he’s just funny!
      So here he is, mocking.
  • Buffalo
    Buffalo 2 October 2015 22: 28 New
    +1
    The events of October 93 are a disgrace to Russia. The betrayal of Rutsky, Tuleev ...
    Later both became governors. Tuleyev is still sitting. But Rutskoi is resting in the country, in Kratovo near Moscow, which is more like an estate of a Russian gentleman, with his columns and with guards. I happened to witness those terrible events. The White House was fired from tanks, Tamanians and soldiers of the division named after Dzerzhinsky, stained with Russian blood and covered with indelible shame their battle banners.
    Between Metro Barrikadnaya and the new US Embassy, ​​riot police beat pensioners with batons of protesters against poverty. Huge men beat with a pull of old women on their heads, so that the skin burst from blows and blood flooded their faces.
    In Ostankino, near the television center, an APC drove around and mowed down all passers-by on the street ... At the stadium, near the White House, the guys were executed and stars were cut on their backs.
    And so far no one has answered for this slaughter!
  • VIA_56
    VIA_56 3 October 2015 14: 41 New
    +1
    Although it is not Christian it is bad to talk about the dead. But with respect to Yeltsin, this is permissible (may God forgive me). You can’t talk about it differently, but to be silent is doubly shameful.
    Traitors must not be forgotten. I observed the actions of this public forehead prior to the October events in Moscow from neighboring Latvia, where I served in the armed forces in the late 80s and early 90s.
    I saw a live broadcast of the Latvian TV meeting of the 3 leaders of the Baltic republics with the EBN in Jurmala. When he was already drinking, at the exit from the tavern where this meeting was held, gave a short interview to media representatives. He directly stated: "Each nation has its own homeland. There is a homeland for the Russian people. This is Russia." After these words he was given a command in the field about the persecution of Russians living in the Baltic. These actions took place under the banner: "Motherland is calling you!"
    BUT. I understand with my heart all the betrayal of his actions, I still don’t understand how to understand one thing: why did he offer Vladimir Vladimirovich his successor? Maybe, even so, he decided to correct the results of his actions?
    1. Ladoga
      Ladoga 3 October 2015 22: 41 New
      +1
      ,, I still don’t understand the fashion of understanding one thing: why did he propose Vladimir Vladimirovich as his receiver? ,,
      Because ! He gave guarantees of the inviolability of the Family, to all relatives of EBN, in a word - we don’t hand over our own!
      And according to the St. Petersburg past, associated with foreign economic activity, Sobchak’s deputy at Svetleyshiy can see a big clothespin on his eggs. Hence a lot, and the so-called fight against corruption, and others, misunderstandings.
  • 1goose3
    1goose3 4 October 2015 09: 56 New
    0
    Quote: Babr
    This is the “Biblical project.” Without understanding this, it is impossible to understand all the intricacies of politics. General Petrov helped me, a simple engineer who was never interested in politics.

    And what did General Petrov KP help you understand, I think you meant it? Rather, what could Petrov know? In no case do not want to offend his memory. But the level of his posts did not allow him to have information about the situation in the country's top leadership, and therefore the reference to him, as an expert, is not correct. And therefore your allegations are groundless i.e. at the rumor level.