Beheaded Georgian opposition

[Saigon]

Mememe -

There is little point asking questions if you refuse to look at the answers.

Do some reading on the Doctor's Plot, and I'll be happy to answer any questions you have about it.

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

There is little point asking questions if you refuse to look at the answers.

.

Saigon, I am asking YOU (!!!!!!!).

Not some author of some book, but YOU!

You do have YOUR OWN thoughts on the matter, don't you?

So, please, tell me why do you think that a group of medics was tried and punished because they were Jews and not because they were members of Zionist organisation on CIA payroll who were engaged in terrorist activities in the USSR?

Is it because:
1. Jews can not be terrorists?
2. Jews can do no wrong?
3. No matter what Jews do they can not be held to account?
4. CIA and US State Department do not support terrorist activities in target countries?

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

If you were willing to read, you would be able to learn about things for yourself. I generally think that's better, especially as there is no reason for you to believe me.

But to answer your question - not only was there no evidence to suggest that any of the Doctor's involved were "terrorists", there were no acts of terror. There was no plot.

None of the doctors were members of any secret cells, they weren't plotting, and as far as anyone has ever suggested - they were just normal, everyday doctors.

It's hardly a mystery - the doctors were rounded up and executed or deported purely and simply because Stalin did not like Jews.

Go to whatever serious source you like - you won't anyone who actually believes there was a plot.

I don't know where you get all of this "Jews can do no wrong" bullshit. Just because there have been Jewish terrorists in the past does not mean that all acts of terror are committed by Jews.

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

If you were willing to read, you would be able to learn about things for yourself. I generally think that's better,

not only was there no evidence to suggest that any of the Doctor's involved were "terrorists",

there were no acts of terror.

None of the doctors were members of any secret cells, they weren't plotting,

and as far as anyone has ever suggested - they were just normal, everyday doctors.

It's hardly a mystery - the doctors were rounded up and executed or deported purely and simply because Stalin did not like Jews.

Go to whatever serious source you like - you won't anyone who actually believes there was a plot.

No, it isn't "better" when a person, especially a journalist can't explain his own thoughts!

How many pages of original investigation did you (or the authors of the books you take your information from) studied before coming up with this conclusion?

"Acts of terror" are not necessarily bombings; it's actions that spread mass panic or inflict mass damage. In this case an attention to coincidental death of two high ranking government officials and glaring flaws in treatments of other high ranking government officials was drawn by a doctor who became suspicious of actions of few doctors involved.

Says who? Anti-Stalin/Soviet propaganda merchants?

How can you say "anyone has ever suggested" if there was a report, an investigation, a trial and a conviction?! Unless, you suggest that only an opinion of anti-Stalin/Soviet propaganda brigade counts?!

And that we deduct from what evidence exactly? Please, explain why do you think that a group of medics was tried and punished because they were Jews and not because they were members of Zionist organisation on CIA payroll who were engaged in terrorist activities in the USSR?

I already did go to a serious source, that's why I am interested in YOUR sources. As for beliefs, they are irrational; I am interested in KNOWLEDGE, not in whatever fairies you believe!

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

In the case of an author like Montefiore, it's really a lifetime of work. He's been working with Russian history for decades now, and his two books on Stalin probably amount to a good ten years of solid research, largely in Georgia and Moscow.

Likewise Richard Overy, who is very strong in this area - it's perhaps 20 - 30 years of painstaking fieldwork, research and teaching.

Much of the research they are able to do is simply not available to you. You do not have access to half of what professional researchers are able to access. Try the Bad Arolsen files for one - those files are only available to real researchers.

I haven't done anything like the work these guys have, but I have read their books, gone to Georgia and looked around and tried to draw my own conclusions. And obviously anyone deeply interested in this topic is also going to have travelled extensively in the region to get a feel for it - Armeniam Azerbajian, Moldova, Belarus are all key places to visit for background.

To imagine that you have come across something they have not isn't so much stupid as unworthy of comment.

But that is how it goes with conspiracy theories - you will ignore all and any facts, refuse to read books and research, and sit backand congratulate yourself on understanding history like no one else.

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

In the case of an author like Montefiore, it's really a lifetime of work. He's been working with Russian history for decades now, and his two books on Stalin probably amount to a good ten years of solid research, largely in Georgia and Moscow.

Likewise Richard Overy, who is very strong in this area - it's perhaps 20 - 30 years of painstaking fieldwork, research and teaching.

1. Montefiore was a banker, and a journalist, and a novelist, and a POPULAR historian! Saigon, the dude was writing half-historical, half-fictional books! And he was writing them and about Stalin, and about Ekaterina II... What does it tell you about the DEPTH of his knowledge? Clearly, nothing. But it should tell you that he was a Jack of all trades, and just by that definition the depth of his knowledge was not up to the task of HISTORICAL, FACTUAL work. The fact that he was travelling places living somewhere does not mean that he was sitting day and night in archives studying documents. He had far too busy a life to do that.

2. Richard Overy. The very title of his concoction "The Dictators: Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia" gives no room for impartiality: it is a book that serves a very particular agenda. In other words, it is a propaganda work.
All right, maybe I am wrong, let's read his first chapter. Was there a letter written by Lenin? There was. Was Lenin, et al opposed to Stalin? Yes. But Richard Overy conveniently omits to mention who and what were those people: Lenin, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotsky... And the reason for his omission is simple: Bolsheviks were a radical wing of Jewish revolutionary-terrorist organisation that was funded by both Rockfellers and Rothschilds and who saw their mission in destruction of Russia as a state. The dismemberment of the Russian Empire, the horrors of Red Terror and 1920-s repressions, mass murder of Russian Orthodox clergy and demolition of Russian churches were the result of Lenin and Trotsky policies. Stalin put an end to it. Stalin removed Lenin-Trotsky Bolsheviks from power and reversed the most damaging effects of their policies. That is why the West is so warm towards Lenin and Trotsky -- they were "Gorbachov" and "Yeltsun" of that time; and that is why the West is so hateful when it comes to Stalin -- he messed up the plans of Western financial and corporate mafia.

Then again, what does Richard Overy say about the role of US, UK and France in bringing Hitler to power and in directing him to the East? Practically, nothing. What a great surprise (not!)!

And if you draw your knowledge from such sources, then it is no wonder that you sound like 1950-s fossil.

 

[mememe]

Saigon!

I actually started to read your Montefiore "Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar".

Part 1. Chapter 1. Line 11:

"Westerners often do not realize how foreign Georgia was: an independent kingdom for millennia with its own ancient language, traditions, cuisine, literature, it was only consumed by Russia in gulps between 1801 and 1878."

That's it! Enough! "Historian" my arse!

1. There was never a kingdom named "Georgia"!
Between 12 and 8 centuries BC on the territory of modern day Georgia existed two states: Diaoha and Kolha, as well as an array of smaller less stable states.

6 century BC -- Kolha kingdom in the Western territory of modern day Georgia.

In what is now Easter region of Georgia there was Iberia kingdom (4 - 3 BC).

Also, there existed Kartlian kingdom (3 - 2 BC).

4 -6 AD -- Lazlar kingdom.

736 -- 1122 -- ISLAMIC state -- Tiflis emirate.

Around this time there was also a state Ereti.

9 -- 10 AD -- Tao-Klarjeti, Abkhasian kingdom, Kartlian kingdom, Kaheti and Ereti.

(So, which one of these kingdoms was "Georgia" in Montefiore's understanding? )

10 -- 11 AD Tao-Klarjeti takes over the rest of the kingdoms and forms a kingdom SAKARTVELO.

13 AD Abkhasia becomes independent and Samtshe and Djavahetia leave what once was Sakartvelo.

15 AD on a territory of modern day Georgia existed few independent states with their own languages, traditions and culture: Kartli, Kaheti, Imereti, Samtshe-Djavaheti.

What sort of "historian" doesn't know these simple facts????!!!!!!!!!


2. "independent kingdom for millennia"? It looks like Montefiore is also an outstanding mathematician!


3. "Georgian" is an ANCIENT LANGUAGE?!
"Georgian" language was a language of predominantly Iberian kingdom, Kartli and Kolhi. It is a mixture of few languages and it is not a native language to many "Georgian" ethnicities of modern day Georgia!

What stopped your "historian" from figuring that out?!


4. "consumed by Russia"?
Let's have a look, shall we?

For simplicity sake let's refer to all nations of what is now Georgia, as Georgians; and to various kingdoms there -- as Georgian kingdoms.
By the 16 - 17 century Georgian nations stood on a brink of physical extinction thanks Turks, Persians and assorted Caucasian nations.

In 1782 Georgian (Kartlo-Kahetian, since Georgia at the time consisted of few kingdoms) king asked Russia for protection (Georgievsky pact).

In 1795 Persian Shah Aga Khan Mohammed, dissatisfied that Irakly II failed to appear at his coronation and so expressed its independence, summed troops to Tbilisi. They rounded up civilians (80 000) and slaughtered them. In Tbilisi an image of Virgin Mary was brought to the bridge over the Kourou, where more than three thousand men were gathered and told to undress. Shah then ordered everyone to come to St. Mary and desecrate her image. Those who refused were beheaded and thrown into the river. Georgians who tried to flee Georgia were caught and massacred. Many Georgians loyal to Shah took part in the massacres.

Georgian king Irakley wrote letters to Catherine II begging her to save Georgia.

Three detachments of Russian troops of militia generals Burnashev, Gudovich, Suhotnev located in the Caucasus, and an Ossetian detachment of 500 soldiers came to the aid of Georgia. In Petersburg, it was decided to urgently equip an army of ten thousands send it to Tiflis. Mohammed Aga Khan retreated...
In 1797 Mohammed Aga Khan once again went on Tiflisu. Only his death saved the city.

In 1801 Russia fulfilled the request of Georgian king George XII and took Georgia into Russian Empire.

How come your "historian" did not know about REPEATED REQUESTS of Georgian kings to be "consumed" by Russian Empire?!



Conclusion:

If in the first 13 lines Montefiore managed to make 4 crude mistakes, I am not going to even entertain the thought of reading the rest of his crap!

In 13 lines -- 4 glaring mistakes!!!!!!! And you call him "historian"?!

Go away...

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

Let's stick with what is imporant:

You know more than anyone else. You know more than all so-called experts with the PhDs, awards and publications.

You have seen secret documents the experts have never seen. You know people who REALLY KNOW!

Only YOU know the real story of Stalin being Jewish.

Only you know that the west hates Stalin not bcause he killed 30 million of his own people - but because he interfered with western banks plans!!

IT'S TRUE!!


meme - You MUST ignore all facts, all history, and all experts. You MUST preserve what only you know.

And to do this, you must NOT read books!

 

[Saigon]

1. Montefiore was a banker, and a journalist, and a novelist, and a POPULAR historian! Saigon, the dude was writing half-historical, half-fictional books! And he was writing them and about Stalin, and about Ekaterina II... What does it tell you about the DEPTH of his knowledge? Clearly, nothing.

I did laugh at this.

Does he know nothing, well let's look at that publishing history:


Non Fiction

Jerusalem: The Biography, 2011 ISBN 978-0-297-85265-0
101 World Heroes, 2009
Monsters – History's most evil men and women, 2008
Young Stalin, 2008
Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 2005, 2004 ISBN 1-4000-4230-5 ISBN 978-1400042302
Potemkin: Catherine the Great's Imperial Partner, 2005
Catherine the Great and Potemkin, 2004
Speeches that Changed the World: The Stories and Transcripts of the Moments that Made History, 2008, 2007
Speeches that Changed the World, 2007
Piggy Foxy and the Sword of Revolution: Bolshevik Self-Portraits (Annals of Communism Series) with Alexander Vatlin, Larisa Malashenko and Vadim A. Staklo, 2006
A History of Caucasus, 2005 ISBN 0-297-81925-9 ISBN 978-0297819257

And that bio you claim is "jack of all trades" -

Montefiore was educated at Ludgrove School, Harrow School, and Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, where he read history. He went on to work as a banker and foreign affairs journalist.

Montefiore’s books have been world bestsellers, published in 33 languages. His first history book, Catherine the Great & Potemkin, was shortlisted for the Samuel Johnson, Duff Cooper, and Marsh Biography Prizes.[1] Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar won History Book of the Year at the 2004 British Book Awards.[3] Young Stalin won the LA Times Book Prize for Best Biography,[4] the Costa Book Award,[5] the Bruno Kreisky Award for Political Literature,[1] the Prix de la Biographie Politique[6] and was shortlisted for the James Tait Black Memorial Prize.[7]

His novel, Sashenka, set in twentieth century Russia, appeared in 2008. His latest history book is Jerusalem: the Biography, a fresh history of the Middle East.

Miramax Films and Ruby Films have bought the rights and are currently developing a movie of Young Stalin.

Simon Sebag Montefiore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


He knows nothing.

Only Mememe knows the real truth.

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

Let's stick with what is imporant:

You know more than anyone else. You know more than all so-called experts with the PhDs, awards and publications.

If your PhD experts makes 4 glaring mistakes in the first 13 lines and clearly state that their "historical book" is agenda motivated (in other words -- propaganda), then they are truly "SO-CALLED".

With regard to my "superior knowledge": one has to be able to read in order to find out just how many states existed and co-existed on the territory of modern day Georgia in order not to make a mistake of claiming that "Georgia existed for millennia", or that "Georgian language existed for millennia". It's BASICS!
The fact that your "PhD" chose not to write the basic facts suggest that his twaddle was written specifically for WESTERN AUDIENCE, and that the author holds you for ignorant idiots!

And judging by you, he is right!

 

[mememe]

He knows nothing.

Only Mememe knows the real truth.

No, Saigon.

I believe both of your "history" merchants know the real facts, but they write to serve the agenda. And they write for WESTERNERS, whom they and the establishment hold for numpties; you would NEVER be able to get their "histories" past Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians, Moldovans...

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

Yes, yes, yes - it is all a western conspiracy. Much like the Doctors Plot!

Stalin was really a lovely man who played with puppies, and it is ridiculous that Richard Overy calls him a 'dictator'! What bias!

Just because Stalin was the responsible for more deaths than Hitler - those evil historians call him a dictator!

I tell you what, Meme, if you do ever decide to read anything on Stalin and/or the Doctor's Plot, send me a PM and maybe we can discus it then. At the moment it isn't really possible to discuss the issues, because you simply do not have enough knowledge of the subject and refuse to read.

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

Yes, yes, yes - it is all a western conspiracy.

Much like the Doctors Plot!

Stalin was really a lovely man

Saigon, there is no conspiracy in opening up history of Caucasus and finding out just how many states there were on a territory of modern day Georgia. There is no conspiracy in being curious. Unfortunately, Western populace was conditioned not to question official information and not to ask questions. You are generally ignorant and stupid.

And since your "facts" about Doctor's Plot come from the same sources that gave you "millennium old Georgia", "millennium old Georgian language" and other marvels, we can safely conclude that they are just another piece of twaddle for Western propaganda consumers (see p. 1).

Stalin was not a lady-boy to be "lovely", you -- idiot! He was a STATESMAN!!!!! It's now West doesn't have statesmen, only lovely lady-boys; that's why it's in such a mess.

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

Was Stalin responsible for the death of at least 30 million Russians?

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

Was Stalin responsible for the death of at least 30 million Russians?

You mean, 27-29 million (including military) of Soviet citizens who died during the Great Patriotic War?

 

[Saigon]

Mememe -

No, I mean the people staved during the Great Famine and murdered during the Terror first and foremost.

How about we start with them?

 

[mememe]

Mememe -

No, I mean the people staved during the Great Famine and murdered during the Terror first and foremost.

How about we start with them?

1. Red Terror -- the policy concocted and implemented by Lenin-Trotsky faction; during Stalin times they were tried for their crimes.

2. If famine of 1932-1933 in the USSR was of Stalin's doing, then whom are you going to hold responsible for the famine of 1930-s in Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, UK, Germany, USA?

Besides, I still can't figure out where you got your figure of "30 million" from? Does it include everyone who died between 1917 and 1946?

 

[Saigon]

during Stalin times they were tried for their crimes.

If famine of 1932-1933 in the USSR was of Stalin's doing,

And you want to talk about believing propaganda?

And you don't even know that Stalin deliberately starved the Ukraine to death?

I'm afraid your knowledge of history is such that no discussion is possible. You just don't know enough to make debate possible.

 

[mememe]

during Stalin times they were tried for their crimes.

If famine of 1932-1933 in the USSR was of Stalin's doing,

And you want to talk about believing propaganda?

And you don't even know that Stalin deliberately starved the Ukraine to death?

I'm afraid your knowledge of history is such that no discussion is possible. You just don't know enough to make debate possible.

Saigon, do you even realise that you repeat the same half-a-dozen cliches given to you, Westerners, by your establishment?

I had "conversations" like that so many times that I can tell in advance everything you will put forward in support of all your arguments. You were fed certain mantras as far back as 1950-s and they remain the same.

All right, let's do it for the hundred's time:

1. Famine of 1930-s was rife throughout Europe, Africa and N. America. Did Stalin do it?

2. Are you even aware that famine of 1930-s was not confined to Ukrainian SSR?

3. Are you aware that "Ukraine" as a separate from the rest of Russia republic was created by Bolsheviks; and "Ukrainians" as an ethnicity separate from the rest of Russians was also created by Bolsheviks by simply writing all those born in Malorussia as "Ukrainians" into 1922 census? So why would Stalin create something and then "starve it to death"?

4. Then, again, not all reagions of Ukraine were affected by famine.

5. Prior to 1930-s famines were a regular thing. Did Stalin do it?


4. I hope you do know that before WW2 ended the US accepted scores of German Nazis, including those from Nazi propaganda department? They were helping Americans organise their propaganda work of the Cold War period.

Well, "Hearst's relationship with the Nazis in 1934 is of critical importance in understanding a major element of American anti-Communist propaganda. In 1934 Hearst published a number of stories about the 1932-1933 famine in Ukraine. Nazi Germany had been waging a major anti-Communist propaganda campaign as part of its agenda, fascism being the "sworn enemy" or communism.

As part of this larger propaganda campaign the German Ministry of Propaganda created a story about a Soviet program of genocide in Ukraine. This was all part of the larger German plans to not only put down Communist support in Germany, but justify later invasions to the east under the banner of "liberation."

The Germans manufactured stories about the famine in Ukraine and used false photographs to depict the famine conditions as worse than they really were, including pictures from a 1920-22 famine in Russia during the Russian Civil War and pictures of famine conditions during World War I of regions that were not even Russian.

The Germans wanted to expand this propaganda campaign against the USSR to potential rival states which it hoped to build support in, such as the United States and Britain. This is where Hearst came in.

Hearst's role for the Nazis was to try and build Nazi sympathy in America, which was to be achieved by both portraying Nazi Germany in a good light, as well as portraying Germany's primary target, the Soviet Union, and Communism in general, in an exaggeratedly negative light.

Hearst picked up the Ukraine famine story in 1934, about a year after the famine actually took place. In a press like the Hearst Press everything relied on "breaking news." Had Hearst had a real interest in covering the Ukraine famine it would have been covered in 1932 and 1933 when it was taking place, however it was not covered in Hearst presses until 1934, after he picked up the story for the Nazis.

Hearst's Ukraine famine stories have proven to have had a huge impact among Americans, and even today the majority of Americans believe that there actually was a "Ukraine Holocaust." Common figures are that 6 million people died in Ukraine under Stalin's rule in what was an intentional starving to death of these millions of people. This 6 million figure is in fact a pure fabrication of Nazi propaganda. The idea that Ukrainians were intentionally starved to death is likewise a product of Nazi propaganda, picked up by Hearst and spread to the United States, where it was accepted at truth, and for the most part still is today.

For more on the Ukrainian famine and the role of the Hearst Press in creating the myth of a Ukrainian genocide see: "Fraud, Famine and Fascism: The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard".

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...h7Rc4i9R6kfYa-zlw&sig2=t_SIXtLh-Lh71zjkWeHtkQ

 

[52ndStreet]

during Stalin times they were tried for their crimes.

If famine of 1932-1933 in the USSR was of Stalin's doing,

And you want to talk about believing propaganda?

And you don't even know that Stalin deliberately starved the Ukraine to death?

I'm afraid your knowledge of history is such that no discussion is possible. You just don't know enough to make debate possible.

Saigon, do you even realise that you repeat the same half-a-dozen cliches given to you, Westerners, by your establishment?

I had "conversations" like that so many times that I can tell in advance everything you will put forward in support of all your arguments. You were fed certain mantras as far back as 1950-s and they remain the same.

All right, let's do it for the hundred's time:

1. Famine of 1930-s was rife throughout Europe, Africa and N. America. Did Stalin do it?

2. Are you even aware that famine of 1930-s was not confined to Ukrainian SSR?

3. Are you aware that "Ukraine" as a separate from the rest of Russia republic was created by Bolsheviks; and "Ukrainians" as an ethnicity separate from the rest of Russians was also created by Bolsheviks by simply writing all those born in Malorussia as "Ukrainians" into 1922 census? So why would Stalin create something and then "starve it to death"?

4. Then, again, not all reagions of Ukraine were affected by famine.

5. Prior to 1930-s famines were a regular thing. Did Stalin do it?


4. I hope you do know that before WW2 ended the US accepted scores of German Nazis, including those from Nazi propaganda department? They were helping Americans organise their propaganda work of the Cold War period.

Well, "Hearst's relationship with the Nazis in 1934 is of critical importance in understanding a major element of American anti-Communist propaganda. In 1934 Hearst published a number of stories about the 1932-1933 famine in Ukraine. Nazi Germany had been waging a major anti-Communist propaganda campaign as part of its agenda, fascism being the "sworn enemy" or communism.

As part of this larger propaganda campaign the German Ministry of Propaganda created a story about a Soviet program of genocide in Ukraine. This was all part of the larger German plans to not only put down Communist support in Germany, but justify later invasions to the east under the banner of "liberation."

The Germans manufactured stories about the famine in Ukraine and used false photographs to depict the famine conditions as worse than they really were, including pictures from a 1920-22 famine in Russia during the Russian Civil War and pictures of famine conditions during World War I of regions that were not even Russian.

The Germans wanted to expand this propaganda campaign against the USSR to potential rival states which it hoped to build support in, such as the United States and Britain. This is where Hearst came in.

Hearst's role for the Nazis was to try and build Nazi sympathy in America, which was to be achieved by both portraying Nazi Germany in a good light, as well as portraying Germany's primary target, the Soviet Union, and Communism in general, in an exaggeratedly negative light.

Hearst picked up the Ukraine famine story in 1934, about a year after the famine actually took place. In a press like the Hearst Press everything relied on "breaking news." Had Hearst had a real interest in covering the Ukraine famine it would have been covered in 1932 and 1933 when it was taking place, however it was not covered in Hearst presses until 1934, after he picked up the story for the Nazis.

Hearst's Ukraine famine stories have proven to have had a huge impact among Americans, and even today the majority of Americans believe that there actually was a "Ukraine Holocaust." Common figures are that 6 million people died in Ukraine under Stalin's rule in what was an intentional starving to death of these millions of people. This 6 million figure is in fact a pure fabrication of Nazi propaganda. The idea that Ukrainians were intentionally starved to death is likewise a product of Nazi propaganda, picked up by Hearst and spread to the United States, where it was accepted at truth, and for the most part still is today.

For more on the Ukrainian famine and the role of the Hearst Press in creating the myth of a Ukrainian genocide see: "Fraud, Famine and Fascism: The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard".

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...h7Rc4i9R6kfYa-zlw&sig2=t_SIXtLh-Lh71zjkWeHtkQ

Yes , America acceptance of German Nazi was due to the need to replicate German V2
rocket technology, and other German advances in science and technology. Verner Von Braun helped to build the America NASA rocket technology.

The German propoganda aspect was used very effectively also by the U.S. millitary.
Communism was gaining to much influence in the world. It still is today. It must be
stopped.World democracy is at risk.Capitalism is at risk.