Moscow just came unglued

[SMR 368]

I have no idea about Hawaii, but I know Texas voted to get into the US as long as they were known as "The Republic of Texas", and Alaska voted to get into the US. The Alaska natives up here wouldn't have it any other way. It was different with the Baltics. Red Army troops invaded the Baltics after the Molotov - Ribbentrop Pact and proceeded to deport thousands of Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians to Soviet labor camps in Russia Far East and Siberia. Read up on it if you have never heard of this before. Start with googling "Molotov - Ribbentrop Pact",and "NKVD deportations".

At the end of WW2 the same thing happened again. Red Army troops invaded the Baltics in pursuit of the Germans and proceeded to deport thousands of more of those people but only after they took their time raping, stealing and murdering which was a Red Army favorite past time. Google "Soviet War Crimes" if you don't know of this.

Another one for you to google is "The Singing Revolution" and the "Relocation of the Bronze Soldier". The USSR was nothing more than a bunch of thugs illegally occupying Eastern Europe among other countries like the "Soviet Stans and Caucuses".

While your at it here's a few more for you to google: "Hungary Revolution 1956", East German Workers Rebellion" and "Prague Spring 1968", "Iron Curtain", "Berlin Wall", "Occupation of the Baltics", "Occupation of Poland", Occupation of Hungary","Checkpoint Charlie", "Soviet citizens seek asylum to the West", "Soviet invasion of Western Ukraine" and "Lech Walesa".

Texas used to be part of Mexico but was taken in a war. Those who voted to be part of the US weren't the people that originally controlled it (the same applies to Arizona, New Mexico, and parts of Colorado, Utah, Nevada, California, and Oklahoma). Hawaii was an independent nation as well that eventually succumbed to pressure from the outside. You're right that Alaska was purchased but not from the people that lived there.

I'm not trying to draw direct parallels but rather just point out that the process by which land moves from one government to another is rarely cut and dry or pretty and can almost always be spun in an unfavorable way. If the takeover doesn't pan out, it will be spun unfavorably. If it works out, all will be forgiven in time. Maybe you should read up on the various Indian wars, the Whiskey rebellion, or the "War of Northern Aggression."

As to the Baltics, specifically, they are under a different government now and it's easy to blame every problem on Russia and the USSR, just like it's easy for some to blame every problem on racism, sexism, or class injustice. At a certain point you have to take responsibility for your own problems and finding solutions to them.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Tsar Putin's KGB mouthpiece speaks.

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-churchs-patriarch-calls-dialogue-094146119.html

Russian church's patriarch calls for dialogue

AP – Sat, Jan 7, 2012

MOSCOW (AP) — The head of the Russian Orthodox Church on Saturday urged the government to listen to protesters demanding free elections.

Patriarch Kirill warned both sides that Russia cannot afford another revolution.

"The government should, through dialogue and by listening to society, correct the course and then everything will be fine," he said in an interview broadcast Saturday, the day on which Russians and other Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas.

Tens of thousands of people turned out for two demonstrations in Moscow to protest vote fraud in last month's parliamentary election and call for an end to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's 12-year rule.

A third demonstration is planned for Feb. 4, a month ahead of a presidential election that Putin hopes will extend his power for at least six more years. He first served as president from 2000 to 2008.

The patriarch, whose church has close ties to the Kremlin, spoke of the need to preserve a strong state.

He warned the protesters against being used by those fighting for political power, comparing the opposition leaders to the Bolsheviks whose 1917 revolution brought down czarist Russia.

"We destroyed the country, and why did this happen? Because in general the just protests of the people were cleverly used by political forces fighting for power," Kirill said.

The same thing happened again with the protests that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the patriarch said.

The challenge for Russia today, he said, is for the protests to lead to political change but not to shake the foundations of the state.

The protesters have demanded a rerun of the parliamentary election and the dismissal of the Central Election Commission chief.

Putin has promised to allow more political competition and to take steps to ensure the transparency of the March 4 presidential election, but so far he has shown no willingness to consider the protesters' demands or to ease his centralized control over the political system.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-protest-organizers-snub-putin-award-ceremony-201634040.html

Russian protest organizers snub Putin award ceremony

By Gleb Bryanski and Alissa de Carbonnel | Reuters – 18 hrs ago

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Several leaders of recent anti-government protests in Moscow snubbed a media award ceremony on Friday with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, whose spokesman said they had missed their chance for dialogue by not turning up.

Putin, who faced the biggest protests of his 12-year rule less than two months before he is expected to return to the Kremlin in presidential polls, angered the opposition by comparing rally participants to chattering monkeys.

Political satirist and poet Dmitry Bykov, journalist Sergei Parkhomenko, author Boris Akunin as well as other prominent opposition journalists also declined invitations to the event.

"I just didn't want to go. I was invited but I didn't want to take part in all of this," Leonid Parfyonov, a prominent television journalist who was voted the most trustworthy of the protest movement's leaders by Russians polled during the December 24 rally, told Reuters.

"I don't think he intended to talk about (the protests). I think he wanted some PR for himself and had no intention to speak to anyone."

Putin recently softened his stance, saying he was ready for dialogue with the opposition but that it lacked a common platform and a leader with whom to hold talks. Putin still looks set to win the March election but his popularity is waning.

Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said protest organizers missed their chance to talk with the prime minister. His press office distributed a list of participants and the reasons given by those not attending, listing many as on vacation.

"Earlier many of them had expressed desire to take their message to Putin. They were given such an opportunity," Peskov said. "They talk loudly about the dialogue but when they are called they do not turn up."

The event was organized at short notice at a time when many Russians are still on holiday. Peskov said invitations were sent out on Monday.

NO BOYCOTT

Dmitry Muratov, editor-in-chief of the opposition Novaya Gazeta newspaper, said the government invitation to the media award ceremony held no mention of an offer for dialogue with the opposition and he simply chose not to attend.

Russian opposition groups plan to hold another demonstration near the Kremlin next month, stepping up pressure on Putin over a controversial election win by his United Russia party. Over 16,300 people have signed up to go on Facebook.

The event, at which Putin handed an award for bravery to a reporter left handicapped by a severe beating while campaigning to save a suburban forest in Khimki, appeared to be the latest in recent government moves to appease its critics.

Mikhail Beketov was nominated for the award by Novaya Gazeta for his reporting in a battle to stop construction of a $1 billion road that cuts through the forest in a suburb of Moscow.

He lost three fingers, part of his lower leg and still has difficulty speaking after being savagely beaten by unidentified attackers in 2008.

NO AWARD WILL BRING BACK HIS HEALTH

At the ceremony Putin hugged a frail and scarred Beketov, who was loudly applauded as he walked up with the use of a crutch to receive the $32,000 award, and promised to speed up an investigation to find those responsible for his beating.

The state-backed road construction project is being carried out by the world's largest construction company Vinci in partnership with a Russian firm in which Putin's former judo partner Arkady Rotenberg has a stake.

Russian environmentalists say local officials with commercial interests linked to the road construction project are behind the attack -- charges denied by local officials.

"I cannot call Putin's behavior anything other than hypocrisy," environmentalist and opposition activist Yevgeniya Chirikova, who has worked closely with Beketov, told Reuters.

"No awards will bring back his health."

Several high profile journalists and Putin critics such as Novaya Gazeta reporter Anna Politkovskaya have been murdered during Putin's rule. Others such as Kommersant daily reporter Oleg Kashin were severely beaten.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Y'all ned to study Texas history. It was part of Spain, France, Spain again, then Mexico. Texas declared its independence March 6 1836 and won its war for independence with Mexico on April 21, 1836. It was an independent country for 9 years. It was annexed by the US in return for giving nearly half its territory to the US for other states. Texas icurred huge debt in it swar with Mexico and the US picked up the debt in return for the territory. New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma and Kansas all contain parts of what was Texas. The name "republic" is no more meaningful than the several states that retain the name "commonwealth"

the US subsequently fought a war with Mexico AFTER Texas was annexed. It can be said that after that war Mexico gave up its claim to Texas, which it had never really done before that. While the US recognized Texas as an independent country, Mexico did not. It woul ddepend on whose claim you believe whether or not Texas was "won from Mexico" in the Mexican War.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Davey Crockett

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Davey Crockett

A hero of the Alamo!

[SMR 368]

Y'all ned to study Texas history. It was part of Spain, France, Spain again, then Mexico. Texas declared its independence March 6 1836 and won its war for independence with Mexico on April 21, 1836. It was an independent country for 9 years. It was annexed by the US in return for giving nearly half its territory to the US for other states. Texas icurred huge debt in it swar with Mexico and the US picked up the debt in return for the territory. New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma and Kansas all contain parts of what was Texas. The name "republic" is no more meaningful than the several states that retain the name "commonwealth"

the US subsequently fought a war with Mexico AFTER Texas was annexed. It can be said that after that war Mexico gave up its claim to Texas, which it had never really done before that. While the US recognized Texas as an independent country, Mexico did not. It woul ddepend on whose claim you believe whether or not Texas was "won from Mexico" in the Mexican War.

Thanks for the details. But in general, you've demonstrated my point. There were various different opinions about what belonged to whom and wars were fought over said disagreements. In the end, might made right and everybody stopped worrying about it. That's the process by which land changes hands. There are exceptions, of course, but they are typically even less cut and dry,

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Thanks for the details. But in general, you've demonstrated my point. There were various different opinions about what belonged to whom and wars were fought over said disagreements. In the end, might made right and everybody stopped worrying about it. That's the process by which land changes hands. There are exceptions, of course, but they are typically even less cut and dry,

Then there is the other thing they taught us in Texas...The US recognizes Texas was once an independent country, even though the country it was independent OF, Mexico, did not recognize it. The US teacxhes children that Texas was an independent country.

YET...can you imagine...

The US does NOT teach that the Confederate States of America was an independent country even though it was recognized as such by more countries than the Republic of Texas.

Hence our children's education is twisted into believing we ever had a "Civil War" (two or more factions struggling over control of a country) when we never have had a "civil war". The Confederacy had no intent of controlling the United States at any time, it was also a separate country, making a "civil war" impossible.

Spain had a civil war, Russia had a civil war, England had a civil war. We had a "War Between the States" or as my mother calls it (bless her Democrat heart) "the War of Yankee Aggression"

AT LEAST they do offer the "War Between the States" as an accepted answer on the citizenship test!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I guess all that means is that the winners get to write history.

Our children, and new immigrants, are taught that "Lincoln freed the slaves" and that the slaves were freed "by the emancipation proclamation". Nonsense.

the Emancipation Proclamation was announced by the President of a different country and did not apply to even the slaves still in the US but only to "States in open rebellion" The slaves in Missouri, Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, who never seceeded from the union, were kept in bondage.

The Emancipation Proclamation was fabricated to hold the Union together as they were decidely falling apart around Lincoln's ears.

The slaves were freed by Constitutional Amendment 2 months after Lincoln was dead. June 19, 1865 is celebrated in Texas and other former Confederate States as the day slavery was ended and is referred to as "Juneteenth".

Edited January 15, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[visaveteran1 33]

A hero of the Alamo!

I don't think we'll ever know the real story of the Alamo. Some stories have Davey going down fighting. Other stories say he was executed by the Mexicans.

Whatever happened with Texas and Mexico, the Mexicans brought on themselves. They used to promote Americans coming to Texas and required them to pay taxes and pay for the land too. THe Mexicans started getting greedy and screwing with the settlers. Bad idea.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I don't think we'll ever know the real story of the Alamo. Some stories have Davey going down fighting. Other stories say he was executed by the Mexicans.

Whatever happened with Texas and Mexico, the Mexicans brought on themselves. They used to promote Americans coming to Texas and required them to pay taxes and pay for the land too. THe Mexicans started getting greedy and screwing with the settlers. Bad idea.

Very true.

The Texicans (Texians) originally wanted only to return to the 1824 constitution and they would have been pleased to remain Mexican citizens. After being enticed and subsidized to move there Santa Anna changed the deal and pissed everyone off. He then, just like the British decided these upstart colonists had no need to own firearms and demanded they be surrendered. The Texians replied "Come and Take Them" and siezed the Alamo from the Mexican Army in November 1835 and held it until March 1836. The siege on the Alamo caused the Texicans to decide they could not deal with Santa Anna and declared independence during the Alamo battle.

But yes, Sanata Anna poked that beehive until the bees got angry and let him have it!

Because ALL or nearly all the people at the Alamo were killed, there is little in truly accurate information of what happened to whom. Exactly anyway.

We do know that the defenders were offered the opportunity to leave and they did not, they were volunteers. We also know that they had been promised DEATH if they remained and we know that Santa Anna had the wherewithall to kill them all eventually, and so did they.

So there is no question that the men did a brave thing and served to delay the Mexican army so Sam Houston could assemble more men to fight them (and eventually win)

We also know that men like Crockett were not native Texicans or even settlers, they were men that came because they saw an injustice taking place, and maybe they were a bit of a rabble and troublemakers also, but for good causes. So whether he went down fighting or was executed afterwards is a moot point in my book.

Not many men left like that anymore, not even in Texas.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Not many men left like that anymore, not even in Texas.

Didn't Crockett and his militia all come out of Tennessee?

[visaveteran1 33]

So there is no question that the men did a brave thing and served to delay the Mexican army so Sam Houston could assemble more men to fight them (and eventually win)

Not many men left like that anymore, not even in Texas.

Agreed. Brave men with honor and willing to walk the talk...even unto death.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Didn't Crockett and his militia all come out of Tennessee?

Yes, they represented 35 of the 185 men there. Which in no way belittles what they did and no one ever claims otherwise. The shrine at the Alamo in fact displays a flag for the home state/country of each man that died and there are a whole bunch of flags!

There is a county in Texas named for each man that died there regardless of where he was "from" he died a Texican.

Edited January 16, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[slim 1,523]

Resistance to tyranny no matter where it's encountered. Those were true patriots!