Russia Won The Battle For The Holy Land At The Crimean War
By Mikhail Yakushev
The international conference devoted to the Crimean War 1854 - 1855 was held in Moscow on November 7-8, 2006. Initiated by the Center of Russia's National Glory, #1 it was attended by representatives of the state, society and the Church.
The lessons of the Eastern War for today's Russia, the reasons for which the Soviet scholarship ignored its religious factor in studying it, the importance of working out an objective view of this theme in school and university curricula and a possibility for the new view of the Eastern War to fortify the Russian positions on international arena - all this is treated by Mikhail Yakushev, an orientalist and vice-president of the Center of Russia's National Glory, in an interview to Interfax-Religion. #2
MALAKHOV KURGAN The Glorious Defence of Sebastopol in 1854 - 1855 A fragment of the famous panorama painted in 1905 by Franz Roubeau
MALAKHOV KURGAN The Glorious Defence of Sebastopol in 1854 - 1855 A fragment of the famous panorama painted in 1905 by Franz Roubeau
- Could you tell us about the aims of the forthcoming international conference on "The Crimean (Eastern) War in the Cultural Memory of Peoples in Russia and the World"?
- The conference was in preparation for over half a year by an expert group of scholars, historians and publicists set up by at the Center of National Glory (CNG) and St. Andrew the-First-Called Foundation (AFCF). It will be the culmination of our program called "The Crimean War", which was launched by the two foundations three years ago and planned to coincide with the 150th anniversary of the Crimean War. It is aimed to attract the attention of the Russian public who have recently celebrated the Day of People's Unity to the event which was both tragic and significant in the history of our country. It would not be an exaggeration to describe this war as "unknown" to today's Russia, since the whole truth about it was not revealed either in the tsarist time or in the Soviet period of the Russian state. The underlying reason and preconditions of that war were known only to a limited circle in the palace, while dispatches from the Russian diplomatic mission in Constantinople, where the interests of the Ottoman, Russian and British empires collided, "settled to the bottom" of the secret Chief Political Archives of the Russian Foreign Ministry to become inaccessible even for the ministry's executives. Immediately after the war, Emperor Alexander II instructed the new head of the foreign office, A.M.Gorchakov, to ensure that a book be published in the West setting forth Russia's objective position in the past war. This task had to be undertaken by Baron A.Jomini, a Frenchman by origin. However, the author of A Diplomatic Essay on the 1852-1856 Crimean War did not have enough time to find documents necessary for his work in the foreign office archives. As a result, the book, which came out in 1974 in French, could not influence the already established opinion about the ‘aggressive’ and "pushing" role of Russia in unleashing the Crimean War.
A cannon of Sebastopol Serving today as a monument to the glorious battles
THE FOURTH BASTION A cannon of the Heroical Sebastopol Serving today as a monument to the glorious battles
The prime cause of the Crimean War was the problem of the Holy Places in the Palestine. The Soviet scholarship omitted this factor for ideological reasons. Soviet Academician Yevgeny Tarle maintained that the problem of holy places was secondary and irrelevant in the entire tangle of international issues that led to the outbreak of the Crimean (Eastern) War. It is difficult to agree with that. It was not accidental indeed that the Orthodox Arab East called this three-years-long military campaign "a war for the Palestinian Holy Places". After all, in that "Greek-Latin dispute" around the Holy Places, Petersburg stood for maintaining the status quo in Christian places of veneration, where it was the Jerusalem Orthodox clergy who had the privilege to own and preserve them. Russia, just as France, traditionally patronized Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. When the Ottoman sultan, in his letter to the Russian emperor, pledged to protect the rights and privileges of his Orthodox subjects in their dispute with the Catholics and then failed to keep his word, Petersburg put into action all the set of diplomatic and military means to make Porte keep its promise. In that war, however, Russia did not seek any territorial gains. Her role was to protect the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the "Mother of all Churches". Western diplomacy did all it could to present Russia as initiator of the war and the sultan as a ‘victim’ of the aggressive tsarist policy, while appearing before the world public opinion as the saver of "the Sick Man", that is the Ottoman Empire, from its northern neighbour, that is Russia.
Unfortunately, in the Western historiography, just as in the Soviet scholarship, the problem of the Holy Places did not become a subject for an objective and honest study. Actually, nobody studied it in any serious way. Nevertheless, if this knot of contradictions and problems in relation to the Holy Place is patiently untangled, it will be clear who was the real initiator of the conflict in Jerusalem, Constantinople and Europe. Our task is to cleanse the Crimean War`s history of myths and stereotypes created for political and ideological reasons. Western historiography does not like to dilate on the fact that it was England, France and Sardinia who were the first to declare war on Russia. The interventionists' aim was to involve the tsar into the war, aware that he would not refuse protection to the Orthodox Christians, and then to accuse him of aggression against the sultan and to "come to the padishah's aid". It was their warships that shelled the Russian villages of Chapoma and Umba, the Russian cities of Odessa, Sevastopol, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and the Orthodox holy places such as the Solovki Monastery. They looted abandoned churches only to return the loot in the modern time in an attempt to whitewash their militant ancestors. Let us remember that only recently Pope John Paul II apologized to the Orthodox Greeks and Arabs for the crusades his predecessors led to the Holy Land. We should not forget that Old Russia also suffered from them in the 13th century early 40s and that, thanks to the courage and wisdom of the Orthodox Prince Alexander Nevsky and the heroism of the home guard he summoned, the Teutonic Knights were driven away from our land, just as the Saracens had driven them away from the Palestine not long before that.
Admiral Pavel Stepanovich Nakhimov (1802 - 1855) He was killed in action on a cannon firing position in Sebastopol
It is noteworthy that in 1854 France in the person of Cardinal Sibour, Archbishop of Paris, qualified the Crimean War as religious and even as a ‘crusade’ against Russia and the Eastern Orthodoxy in the Holy Land, waged under the banner of Islam at that. If we compare this conflict to the 11th-13th century crusades to the Holy Land in general, we will see that they have many things in common. In this sense, those campaigns were little different from the Crimean War as the instruments were the same - lies and slander presented as truth. Blessed by archpastors, the thieves’ campaigns were declared to be heroic feats. The information and propaganda machine was activated to brainwash the public who enthusiastically supported the idea of a crusade to the Holy Land "for the salvation of the Lord’s Sepulcher from the Saracens". The same happened in case of the Crimean War. A similar scenario was used in former Yugoslavia, in Afghanistan and Iraq. And take the wave of Orange Revolutions in the post-Soviet space. Aren’t the crusade features discernable in them?
While for the West the Crimean War or the "crusade" against Russia is a page it wants to turn over as quickly as possible, we should read it as carefully as possible.
- Did Russia achieve the goals she set herself in the Crimean War?
- In other words, you would like to ask whether Russia won or lost that war. The results of the Eastern (Crimean) War are complex and far from unambiguous - the fact sealed in the very structure of the Paris Peace Treaty. To view them out of their totality, ideologically, suppressing or belittling some while exaggerating others is both scientifically wrong and historically unfair, at least with regard to Russia and our ancestors.
In spite of the popular opinion that Russia was officially the defeated party, nowhere in the documents will you find the phrase that "Russia lost the war", neither in the Paris Peace Treaty of March 1856, or in Alexander II's Manifest of March 31, 1856. This document states that Russia ‘ended the war’. Let us read carefully the text of the imperial manifest. It states, "The stubborn bloody struggle that has troubled Europe for almost three years is drawing to an end. It was not instigated by Russia, and before its very beginning, our unforgettable Father, who has passed away and rests in peace, solemnly declared to all His faithful subjects and to all foreign Powers that the only aim of His bids and wishes was to safeguard the rights and to remove the oppression of our Orthodox brothers in the East... The future destiny and the rights of all the Christians in the East have been secured. The sultan has solemnly recognized them, and in consequences of this action of justice, the Ottoman Empire enters into the common union of European States. Russians! Your efforts and sacrifices have not been in vain. The great task has been accomplished, though in other, unforeseen ways..."
If we recognize this complex approach as the outcome of the Eastern (Crimean) War, then we will see that, from the point of view of achieving the goals which Russia set herself in that war and for which she entered into that war - not of her own will but because she was forced to do it by the provocative policy of other European powers - namely, for the goal of preserving and asserting for good the status quo of the holy places in Palestine, Russia actually won that war for the Christian Holy Places! It was not accidental that French Ambassador Bourquenais, having read the provision of the peace treaty, exclaimed, "It is not clear who won and who lost this war". Later this statement was paraphrased to say, "The looser did not lose and the winner did not win".
On the other hand, it should be admitted that politically and militarily that "victorious" war was unsuccessful for Russia. Miscalculations and failures haunted Russia in the field of intelligence and diplomacy, in the struggle for European public opinion before the war. She had an unreformed economy, no railways in strategic directions and no telegraph. The army and navy were backward militarily and technologically; rifled arms were a rarity in the Russian army. Due to all this Russia suffered enormous casualties, and disasters befell her army, admittedly only in the battleground of the Crimea and Sevastopol.
Nevertheless, at the end of the hostilities when Emperor Napoleon III saw that British losses were a lot fewer then those of France, he decided to enter into backstage negotiations with representatives of the recently enthroned Emperor Alexander II to end the war on reciprocal principles. He was also prompted to do that by the military successes of the Russian army during the capture of Kars when this besieged mighty fortress with an Ottoman garrison under the command of Wasif-pasha and British General Williams surrendered to the Russian army. General Muravyov "of Kars", in appreciation of their courageous resistance, allowed the surrendering officers to keep their swords and set free the Turks, the British and even the Poles and Hungarians. To punish the chairman of the Kars Majlis for his indifference towards his own wounded Ottoman soldiers in hospital, General Muravyov ordered the pasha to stay in hospital bed for a week together with his wounded countrymen. The victory at Kars reinforced to a considerable degree the position of Russian diplomats at the peace negotiation in Paris.
Time has defined the role and real historical significance of various aspects of the outcome of that war. Everyone can make his own evaluation. Noteworthy in this respect was the rhetorical question that the French General Consul in Jerusalem, M. Ledou, asked Jerusalem Governor Reshad-pasha in 1889, "What did we wage the Crimean War for if not to acquire rights over the Jerusalem Holy Places?" I would like to stress that the negative military and political results of that war were neutralized by Russia 15 years later, by 1871, while its spiritual and religious results have kept for 150 years and continue to this day. Admittedly, the role that Russia played in the problem of the Holy Places and the price she paid in ‘the war for the Holy Places of Palestine’ is something that they in the Holy Land do not want to remember for some reason.
It is no less important that historical lessons should be drawn from the past so that mistakes may not be repeated. As is well known, Russia repeatedly protected other countries and nations against external threats on the international arena. In doing so, she would suffer enormous human and material losses. This was the case in the Crimean War and this was the case in World War I and World War II. When blood had to be shed, the external world did not hesitate to turn to Russia for help. Having secured the help, it paid back with cold ingratitude. Another important lesson of history is that we should have realized long ago that the most precious thing that our country has is its unique multinational people and its state unique in size and natural resources, and without a stable and energetic population growth this state can become an object for new "crusades".
#3 Here is an interesting excerpt from the book Russia, by Donald Mackenzie Wallace:
"Prince Gortchakof's saying, 'La Russie ne boude pas, elle se recueille', was more than a diplomatic repartee – it was a true and graphic statement of the case. Though the Russians are very inflammable, and can be very violent when their patriotic feelings are aroused, they are, individually and as a nation, singularly free from rancour and the spirit of revenge. After the termination of hostilities they really bore little malice towards the Western Powers, except towards Austria, which was believed to have been treacherous and ungrateful to the country that had saved her in 1849. Their patriotism now took the form, not of revenge, but of a desire to raise their country to the level of the Western nations. If they thought of military matters at all, they assumed that military power would be obtained as a natural and inevitable result of high civilisation and good government."
Original source:
http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/russian/Russia/chap41.html
Only one with a heart of stone
can fail to be moved by this video
Friends, I must admit that despite being myself
quite a hardy, tough, and experienced man, as I am
nevertheless
I could not hold back my bitter tears
when I was watching this
extremely heartbreaking video
Click on the picture to watch it yourself
No true Christian can ever watch this video
without tears in the eyes!
Now, you will have to realize
why we Russians love and esteem Stalin:
This is because
Stalin denied the Soviet children
the "freedom" to be homeless and marooned
He denied all of us the dubious "freedom"
to starve and perish in the street
as in America
IN THE SOVIET UNION
NOBODY HAD THE DUBIOUS "RIGHT"
EITHER TO BE HOMELESS, OR UNEMPLOYED
OR TO LIVE AND DIE IN THE STREET
HELPLESS AND ABANDONED
AS IN AMERICA
ALL OF US THE SOVIET PEOPLE
WERE DENIED SUCH WESTERN "HUMAN RIGHTS"
BY THE STALIN'S REGIME
In this regard I suggest that
you should have a look at the shrewd observations
by an American expat now living in Russia:
click HERE
IS THE WEST HELL?
NO, IT IS NOT HELL
THE WEST IS
TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE HADES
THE WEST IS
A REALM OF FEAR AND LOATHING
The West's Fundamental Slogan
has been this:
HOMO HOMINI LUPUS EST
Which means:
Man is a wolf to man
In contrast to the West's inhumane slogan
our Russian motto has always been this:
Человек
человеку
друг,
товарищ
и
брат
HOMO HOMINI AMICUS, SOCIUS ET FRATER EST
Which means:
Man is a Friend, Comrade and Brother to Man
This great Christian idea
has been a fundamental one for all of us
living both in modern Russia and in the Soviet Union
despite all the official communist anti-religious stance
because this great idea has been always based upon
the ingrained Russian sense of the Divine Justice
which moreover had happily conformed
to Stalin's own views on patriotism
Inasmuch as the former Soviet Union
used to serve formerly as a permanent open rebuke
to the Western inhumane godless way of life
so today's Russia continues to serve
as the same rebuke to the West
at the present time
And this is the only true reason
why our beloved great country Holy Russia
has been vilified, defamed, reviled and hated so much
by the West's ruling class
as well as by the mass media under their control
No wonder!
Freedom of Speech conquerred Freedom of Thought
Once a year, and even more often, the tragedy happens in America: the schooler buys weapon, goes to school and shoots at whom he meets. Why such things are accidental in Russia, China or Europe?
The Human Rights Disaster in the United States of America
An excerpt from the
REPORT
Each year, 30,000 people die in gun-related incidents in the USA.
There were 14,180 murders in 2008.
In the first ten months of 2009, 45 people were killed by police use of tasers, bringing the total for the decade to 389.
In 2008, 315 police officers in New York City were subject to internal supervision due to "unrestrained use of violence."
7.3 million Americans were under the authority of the correctional system, more than in any other country.
An estimated 60,000 prisoners were raped while in custody last year.
On democratic rights, the report notes the pervasive government spying on citizens, authorized under the 2001 Patriot Act, extensive surveillance of the Internet by the National Security Agency, and police harassment of anti-globalization demonstrators in Pittsburgh during 2008 G-20 summit. Pointing to the hypocrisy of US government "human rights" rhetoric, the authors observe,
"the same conduct in other countries would be called human rights violations, whereas in the United States it was called necessary crime control."
It does offer a few facts rarely discussed in the US media:
712 bodies were cremated at public expense in the city of Los Angeles last year, because the families were too poor to pay for a burial.
There were 5,657 workplace deaths recorded in 2007, the last year for which a tally is available, a rate of 17 deaths per day (not a single employer was criminally charged for any of these deaths).
Some 2,266 veterans died as a consequence of lack of health insurance in 2008, 14 times the military death toll in Afghanistan that year.
All this said, I do by no means wish, however,
that my readers could come to a wrong conclusion
that we Russians might have ever hated Americans
No, not at the least!
The following website will show you
WHICH AMERICA WE RUSSIANS LOVE
Click on the picture to have a look at
a huge collection of fascinating portraits of
the Americans in San Francisco, San Jose,
Carmel, Monterey, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz
and other places of the United States
THIS IS JUST THE AMERICA
WE RUSSIANS DO ALWAYS LOVE
It is worth being noticed here also that even in the height of the so-called Cold War, in the mid-1960s we used to consider America as a friendly country.
Why "the so-called"?
Because we Russian chidren had never been taught to regard the Americans as enemies. Hence we did never think about whatever "Cold War" at all.
Nor we Russians had ever had such moronism as the "Duck and Cover" idiotic drills like the American children had to have at the time.
On the contrary, we Russians never feared anything, which is why during the so-called Cold War in our cinemas we enjoyed watching good American movies that were perfectly dubbed into the Russian language, without any subtitles. I can recall how we Russian boys in the 1960s went to watch The Magnificent Seven film scores of times on end (sic!), over and over again, because the tickets in the USSR were incredibly cheap and the American movie was brilliant, most impressive and absolutely exciting.
I do remember by heart almost all of the dialogues from the famous movie The Magnificent Seven even to the present day, despite the fact that it is almost fifty years that have already lapsed since those blessed times of our youth. Of course we knew well that the famous Hollywood actor Yul Brynner was of the Russian descent, and we Russian boys were then very proud of the fact.
You can watch a short (3 min) trailer from the famous American movie
THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN
by clicking on the picture
Russian armored column is rushing to stop the genocide in South Ossetia
SAVED!
A South Ossetian military man holds a child as he looks at
an armored Russian column arrived to save them from Georgian assault
A PATH TO PEACE IN THE CAUCASUS
By Mikhail Gorbachev, 12 August 2008 The Washington Post
MOSCOW - The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.
The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force – both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar – it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.
Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.
Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.
The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.
What happened on the night of 7th August 2008 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.
Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.
In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.
Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims – the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend - and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus – a region that should be approached with the greatest care.
When the problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia first flared up, I proposed that they be settled through a federation that would grant broad autonomy to the two republics. This idea was dismissed, particularly by the Georgians. Attitudes gradually shifted, but after last week, it will be much more difficult to strike a deal even on such a basis.
Old grievances are a heavy burden. Healing is a long process that requires patience and dialogue, with non-use of force an indispensable precondition. It took decades to bring to an end similar conflicts in Europe and elsewhere, and other long-standing issues are still smoldering. In addition to patience, this situation requires wisdom.
Small nations of the Caucasus do have a history of living together. It has been demonstrated that a lasting peace is possible, that tolerance and cooperation can create conditions for normal life and development. Nothing is more important than that.
The region's political leaders need to realize this. Instead of flexing military muscle, they should devote their efforts to building the groundwork for durable peace.
Over the past few days, some Western nations have taken positions, particularly in the U.N. Security Council, that have been far from balanced. As a result, the Security Council was not able to act effectively from the very start of this conflict. By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.
The international community's long-term aim could be to create a sub-regional system of security and cooperation that would make any provocation, and the very possibility of crises such as this one, impossible. Building this type of system would be challenging and could only be accomplished with the cooperation of the region's countries themselves. Nations outside the region could perhaps help, too – but only if they take a fair and objective stance. A lesson from recent events is that geopolitical games are dangerous anywhere, not just in the Caucasus.
The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank.
RUSSIAN BEAR WILL GROWL THEN BITE DEADLY – IF PROVOKED
Well what did else the West expect? Any self-respecting bear will growl first as a sign to ward of attackers, then pounce and maul them if provoked sufficiently.
Remember the dire fate of Napoleon, Hitler, and all the other bloody murderous scum who dared to insult Holy Russia.
The Russian Bear is confident and proud and looking more for respect in international affairs rather than a fight. But we Russians are always ready to make mincemeat of any aggressor.
With 4,237 strategic Russian warheads, approximately 2,000-3,000 operational tactical warheads, and approximately 8,000-10,000 stockpiled strategic and tactical warheads Holy Russia is being remarkably well equipped to defend herself and her allies.
RUSSIA IS A SUPERPOWER – WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!
Some say we are five minutes to a new Cold War
This is a false assertion
In fact, with the NATO Navy entering the Black Sea
"Washington and its NATO allies launched two of the three
major wars in the world over the past eleven years
in March – against Yugoslavia in 1999
and against Iraq in 2003.
The war drums are being pounded anew
and the world may be headed for a catastrophe
far worse than those in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq."
ARE YOU READY FOR NUCLEAR WAR?
The Mindlessness is Total
By Paul Craig Roberts, August 19 2008
Nothing real issues from the American press, which is about demonizing Russia and Iran, about the vice presidential choices as if it matters, about whether Obama being on vacation let McCain score too many points.
The mindlessness of the news reflects the mindlessness of the government, for which it is a spokesperson.
The American media do not serve American democracy or American interests. They serve the few people who exercise power.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US and Israel made a run at controlling Russia and the former constituent parts of its empire. For awhile the US and Israel succeeded, but Putin put a stop to it.
Recognizing that the US had no intention of keeping any of the agreements it had made with Gorbachev, Putin directed the Russian military budget to upgrading the Russian nuclear deterrent. Consequently, the Russian army and air force lack the smart weapons and electronics of the US military.
When the Russian army went into Georgia to rescue the Russians in South Ossetia from the destruction being inflicted upon them by the American puppet Saakashvili, the Russians made it clear that if they were opposed by American troops with smart weapons, they would deal with the threat with tactical nuclear weapons.
The Americans were the first to announce preemptive nuclear attack as their permissible war doctrine. Now the Russians have announced the tactical use of nuclear weapons as their response to American smart weapons.
It is obvious that American foreign policy, with its goal of ringing Russia with US military bases, is leading directly to nuclear war. Every American needs to realize this fact. The US government’s insane hegemonic foreign policy is a direct threat to life on the planet.
Russia has made no threats against America. The post-Soviet Russian government has sought to cooperate with the US and Europe. Russia has made it clear over and over that it is prepared to obey international law and treaties. It is the Americans who have thrown international law and treaties into the trash can, not the Russians.
In order to keep the billions of dollars in profits flowing to its contributors in the US military-security complex, the Bush Regime has rekindled the cold war. As American living standards decline and the prospects for university graduates deteriorate, "our" leaders in Washington commit us to a hundred years of war.
If you desire to be poor, oppressed, and eventually vaporized in a nuclear war, vote Republican.
This is the final part of an article by P. C. Roberts.
Warning
This video contains images depicting the reality and horror
of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience
with their nerves of steel
Massacre Caught on Tape: US Military Confirms Authenticity of Their Own Chilling Video Showing Killing of Journalists
One of the men on the ground, believed to be Chmagh, is seen wounded and trying to crawl to safety. One of the helicopter crew is heard wishing for the man to reach for a gun, even though there is none visible nearby, so he has the pretext for opening fire: "All you gotta do is pick up a weapon." A van draws up next to the wounded man and Iraqis climb out. They are unarmed and start to carry the victim to the vehicle in what would appear to be an attempt to get him to hospital. One of the helicopters opens fire with armour-piercing shells. "Look at that. Right through the windshield," says one of the crew. Another responds with a laugh.
Sitting behind the windscreen were two children who were wounded.
† LINKS
†
#1
#1
