Connect with us

RussiaFeed

News

Bloody Monday: Grandnephew of GULAG organizer stabbed Moscow radio station editor

The attacker was a grandnephew of an inventor and first commissar of the death camps in Russia.

Published

on

0 Views

(The Saker) – On November 23, 2002, fifty armed jihadi terrorists, or “freedom fighters” as they were called by the West, seized the Dubrovka Theater in Moscow taking 850 hostages. The liberal radio station Echo of Moscow immediately declared this to be Putin’s government fault, the government couldn’t be trusted, and unless it guaranteed safety to all of Russia’s citizens, Putin should resign.

The mastermind behind the attack was arrested in 2014, when he tried to get to Crimea from the territory of Ukraine.

Fifteen years later, on Monday October 23, 2017, a man entered a high-rise building in center Moscow, pepper sprayed the security guard on duty, got into an elevator, stopped on the 14th floor occupied by the radio Echo of Moscow offices, entered the offices of Tanya Fengelgauer, the Deputy Chief Editor, stabbed her, and ran away.

Before I proceed telling you what happened next, I want to give you an illustration of a simple formula which has been used in multiple black anti-government psy ops known as “color revolutions” during the last hundred years.

A new documentary Revolution: a trap for Russia made by the Culture Foundation of Russia reveals details of one of those psy ops.

My translation is from minute 19 to 35 of the video.

“At the Paris Inter revolutionary parties Conference in September 1904, Lenin, who found out about the Japanese government financing this conference, preferred not to attend. His choice was to work with the Europeans. At this conference sponsored with Japanese money, came together the leaders of the entire anti-government opposition: from separatists of Georgia, Finland and Poland, to the Liberals. The Russian liberals were also attending with Struve, as their leader. They supported the course of the armed uprising, which surprised the Colonel Akashi.

Pavel Milyukov, professor of history, future leader of the Constitutional Democratic or the CaDet party, one of the most active participants of the February Revolution in 1917.

Peter (or Pyotr or Petr) Berngardovich Struve, a Marxist, who lived in Germany and published a revolutionary magazine Liberation (Osvobojdenie), one of the organizer and ideologists of R.S.D.R.P. or Russian Social Democratic Labour Party.

“Milyukov wasn’t a revolutionary, per se. He was a liberal who influenced and had contacts with an American millionaire Charles Richard Crane, one of the founders of the Chicago University. “Milyukov fundraised some sum of money from him.

Charles Richard Crane was a rich industrialist, a founder of the Slavic Center of the Chicago University, a shadow political activist who took part in Russian Revolution.

From the classified report of the Colonel Akashi: 

“The Conference decided that each party will use their own methods of fighting: the Liberals will fight through the local government and media, the revolutionary parties will use “emergency measures”, the representatives of Caucasus will organize murders, Polls – demonstrations.”

The Liberals’ job was to critique Russia’s government for its cruelty, and to use the acts of violence, real and fake, as facts of the state’s failure and the country being in “ruins.”

At the Paris Conference adopted a resolution about the toppling of the monarchy and division of Russia on ethnic autonomies. A possible defeat in the war with Japan was considered to be a desired outcome for future advancement of the revolution.

By that time Lenin broke up with the Menshevik (minority) party. He was expelled from the editorial team of the Iskra newspaper, and was almost expelled from the Central Apparatus of R.S.D.R.P.

There were two leaders at that time, Lenin and Plekhanoff.

The Japanese didn’t like Plekhanoff, and instead chose Lenin and gave him money to publish the gazette Vpered (Forward).

In its first issue on December 22, 1904, Lenin made a prediction:

“Military defeat is unavoidable, and it will increase dissatisfaction with the government by ten times. At this moment, the proletariat will rise at the head of the uprising.”

Only 18 days remained until “Bloody Sunday.”

From the classified report to the General Shtab of Japan from the Colonel Akashi:

“In November-December a decision was made to stage multiple demonstrations in Russia.”

The beginning of the first Russian revolution we should count not from the January 9, 1905, but from the fall 1904, when the plan of this revolution was developed and adopted and the work started including the stimulation of Gapon’s activity.

Georgy Apollonovich Gapon was an Orthodox priest and a talented man who could influence large audiences and who felt at ease in the Police headquarters, at high society gatherings, and in workmen’s groups. During his childhood he read a story of Joan of Belgorod’s flight to Jerusalem on a back of the Satan. In his memoirs he wrote:

“First I cried in fear, because Satan was frightening, but on the other hand I wanted to saddle the satan and to fly to Jerusalem like Joan of Belgorod.”

In 1903, Gapon founded the Assembly of Russian Factory and Plant Workers at the Putilov plant, the largest Petersburg industry.

When we look carefully at the events, we can see that this sort of “satan” was present there. He worked on the Putilov manufacturing plant. Nothing was accidental there. Everything was well planned. Peter or Pinhas Rutenberg, was a member of the Social-Revolution party or the S.R. party, an activist of the revolution of 1905-1907. He graduated from the St. Petersburg Technological Institute, and until February 1917 he lived in Europa and America. After the revolution of 1917, he was a deputy head of Petrograd. Later he created an electric company, which still exists in Israel.

At the end of 1904, an ordinary event took place: three workers were fired from the Putilovsky plant. All three of them were members of the Gapon’s organization of manufacturing workers. He demanded them to be put back on the payroll. The director didn’t want to take them back because they missed too many work days.

The Putilovsky plant was a defense contractor and produced weapons and military hardware. During the war with Japan, government banned all the protests and job walkouts. That’s why when in January 1905 the Putilovsky plant stopped its work, it was seen as the crime. The demonstrations and job walkouts of thousands of worker needed lots of money. By that time, percentage wise the proletariat wasn’t that big. They were first-second generation and didn’t form their ideology and their own place in the structure of the Russian society. That’s why it was so easy to influence them ideologically. Especially considering that during the war, economic difficulties were elevated in the country.

When someone shows up and claims that he knows what to do, like the revolutionaries did, the proletariat are easily entrapped by them.

In the night of January 8-9, Gapon locked himself up with Rutenberg and armed fighters from the Esser party. They were working on the last draft of the Petition to the Czar, as if it was from the Putilovsky plant workers.

First economic demands were switched to the radical demands, that were rocking the Russia during this wartime period. They included the demands of separation of the Church and state. At that time, every workman and every peasant were Christians. They didn’t understand the idea of separation of church and state, and if they understood, they would never accepted and supported it.

Since, the demonstration was authorized, the organizers decided to bring the church symbols, and when they were turned down by the local church, the organizers simply forced themselves in and took the icons and other church symbols by force.

Gapon was wearying the civilian clothes, and put on the priest’s garments only inside this church.

Rutenberg kept close to Gapon the entire time.

Gapon called for the Czar to come out and to meet the “Russian people to restore morality.” In other words, the revolutionaries manipulated the images of the “kind czar” and “czar the daddy,” who will bless everyone and give everyone good life without wars, taxes and work.

It was the canning vicious manipulation of the deepest archetypes of the Russian worldview.

[These were people the “revolutionaries” were fleecing.

The history speaks about these people and how easy it was for an international maniacal gang to fool them.

People whom the Russian elite didn’t bother to teach or inform the true nature of the “revolutionary” movement. No matter how much fur and diamonds so called “Russia’s elite” would put on themselves, they still were looked down by their counterparts somewhere in Paris. It goes without saying that Europeans were brought up to see Russians as white Africans. That they managed to flee us Russians twice for more than they ever fleeced Africans and Native Americans speaks volumes about us and we have to come to terms with it, and learn to do better next time. S.H. ]

Despite of the calls for the czar to come out and to meet them, they were armed. That’s why they weren’t allowed to go forwards, and that why they were stopped. The Police did their job and they knew that the crowd was armed. It’s hard to imagine that an armed crowd would be allowed to enter a residence of the head of state.

The organizers of the demonstration directed people to the Winter Palace fully aware that the Czar wasn’t there. He was in Tsarskoye Selo at the time.

Add to this fact that this demonstration wasn’t authorized and it was taken place in the city under declared martial law because of the war. According to this law, no one could approach military unites closer than fifty meters.

The organizers of this demonstration wanted blood, and they got it. It’s hard to establish now, but people could be killed and injured by the troops and also by those armed fighters in the crowd.

The military got order to stop the procession and not to let them to the Palace Square. When they reached the troops, Rutenberg grabbed Gapon and they both fell. That’s how they survived. After that Rutenberg and Gapon went behind a nearest building, where Rutenberg cut Gapon’s hair and beard, which meant that Gapon wasn’t going to continue as a priest and tried to change his appearance. They both took a refuge inside Maxim Gorky’s apartment and started to write proclamations there.

“Brothers, united in blood, we have no Czar.”

They also wrote

“be damn the Czar with all his offspring,”

“people believed in Czar and this faith was destroyed”

“now, this czar has to be destroyed.”

It was a very extremist proclamation. Maxim Gorky wrote this proclamation to the citizens of Russia and to the entire European society.

The same day M. Gorky sent to the New York Times telegraph with the following text:

“The massacre as I saw it. The Russian Revolution has commenced.”

Interesting, that the New York Times published a large article about the demonstration a day before with a big photo of Nicolay II titled “Revolution is at hand in desperate Russia!” [30:34].

New York Times articles in 1905 – 1906 concerning the “Bloody Sunday,” the first attempt of a color revolution, and calls for sanctions against Russia.

Gorky was arrested on the January 9 for writing this proclamation, but due to public outcry around the world about the violation of his human rights, he was released.

The “Bloody Sunday” touched many Americans, and it was used to show the bloody despotism of the Russian monarchy that shoots “unarmed demonstration.”

From the classified report of the Colonel Akashi:

“That the priest was able to lead thousands of workmen, and unite members of different parties, and to stage a demonstration that shook entire Russia, it was far exceeding my expectations.”

Surprisingly, the Liberal Pavel Milyukov being in Chicago knew what was about to happen in Russia. In his interview to an American newspaper:

“In the next two days there will be blood spilled in Russia. It’s impossible to stop the standoff. The revolution is developing.”

The question is was it a lucky guess, or Milyukov knew what was planned?

There was nothing accidental about so called Bloody Sunday. Interesting, that even Lenin sitting in Geneva knew about the Akashi plan. He wrote:

“An uprising has began. The street fights are everywhere. Barricades are rising. Rivers of blood are streaming. The civil war for freedom is burning wider. Moscow, Caucasus and Poland is ready to follow the proletariat of Petersburg.” 

In reality there was no uprising at that time. It will be organized later. It will be staged using the same scenario.

After the staging the demonstration, Gapon went to Switzerland to join Lenin there.

The anti-Russia movement “Free Russia” promote him as a face of the “Russian revolution.” An editor of the “Free Russia” David Soskis or SOSKICE, became the author of the PR campaign around Gapon. Gapon lived in his London apartment, and Soskis authorized and published Gapon biography title “History of my life.” The book was published in English and French.

[A brief biography of David Soskis, including his family and education, and his connections to Maxim Peshkov-Gorky, see a the book of Lev Gunin, Another Holocaust. Based on the book of G. H. PERRIS, RUSSIA IN REVOLUTION, LONDON,CHAPMAN & HALL, LTD., 1905.]

Using Gapon’s name, the Geneva conference was organized. The Liberals weren’t invited, and the conference served to the consolidation of the extremists. The plan of the Geneva Conference was to stage an armed revolt, and after the government foils it to talk about the “horrors of the Russian life.”

The Colonel Akashi wrote to the Marshal Yamagata of Japan:

Geneva conference decided to place the blame for past and future bloodshed on the Russian czar.” [35]

That’s how this staged provocation was created and served as the “Bloody Sunday” to the world public as an excuse for Russophobia, foreign invasions and wars on Russia, revolutions and Russia bashing for the next 100 years.

Gapon was found brutally tortured and killed in April 1906 in Russia. Rutenberg was suspected, but he escaped the Police and left Russia.

One of the leaders of the socialist-revolutionary party B. Savinkov wrote:

“Our brilliant leader Chernov entrusted him (Rutenberg) to be a “shepherd” of the priest, to be able to weave his name into the crown of thorns of glory of our suffering party.”

Latter, Lenin called the 1905 events – “a general rehearsal.”

——–

Now, going back to the stabbing of the Echo of Moscow editor.

Following the stabbing, the liberals in Russia used the Social media to express their outrage with the government of Russia and blaming the government for the “murder of a journalist” Tanya Fengelgauer, a Deputy Chief Editor of the radio Echo of Moscow.

In the long tradition of organized psy ops, five hours prior to the attack an anonymous account posted a picture of Fengelgauer saying

“I liked video of the program “Morning with Sasha Plushev and Tanya Fengelgauer/ Alive.”

They leave these “bread crumbs” for us to find and to be at awe at their omnipotence and omnipresence, just like Milyukov knew two day before the demonstration that it would have victims. Because he and others had planted armed people in the crowd to shoot at the demonstrators.

Other, not injured in the attack, journalists of the Echo of Moscow, made multiple statements that this was the “Kristallnacht” event and compared Russia with Germany at the beginning of 30s and The Soviet Russia in 36-37s.

“It was the attack of the Russian Nazis,” it was “pogrom.”

They claimed.

The body of a journalist was more alive than dead, but liberals rushed each with 2c.

“Will we forgive Putin for Tanechka, or will we betray her, as always?”

they asked each other.

Artem Torchinskiy, who works for the Twitter Anti-corruption Foundation donate.fbk.info  wrote:

“This is an attempt on the life of the public figure, terrorism sponsored by the state.”

He didn’t specify what state was sponsoring terrorism in this case.

An online project zona.media reported:

“The Journalists Labor Union places part of the responsibility for the attack on Fengelgauer on Russia24 channel.”

For your information, the Russia24 broadcasted a TV show “The Sleepers” about the liberal journalists working with the US Embassy and the CIA to destabilize the country.

The plan was simple:

  1. To kill Tanya and to call this the “Bloody Monday”;
  2. To blame in her death the President, the “regime,” the law enforcement and other power structures;
  3. To start a media hysteria;
  4. To call “everyone” on the street on November 7th, to protest the” bloody regime”;
  5. To organize shooting during the demonstration. See the plan illustrated above.
  6. In case the murderer is captured, they prepared his “blog” with notes to show that he was “crazy.”

Judging by the figures participating in the RP, this event was planned to become huge.

Igor Chubais, jumped out of the bushes in Germany with his ready-to-serve petition:

“PETITION!

Another attack. Knife against the freedom! Nightmare on the Echo of Moscow!

A wonderful, fearless anchor woman stabbed by a knife in a throat.

New Stalin terror continues!

Say “No” to presidential election until an investigation is completed.

We demand explanation and guarantees of safety for citizens from the president.

We demand public investigation and harsh punishment of the guilty, starting with those who ordered this attack.

Tanya, get well as soon as possible.

Sign my petition”

———————————————–

Liberal media immediately found who was to blame for the attack. They blamed the state media like RT Russia Today and TASS for an “atmosphere of hatred, including towards those (liberal) journalists, nudging, fingering them.”

Timur Shafir, a Secretary of the Union of Journalists of Russia, called the knife fight between Grits and Felgengauer an “attack on the freedom of speech.”

———————————————————————–

However, something went terribly wrong for them.

The attacker was captured by the Police and apprehended. He was a citizen of Israel Boris Grits, a grandnephew of an inventor and first commissar of the death camps in Russia called GULAG, Naftaly Aronovich Frenkel.

It’s was actually very revealing how after all of them saying something about “Russian Nazis,” “pogroms” and “state sponsored terrorism” they suddenly shut up when the attacker turned out to be a Jew from Israel.

Then an excuse was immediately found. He is mentally ill, they said.

No medical records of Grits mental illness was presented, so far. His so called “Diary” sounds like a typical test-book case of being written by a schizophrenic, so Israel, the Jerusalem University and the University of California, where Grits studied, all have to demonstrate that this man was in psychiatric treatment and on anti-psychotic medications, otherwise, claims of him being that severely mentally ill are without merit.

One of the first order of business for Mossad should be to figure out and to report to the world community, why a citizen of Israel, attacked another citizen of Israel, on the territory of a foreign country.

The media in Russia is very careful not to reveal an identity of the attacker and calls him a “foreigner.” Read the TASS article and see for yourself.

Now on, a “foreigner” will be our code word for a traveling band of Israeli assassins.

——————————

P.S.: Tatiana was actually the most normal in comparison with others.

As reported by her doctors she was transferred from an intensive care unit into a general recovery unit on Tuesday.

She even was able to write a note thanking everyone for their concern.

I wish her speedy recovery, but that might be really hard with the colleagues like she has. They reported her to be in induced coma, lied again for their own benefits.

Another issue, it’s her state of mind. She tweets about how much she wants to die and asks to kill her brutally.

================================================================

The following material was collected by people in a few hours after the attack. People combed through accounts of the liberal journalists, they found a copy of Grits’ ID, his complain to the UN, and his correspondence with the journalists of the Echo of Moscow that revealed his personal connection to some of them.

People knew exactly what to look for and where to look. The amount of material that was collected and shared is huge. This is one of the most brilliant research operations that Russian community has conducted, and this is the reason why this attack was a failure of its organizers. They are not able to use their psy op against us. You won’t see the portraits of Fengelgauer, like they managed to do with a former Russia Liquidation team member Nemtsov. The children of those who fleece us twice won’t be coming out on November 7th with solemn faces of professional con artists, holding some red rags with the name of Fengelgauer written on them.

I am certain that next week they will make another attempt of a life of some liberal. They are expendable, after all.

But today, I congratulate all of us with this victory.

————————————————————————

More details

Turns out, that Boris Grits has been connected to the Echo of Moscow in many real ways, rather than telepathically, as he claims pretending to be “crazy.”

Video released by the Press service of the Moscow Police department on 23 October 2017 as posted by the NEWSru.co.il

https://youtu.be/evG_sDvGdoc

Below is a screenshot of a conversation on twitter between Boris Grits @bgrits68, and a journalist N. Barshevskaya @nbarshevskaya and

Boris Grits: I was giving you a bath in the Black Sea when you were 5 or 6, by the way.

Barshevskaya:

“Hello, Glad to hear from you. Write me a personal message.”

Below she posted a picture of the radio co-owner Venedictov,

“I have a romantic date with @aavstll on Friday night :-)”

His twitter account was created on April 1, a Fool’s Day.

Barshevskaya lives with her family in London, and her father is already went on the Solovyev’s talk show to say that his daughter cut communications with Grits after she realized that he was “crazy.”


Boris Grits had hard time of getting job in Israel after he returned from the US.

He filed a complaint with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights at OHCHR.OR

That’s might explain how he was recruited for this psy op. This also explains why he came to Russia and why he posted a couple of notes in 2015 on his blog that he didn’t maintain. His twitter account had only 6 followers, one of which was  Barshevskaya from the Echo of Moscow.


More news in brief

The “Bloody Monday” the day of attempts on the lives of Poroshenko, Rogozin and the journalist from the Echo of Moscow.

The SBU reported a failed attempt on the life of Petro Poroshenko.

https://twitter.com/nastyar26933289/status/922518840940122112

Also a man shot at the Russian border guards trying to illegally cross the border from Ukraine. He was carrying two handguns with 50 rounds of ammunition, five hand grenades, and also 26 vials with presumably mercury.

Ukrainian man detained after opening fire on Russian border guards

A Ukrainian man was shot and detained after engaging in a firefight with Russian border guards during an attempt to illegally cross into Russian territory, the Federal Security Service (FSB) said. Border guards in Russia’s Kursk Region apprehended a 31-year-old Ukrainian citizen, who resisted arrest and opened fire on them, the FSB said.

“He received a moderate gunshot wound in a firefight,”

it added. The man had a pistol, five grenades and 26 ampules with a substance, believed to be mercury, on him.


Irina Prohorova on the attack on Felgenhauer:

In essence this attack is a disintegration of statehood.”

‘The editor-in-chief of the journal Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, (New Literature Review) Irina Prokhorova, in an interview with Ruposters linked the attack on deputy head of the radio station Ekho Moskvy Tatiana Felgenhauer with increased aggression in Russian society.”

“No detachments of so-called “Christian believers”, or some other “guardians of the Fatherland” who attack, threaten and beat, would not act that frequently if those people were convicted for hooliganism or an attack, for a couple of times. And, since this they are all supported behind the scenes, we see the result spreading around. It’s impossible to put together a piece of meat, once you put it through a meat grinder,”

the journalist noted.

“Such situations, Prokhorov is sure, testifies to the “disintegration of Russian statehood.”

“If grassroots terrorism is encouraged, then any person who thinks of himself as a bearer of some values ​​believes that he has the moral right to beat, kill, smash and insult, then it is rather difficult “to put him back in his place. “But in general there are laws according to which such people should be judged, and they are usually being released, since no corpus delicti is found, or they are given provisional sentences. And thus anarchy begins,”

Prokhorova summed up.


Oleg Kozyrev, a founder and CTO at the RocketBank

“Most likely an attacker was either matildovets (protester of the Matilda movie about Nicolay II) or watched too many of anti-Echo federal propaganda. We will find out, soon.”


Oleg Kashin, the New York Times author, about the authorities initial reaction.

“I want to call bastards those people from the Moscow Police department, who started talking about the personal reasons for this attack.”

People compare this attack with Oleg Kashin’s, who was reported beaten in 2010, he was taken to Israel “for treatment.” In Israel he “accidentally” met with then president Dmitry Medvedev.

This time around no one was whisked away to Israel. The good Russian doctors took care of everyone and no one claimed to be in a coma.


Rustem Adagamov, who fled to Prague following pedophilia probe:

“Judging by the way this animal is pushing some kind if “telepathic connection” during him being questioned by the Police, he is a product of the KiselTV (federal TV channels) that nudges’ people to attack.”


DW in Russian

https://twitter.com/dw_russian/status/922451876427288577

“Russia

The attack on Tatiana Felgenhauer: one known cause

The attack on the radio anchor woman and Deputy chief editor of “Echo of Moscow” Tatiana Felgengauer – one of the consequences of hatred, fomented on TV, I’m sure, the cartoonist Sergei Elkin.”


A psychiatrist claims after watching the video of Boris Grits that he doesn’t demonstrate any of the common psycho-motor traits and speaks like a healthy person who just says memorized text. Plus, he had a knife and pepper spray with him. it means that he was prepared to commit crime. People who experience hallucinations can’t plan in advance.


Blaming the federal TV stations for instilling hatred towards the liberals doesn’t really stick, since the attacker is an Israeli, who never watched the Federal TV channels broadcasted in Russia.


Man stabs anchor in neck at Russian radio station Echo of Moscow

Russian Radio Journalist Is Stabbed, Renewing Fears of Attacks on News Media,

“The attack immediately touched off social media posts suggesting a political motivation, though other possibilities were also discussed.”

“This month, Russian state television singled out Ms. Felgenhauer in a report critical of what it called Echo of Moscow’s role “attempting to form pro-Western positions” in Russian society. The selection of experts and the layout of informational and political material speaks for itself,”

the state TV report said.

That broadcast on Oct. 11, called “Echo of the State Department,” said the station collaborated with foreign-funded nongovernmental organizations and was “carrying out anti-government policies, in essence.”

In Russia, such politically hued screeds on state television often set the tone for future action by prosecutors or proxy organizations, although there was no indication that the assailant who attacked Ms. Felgenhauer belonged to any such group.”


Russian radio journalist stabbed in Moscow, suspect held

“Echo of Moscow is a well-known station that regularly invites Russian political opposition figures and is known for its critical views of the government despite energy giant Gazprom being the majority shareholder.

Russia has a disturbing record of attacks on journalists, with 58 killed since 1992, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Threats made against journalists often go unaddressed and attacks are not investigated.”


 ‘Nobody defends us’: Russian journalists respond to knife attack, by Shaun Walker in Moscow

Reporters decry climate of hatred after Tatyana Felgenhauer is stabbed in neck at Ekho Moskvy radio station.

Monday 23 October 2017 14.24 EDT First published on Monday 23 October 2017 07.36 EDT

“Russian journalists have said an increasingly polarized and violent political climate in the country may have encouraged a knife attack in which a well-known radio host was stabbed in the neck.

“Tatyana Felgenhauer, deputy editor of the Ekho Moskvy radio station, was attacked on Monday lunchtime by a man who broke into the station’s studios in a central Moscow tower block. The intruder sprayed pepper in the face of a ground-floor security guard, before vaulting the barrier and taking the lift up to the Ekho Moskvy studio on the 14th floor.

Alexei Venediktov, the station’s editor-in-chief, said in an interview on Monday evening that doctors had operated on Felgenhauer for more than an hour. She will be in an induced coma overnight, but doctors say there is no immediate threat to her life.

Felgenhauer was conscious after the attack and able to walk, but it soon became clear that her injuries were serious and she was taken to hospital. Police arrived to detain the assailant, who had been tackled by two security guards.”


Russian journalist stabbed in neck after attacker storms radio studio

“An unknown assailant storms studio and attacks journalist after series of death threats is sent to reporters at a radio station.

“The incident follows death threats sent to journalists at the station, described as Russia’s only independent outlet, in the past.

Ekho Moskvy has been openly critical of the Russian administration sparking opposition from pro-government critics.

The broadcaster is owned by a media holding controlled by state-owned gas giant Gazprom but it does give air time to staunch critics of the Kremlin and its allies.”


Multiple calls for Vladimir Solovyev and other leading Jewish journalists to condemn the Zionist terror against journalists in Russia went unanswered.


Speaking of fake news. @SvobodaRadio posted an announcement of Fengelgauer @t_felg being shot to death, but attack didn’t go as they planned.

 

Advertisement
Comments

Latest

Michael McFaul, what have YOU done to help improve US-Russia relations?

The former US ambassador to Russia has proven to be quite adept at chastising Russia at every turn, even in retirement. But what exactly has McFaul done to create an atmosphere of lasting peace between Moscow and Washington?

Published

on

It was the summer of 2013 when I had my first and only encounter with Michael McFaul, then-US Ambassador to Russia. It was a Saturday afternoon, and a black sedan pulled into the parking lot of the prestigious Anglo-American School, a private learning facility located in the outskirts of Moscow where foreign diplomats and corporate executives enroll their kids.

Support The Duran – Browse our Shop >>

A burly driver opened the door and into the scorching sun appeared, in all his excellency, Michael McFaul. After exchanging brief pleasantries, the ambassador strolled to the bleachers on the opposite side of the field to await the beginning of a children’s baseball game; a bit of an anticlimactic turn compared to the grand entry. I remember thinking to myself at the time, as he took a seat by himself across the pitch, ‘There goes the loneliest man in the world.’

Sooner than I would have imagined, my impression of the ambassador and his unenviable situation in Russia was confirmed. Several months later, McFaul abruptly resigned from his government post after just two years on the job, returning to the dusty halls of academia from where he had first emerged to work in the Obama administration.

Despite his retirement, and being banned from Russia, McFaul continues to elicit inflammatory opinions on ‘Putin’s Russia’ on a regular basis. Few of these verbal fusillades prove helpful at injecting some semblance of sanity back into the US-Russia relationship.

This week, for example, McFaul went head-to-head against Steven Seagal, the Hollywood actor and martial arts expert who was just appointed as Russia’s ‘special representative on humanitarian relations with the US.’ Seagal’s work includes, among other duties, “promoting bilateral ties in a wide range of fields including culture, art, science, education, sports, public and youth exchanges.”

Considering the basement-level status of the US-Russia relationship, it would seem that any attempt to forge bonds between the two nuclear powers deserves some applause, even if it’s just a polite golf clap. That logic doesn’t apply if you’re Michael McFaul. Following the appointment, McFaul promptly fired up his Twitter account to pedantically slam Seagal for using British spelling as opposed to American while announcing his new post. Our esteemed academic, however, broke the first rule of social-media sparring by failing to ensure that his own tweet was grammatically sound.

In any event, McFaul went on to predict that Seagal would ultimately fail to “achieve any success in improving Russian-American relations,” not only because the Hollywood actor has “almost no influence” in the United States, but because – wait for it – “he has no experience in diplomacy.”

As the attentive reader will recall, the lack of diplomatic credentials was precisely the main argument against McFaul’s two-year stint as US ambassador. Not only was the Stanford professor the first non-career diplomat to serve as US ambassador to Russia, he arrived in Moscow with a rather odd CV, which included a doctorate dissertation devoted to the “theory of revolution in an international context.” To complicate his stay in Russia even more, one of McFaul’s very first orders of business in Moscow was to meet with members of the Russian opposition – and at the very same time street protests and color revolutions were becoming all the rage. How’s that for diplomacy?

The story gets better. Judging by a recent request put forward by Russia’s general prosecutor’s office, in which it specifically named Michael McFaul as a person of interest in the criminal case against Bill Browder, the British financier who is wanted in Russia for illegally moving $1.5 billion out of the country, it would suggest that the ambassador was not limited to just meeting with political agitators. McFaul, however, has denied any wrongdoing.

This was just the later innings, as it were, of what appears to have been a doubleheader the professor was playing. Before being nominated to the position of US ambassador, Michael McFaul was a senior adviser of the Obama administration, where he went on to become the architect of the much-maligned US-Russia ‘Reset.’

You know a program is doomed from the start when not even the US State Department is able to correctly translate the idea into Russian. For a man who is so concerned with proper spelling, you’d think he would have gotten that one right.

Yet it was much more than just poor translating skills that ensured the demise of the ‘Reset;’ the failure was a result of Washington’s absolute refusal to cooperate with Russia on the US missile defense shield in Eastern Europe. Any serious discussion on the US-Russia bilateral relationship is incomplete without mentioning this part of the story.

Initially pledging to “shelve” the brainchild weapon system of the Bush administration (just months after McFaul’s ‘Reset’ is announced in March 2009), the Obama administration shifted gears, telling the world it would opt for a scaled-down version of the system instead, all the while holding out the carrot of cooperation to Moscow.

However, unless the Obama administration committed itself to a real partnership with Russia, McFaul’s ‘Reset’ would have to be interpreted for what it arguably was: an elaborate smokescreen to soften up Moscow into believing the White House had honorable intentions. As events strongly indicate, it did not. Fortunately for Russia, it did not fall for the ruse. It got to work developing ways to balance the military scales that were beginning to dangerously tip due to a US-made weapon system on its very doorstep.

That much was underscored by Vladimir Putin’s recent state of the nation address in which he revealed the introduction of advanced weapon systems that make “obsolete” any missile defense shield in the world. Had the Obama administration not taken a cynical and deceptive approach to its ‘diplomatic’ relations with Russia, as demonstrated by McFaul’s fake ‘Reset,’ the world would not be perched on the precipice of disaster as it is today.

These days, the former US ambassador continues to muddy the bilateral waters, dispatching tirades against Russia via Twitter to his 339,000 followers, many of whom share the same jaded views, which has a tendency to occur whenever ideas are cultivated in an echo chamber.

It may go down as the tragedy of our days that the Obama administration, believing Russia was down for the proverbial count, dispatched to Moscow a non-diplomat at the precise moment when diplomacy between the two nuclear powers was more important than ever. In hindsight, it was a dangerous move on the global chessboard that will have ramifications on international politics for many decades to come. Nevertheless, Russia not only survived the challenge, but it looks quite capable of defending its long-term interests.

It is a regrettable conclusion, but I would argue that Michael McFaul and his colleagues in the Obama administration view Russia’s stunning revival, as witnessed on both the military and economic fronts, as a genuine ‘failure of diplomacy’ on their part. Faced with that sort of cynical, duplicitous approach to Russia, the bilateral relationship needs many more sincere ambassadors of peace, like Steven Seagal, working tirelessly on behalf of friendship between the two countries.

Via RT

Continue Reading

Latest

Crimea vs. Afghanistan – Which is More Occupied?

Let’s compare Russia’s “occupation” of Crimea with an occupation that the US is not demanding a swift end to: the US/NATO occupation of Afghanistan.

Published

on

Both sides of the aisle can agree on this important thing — which has achieved a growing, bi-partisan, academic and popular consensus in the United States during the past four years.

It is this: the second biggest threat to peace on earth and to the global rule of law (right behind either Trump or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, depending on your affiliation) is the 2014 vote by the people of Crimea to re-join Russia.

Support The Duran – Browse our Shop >>

Now, the vote by the people of Crimea to re-join Russia has another, more common name: ‘The Seizure of Crimea.’

This infamous seizure is hard to grasp. It involved a grand total of zero casualties. The vote itself has never been re-done. In fact, to my knowledge, not a single believer in the ‘Seizure of Crimea’ has ever advocated for re-doing the vote. Coincidentally, polling has repeatedly found the people of Crimea to be happy with their vote.

I’ve not seen any written or oral statement from Russia threatening war or violence in Crimea. If the threat was implicit, there remains the problem of being unable to find Crimeans who say they felt threatened. If the vote was influenced by the implicit threat, there remains the problem that polls consistently get the same result.

Of course, a U.S.-backed coup had just occurred in Kiev, meaning that Crimea was voting to secede from a coup government. The United States had supported the secession of Kosovo from Serbia in the 1990s despite Serbian opposition.

When Slovakia seceded from Czechoslovakia, the U.S. did not urge any opposition. The U.S. government supports the right of South Sudan to have seceded from Sudan, although violence and chaos reigned. U.S. politicians like Joe Biden and Jane Harman even proposed breaking Iraq up into pieces, as others have proposed for Syria.

But let’s grant for the sake of argument that the Crimean vote was problematic, even horrendous, even criminal. There is no question that Russia had military forces in Crimea and sent in more, something I believe I can non-hypocritically oppose, since I’m not the U.S. government and I advocate for the abolition of the U.S. military.

Even so, how does the “occupation” of Crimea rise to the level of greatest threat to peace on earth?

Compare it to a trillion dollars a year in U.S. military spending, new missiles in Romania and Poland, massive bombing of Iraq and Syria, the destruction of Iraq and Libya, the endless war on Afghanistan and Pakistan, the U.S.-Saudi devastation of Yemen and the creation of famine and disease epidemics, or the explicit threats to attack Iran, not to mention world-leading weapons dealing to dictatorships around the globe by the good old U.S. of A.

I’m sure your average American would rather visit “liberated Mosul” than “annexed Crimea,” but should we deal with facts or slogans?

Let’s take one example of an occupation that the U.S. government is not demanding a swift end to: the U.S./NATO occupation of Afghanistan.

I don’t propose comparing the horrors of the so-called longest U.S. war — as if the wars on Native Americans aren’t real — with World War II or Iraq. I propose comparing them with the people of Crimea voting to make their little piece of land part of Russia again. Which is more barbaric, immoral, illegal, destructive, and traumatic?

Most countries polled in December 2013 by Gallup called the United States the greatest threat to peace in the world (Russia came in as the 12th greatest threat), and Pew found that viewpoint increased in 2017.

Some in the United States seem to share the world’s view of the matter. “The Taliban had surrendered a few months before I arrived in Afghanistan in late 2002,” Rory Fanning tells me, “but that wasn’t good enough for our politicians back home and the generals giving the orders. Our job was to draw people back into the fight. I signed up to prevent another 9/11, but my two tours in Afghanistan made me realize that I was making the world less safe. We know now that a majority of the million or so people who have been killed since 9/11 have been innocent civilians, people with no stake in the game and no reason to fight until, often enough, the U.S. military baited them into it by killing or injuring a family member who more often than not was an innocent bystander.”

Eleanor Levine, active with Code Pink, says, “Afghanistan belongs to the Afghan people, not the USA and not NATO.”

“How would you feel,” she asks, “if Afghanistan occupied the USA? How would you feel if your towns and streets were patrolled by an occupying force? How would you feel if your schools, homes, stores, banks, agriculture and jobs, were controlled by Afghanistan? I am betting you cannot imagine this possibility. But try hard to imagine how it would feel. Try really hard to imagine it because it is the everyday experience of Afghans who want to live life as Afghans and raise their children as Afghans in their own country. Try to think, what have Afghan people done to the USA and NATO to deserve continuous interference and control from afar?”

Here’s my proposal. The people of Afghanistan should hold a public referendum and vote immediately to become the 51st U.S. state. Not only would they then have made themselves seized, conquered, attacked, raped, and occupied in the bad, Russian senses of the terms. But if they sent along some photos of themselves in a note to the U.S. Congress, they’d get U.S. troops out of their country and achieve its total independence from the United States by the following afternoon.

Via DavidSwanson.org

Continue Reading

Latest

The Russian Su-35 is the plane the US Air Force should fear

The Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E is the top Russian air-superiority fighter in service today, and represents the pinnacle of fourth-generation jet fighter design. It will remain so until Russia succeeds in bringing its fifth-generation PAK-FA stealth fighter into production.

Published

on

The maneuverability of the Su-35 makes it an unsurpassed dogfighter. However, future aerial clashes using the latest missiles (R-77s, Meteors, AIM-120s) could potentially take place over enormous ranges, while even short-range combat may involve all-aspect missiles like the AIM-9X and R-74 that don’t require pointing the aircraft at the target. Nonetheless, the Su-35’s speed (which contributes to a missile’s velocity) and large load-carrying abilities mean it can hold its own in beyond-visual-range combat. Meanwhile, the Flanker-E’s agility and electronic countermeasures may help it evade opposing missiles.

Support The Duran – Browse our Shop >>

The Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E is the top Russian air-superiority fighter in service today, and represents the pinnacle of fourth-generation jet fighter design. It will remain so until Russia succeeds in bringing its fifth-generation PAK-FA stealth fighter into production.

Distinguished by its unrivaled maneuverability, most of the Su-35’s electronics and weapons capabilities have caught up with those of Western equivalents, like the F-15 Eagle. But while it may be a deadly adversary to F-15s, Eurofighters and Rafales, the big question mark remains how effectively it can contend with fifth-generation stealth fighters such as the F-22 and F-35.

History

The Su-35 is an evolution of the Su-27 Flanker, a late Cold War design intended to match the F-15 in concept: a heavy twin-engine multirole fighter combining excellent speed and weapons load-out with dogfighting agility.

An Su-27 stunned the audience of the Paris Air Show in 1989 when it demonstrated Pugachev’s Cobra, a maneuver in which the fighter rears its nose up to 120-degree vertical—but continues to soar forward along the plane’s original attitude.

Widely exported, the Flanker has yet to clash with Western fighters, but did see air-to-air combat in Ethiopian service during a border war with Eritrea, scoring four kills against MiG-29s for no loss. It has also been employed on ground attack missions.

The development history of the Su-35 is a bit complicated. An upgraded Flanker with canards (additional small wings on the forward fuselage) called the Su-35 first appeared way back in 1989, but is not the same plane as the current model; only fifteen were produced. Another upgraded Flanker, the two-seat Su-30, has been produced in significant quantities, and its variants exported to nearly a dozen countries.

The current model in question, without canards, is properly called the Su-35S and is the most advanced type of the Flanker family. It began development in 2003 under the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association (KnAAPO), a subcontractor of Sukhoi. The first prototypes rolled out in 2007 and production began in 2009.

Airframe and Engines

The Flanker family of aircraft is super-maneuverable—meaning it is engineered to perform controlled maneuvers that are impossible through regular aerodynamic mechanisms. In the Su-35, this is in part achieved through use of thrust-vectoring engines: the nozzles of its Saturn AL-41F1S turbofans can independently point in different directions in flight to assist the aircraft in rolling and yawing. Only one operational Western fighter, the F-22 Raptor, has similar technology.

This also allows the Su-35 to achieve very high angles-of-attack—in other words, the plane can be moving in one direction while its nose is pointed in another. A high angle of attack allows an aircraft to more easily train its weapons on an evading target and execute tight maneuvers.

Such maneuvers may be useful for evading missiles or dogfighting at close ranges—though they leave any aircraft in a low-energy state.

The Flanker-E can achieve a maximum speed of Mach 2.25 at high altitude (equal to the F-22 and faster than the F-35 or F-16) and has excellent acceleration. However, contrary to initial reports, it appears it may not be able to supercruise—perform sustained supersonic flight without using afterburners—while loaded for combat. Its service ceiling is sixty thousand feet, on par with F-15s and F-22s, and ten thousand feet higher than Super Hornets, Rafales and F-35s.

The Su-35 has expanded fuel capacity, giving it a range of 2,200 miles on internal fuel, or 2,800 miles with two external fuel tanks. Both the lighter titanium airframe and the engines have significantly longer life expectancies than their predecessors, at six thousand and 4,500 flight hours, respectively. (For comparison, the F-22 and F-35 are rated at eight thousand hours).

The Flanker airframe is not particularly stealthy. However, adjustments to the engine inlets and canopy, and the use of radar-absorbent material, supposedly halve the Su-35’s radar cross-section; one article claims it may be down to between one and three meters. This could reduce the range it can be detected and targeted, but the Su-35 is still not a “stealth fighter.”

Weaponry

The Su-35 has twelve to fourteen weapons hardpoints, giving it an excellent loadout compared to the eight hardpoints on the F-15C and F-22, or the four internally stowed missiles on the F-35.

At long range, the Su-35 can use K-77M radar-guided missiles (known by NATO as the AA-12 Adder), which are claimed to have range of over 120 miles.

For shorter-range engagements, the R-74 (NATO designation: AA-11 Archer) infrared-guided missile is capable of targeting “off boresight”—simply by looking through a helmet-mounted optical sight, the pilot can target an enemy plane up sixty degrees away from where his plane is pointed. The R-74 has a range of over twenty-five miles, and also uses thrust-vectoring technology.

The medium-range R-27 missile and the extra long-range R-37 (aka the AA-13 Arrow, for use against AWACs, EW and tanker aircraft) complete the Su-35’s air-to-air missile selection.

Additionally, the Su-35 is armed with a thirty-millimeter cannon with 150 rounds for strafing or dogfighting.

The Flanker-E can also carry up to seventeen thousand pounds of air-to-ground munitions. Historically, Russia has made only limited use of precision-guided munitions (PGMs) compared to Western air forces. However, the capability for large-scale use of such weapons is there, if doctrine and munition stocks accommodate it.

Sensors and Avionics

The Su-35’s most critical improvements over its predecessors may be in hardware. It is equipped with a powerful L175M Khibiny electronic countermeasure system intended to distort radar waves and misdirect hostile missiles. This could significantly degrade attempts to target and hit the Flanker-E.

The Su-35’s IRBIS-E passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar is hoped to provide better performance against stealth aircraft. It is claimed to able to track up to thirty airborne targets with a Radar-cross section of three meters up to 250 miles away—and targets with cross-sections as small 0.1 meters over fifty miles away. However, PESA radars are easier to detect and to jam than the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars now used by Western fighters. The IRBIS also has an air-to ground mode that can designate up to four surface targets at time for PGMs.

Supplementing the radar is an OLS-35 targeting system that includes an Infra-Red Search and Track (IRST) system said to have a fifty-mile range—potentially a significant threat to stealth fighters.

More mundane but vital systems—such as pilot multi-function displays and fly-by-wire avionics—have also been significantly updated.

Operational Units and Future Customers

Currently, the Russian Air Force operates only forty-eight Su-35s. Another fifty were ordered in January 2016, and will be produced at a rate of ten per year. Four Su-35s were deployed to Syria this January after a Russian Su-24 was shot down by a Turkish F-16. Prominently armed with air-to-air missiles, the Su-35s were intended to send a message that the Russians could pose an aerial threat if attacked.

China has ordered twenty-four Su-35s at a cost of $2 billion, but is thought unlikely to purchase more. Beijing’s interest is believed to lie mostly in copying the Su-35’s thrust-vector engines for use in its own designs. The Chinese PLAAF already operates the Shenyang J-11, a copy of the Su-27.

Attempts to market the Su-35 abroad, especially to India and Brazil, have mostly foundered. Recently, however, Indonesia has indicated it wishes to purchase eight this year, though the contract signing has been repeatedly delayed. Algeria is reportedly considering acquiring ten for $900 million. Egypt, Venezuela and Vietnam are also potential customers.

Cost estimates for the Su-35 have run between $40 million and $65 million; however, the exports contracts have been at prices above $80 million per unit.

Against the Fifth Generation

The Su-35 is at least equal—if not superior—to the very best Western fourth-generation fighters. The big question, is how well can it perform against a fifth-generation stealth plane such as the F-22 or F-35?

The maneuverability of the Su-35 makes it an unsurpassed dogfighter. However, future aerial clashes using the latest missiles (R-77s, Meteors, AIM-120s) could potentially take place over enormous ranges, while even short-range combat may involve all-aspect missiles like the AIM-9X and R-74 that don’t require pointing the aircraft at the target. Nonetheless, the Su-35’s speed (which contributes to a missile’s velocity) and large load-carrying abilities mean it can hold its own in beyond-visual-range combat. Meanwhile, the Flanker-E’s agility and electronic countermeasures may help it evade opposing missiles.

The more serious issue, though, is that we don’t know how effective stealth technology will be against a high-tech opponent. An F-35 stealth fighter that gets in a short-range duel with a Flanker-E will be in big trouble—but how good a chance does the faster, more-maneuverable Russian fighter have of detecting that F-35 and getting close to it in the first place?

As the U.S. Air Force would have it, stealth fighters will be able to unleash a hail of missiles up to one hundred miles away without the enemy having any way to return fire until they close to a (short) distance, where visual and IR scanning come into play. Proponents of the Russian fighter argue that it will be able to rely upon ground-based low-bandwidth radars, and on-board IRST sensors and PESA radar, to detect stealth planes. Keep in mind, however, that the former two technologies are imprecise and can’t be used to target weapons in most cases.

Both parties obviously have huge economic and political incentives to advance their claims. While it is worthwhile examining the technical merits of these schools of thought in detail, the question will likely only be resolved by testing under combat conditions. Furthermore, other factors such as supporting assets, mission profile, pilot training and numbers play a large a role in determining the outcomes of aerial engagements.

The Su-35 may be the best jet-age dogfighter ever made and a capable missile delivery platform—but whether that will suffice for an air-superiority fighter in the era of stealth technology remains to be seen.

Sébastien Roblin holds a Master’s Degree in Conflict Resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing, and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring .

Via The National Interest

Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Advertisement

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...

Advertisement
Advertisements

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement

Advertisements

The Duran Newsletter

Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending