Russian Revolution


"As drama, The Russian Revolution is tremendous.
As narrative it is a masterpiece of organization and lucidity.
And as the utterly objective history of events explosive with controversy,
it is unique."

To Orwell Today,


I agree with you in the LBJ OATH-SWEARING WITNESSES article regarding the Communist's bloody climb to Power in Russia. Lenin was bad. Stalin was infinately worse. It was without a doubt a sad period in Russian history. I'm not informed where the Tsars are concerned. My knowledge of Russian history is not as good as my knowledge of American history, but being from the US, that's understandable. I am currently attempting to broaden my horizons and learn more about Russian history and the history of other Nations.

However, where the last Tsar was concerned, I'm not sure he was exactly a "good" Tsar. There was a massive amount of starvation and poverty prevelent in Russia during the reign of the last Tsar. But of course the Tsar, his wife and children did not go hungry. There was also that Rasputin affair, which, when knowledge of this filtered down to the peasants, engendered a lot of anger towards the Tsar and his relatives. That last Tsar was no saint by any means, but as one minister said some years ago: "When you get rid of one devil, you have to be careful that you don't let seven more devils in".

While the Tsar's Government was corrupt and while the Tsar's Soldiers did fire on peasants, when they gathered to express their grievances, it would be hard to compare him with what came later. Stalin was, in MY estimation WORSE than Hitler. The only difference being that Hitler could shout and gesticulate better than Stalin. When War Crimes Tribunals were set up at Nurnburg following World War Two, Stalin should have been in the dock along with the rest.

But of course, he was our "Ally" and therefore one of the "good" guys......for a time. But Winston Churchill saw through Stalin's deceitfulness, lies and murderous activities (carried out by the NKVD, the fore-runner of the KGB), before Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. But give Truman credit, he learned fast upon becoming President. I especially loved it when, at a meeting between Truman and Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov, Molotov told Truman, "I'm not used to being spoken to that way". Truman replied: "Keep your agreement's and you WON'T be spoken to that way"

Best Wishes,
Bill Urban :-)

Greetings Bill,

It's good you're planning to learn Russian history to understand how the Communists (Bolsheviks) came to power there, including, as I described, assassination of good Tsars attempting to make things better for the peasants and the working class, for example Alexander II, grandfather of the last Tsar, Nicholas II. The aftermath of assassinating good Tsars was that it had a cowering affect on their heirs, who were then less-inclined to work toward democratic reform or they'd end up dead as well.

The Communists' aim in assassinating good Tsars was to thwart acts of democracy or fairness to the people, which would make the rise of Communism more difficult as their only claim to power is based on the lie that they are "the worker's party".

The last Tsar, as I mentioned, was assassinated AFTER the Communists came to power. But previous to that time he had stepped down from the throne in favour of a parliamentary system (Duma) made up of several parties, one of which was the Communists which, under Trotsky and Lenin, illegally seized power in October 1917. Tsar Nicholas asked England's King George V for asylum (where his wife Tsarina Alexandra's grandmother had been Queen Victoria). But King George turned him down, not wanting to appear sympathetic to Germany where then-Princess Alexandra had been raised, the daugher of a Duke her mother, Queen Victoria's daughter, had married.

It's too bad for Russia that Nicholas II married Princess Alexandra because she fell under the spell of Rasputin who was an agent of evil working with the Bolsheviks. Any good Nicholas II attempted toward democracy, his wife Alexandra thwarted.

In the end Rasputin was murdered by a cousin of Nicholas II, but by then it was too late. Russia was in the clutches of the Communists, where it remains to this day, albeit under a different name, Communism having been declared "dead" in 1989, with the symbolic falling of the Berlin Wall.

Churchill, although once known for his anti-Communist rhetoric, actually met in secret with Stalin and Roosevelt during WWII in deceiving the British and American people into siding with the Soviet Union against Germany. Hitler was Stalin's and Communism's greatest enemy because it was his plan to expand the German Empire into Russia, after defeating the Communists there.

Instead, after World War Two, with England and America's help, the Communists expanded into Germany and elsewhere in Europe. And, as you say, Stalin didn't stand trial for his war crimes.

I'm not sure what agreement Truman had with Molotov, but he helped the Communists in China by dropping nuclear bombs on Japan - even though their Emperor had surrendered.

All the best,
Jackie Jura

PS - Orwell didn't like the fact that England and America were allies with the Soviet Union. That's what "Animal Farm" was all about, and he further exposed the Capitalist/Communist link in "1984". See ORWELL'S PUBLISHING PROBLEMS

PPS - The book pictured above (published in 1958) is a great place to start a study of Russian history leading up to and including the Communist Revolution. The words in quotations above are a quote from the back cover.

LINCOLN-KENNEDY & CZAR COINCIDENCES (reader sends a Lincoln-Kennedy coincidence about Russian war ships sailing to America during the presidencies of both)

Churchill best friend Jews ever had, by Martin Knelman, Toronto Star, Jan 17, 2011
Millions of people credit Winston Churchill, Britain’s inspiring wartime prime minister during its darkest hours, with saving the world from Hitler. But was Churchill also — as we’ve rarely heard — the greatest ally the Jewish people have ever had? The answer is a passionate yes, according to Barry Avrich, whose compelling documentary — An Unlikely Obsession: Churchill and the Jews — will have its premiere at 10 p.m. Monday on the Vision channel....Gilbert had spent 20 years writing the official 10-volume biography of Churchill. He had also written many books on Jewish subjects. In his book about Churchill and the Jews, Gilbert argued that it was largely thanks to decades of support from Churchill (going back to World War I) that the state of Israel was born in 1948. One of Churchill’s old friends described him as being “too fond of Jews.” And it has also been said that Sir Winston’s strong support for creating a Jewish homeland did not always win him friends. But is Alan Dershowitz, the celebrated Harvard law professor, exaggerating a tad when he claims that there really ought to be a huge statue of Sir Winston in Jerusalem? If he’s right, then Churchill ought to loom as large in the story of Israel’s birth as those legendary Zionist prophets Theodor Herzl and Chaim Weizmann....The starry commentators tell the story of how at a time of casual anti-Semitism at the highest social and political levels of post-Victorian British society, Churchill took inspiration from Old Testament tales, aspiring to become a latter-day Moses. Denouncing pogroms in Russia even while British voters wondered what events so far away had to do with them, Churchill hobnobbed with influential Jewish leaders and articulated the view that the foundations of modern civilization and ethics came out of Jewish history — for which he felt the rest of the world should show its gratitude....


6.Superstates and 7.Systems of Thought and 5.Pyramidal New World Order and 35.The Brotherhood

Jackie Jura
~ an independent researcher monitoring local, national and international events ~