I watch TV, I work on the Internet, I read newspapers - everywhere a
"terrible and even more terrible" incident with Sergey
Skripal and his daughter - Julia. Nearly poisoned to death by Russian
"offenders". A whole month they scrambled out of the
consequences of a terrible chemical attack, came to their senses. But
there are still more victims - this is the home cat of Nich Van Drake
and the guinea pigs who lived at his house. The cat was put to sleep,
then all the animals were cremated. Why the mystery of the
investigation. Relatives of the Skripals are not allowed to enter
Great Britain. I think - so as not to interfere with the proper
conduct of the investigation. And the more I delve into the work of
the Skripals, the more I begin to understand - after all, something
like that happened once before somewhere. And, suddenly, like a
shroud fell from my eyes, - but this is an analogue of the case of
"Zinoviev's letter". The analogue, of course, is
incomplete, but all events as in 1924 are developing in the
UK.
Let's remember what happened then. September 15, 1924, the British Foreign Ministry received from MI5 (British counterintelligence) a copy of a secret letter allegedly written by Zinoviev, chairman of the executive committee of the Comintern. On October 25, 1924, 4 days before the parliamentary elections in Britain, in the newspaper Daily Mail was published this "Letter by Zinoviev, addressed to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Great Britain. The letter, dated September 15, 1924, called for the strengthening of relations with the Bolshevik government and intensified subversive work in the army and navy, preparing its own cadres for the coming civil war, and proclaiming a course toward an armed struggle against the bourgeoisie. In the letter it was proposed to create cells "in all military units, as well as in factories manufacturing weapons."
The "letter" caused a noisy scandal. It was then about granting Russia a large loan. On the same day as the letter appeared in the media, the British Foreign Ministry sent a special note to the plenipotentiary representative of the USSR in the United Kingdom, Rakovsky, in which the "Zinoviev letter" was interpreted as "instructions for British subjects to forcibly overthrow the existing system in that country and disintegrate the armed forces of His Majesty". In Rakovsky's reply to the note, which followed the very next day, the authenticity of the "Zinoviev's letter" was denied and a number of serious proofs were given that the content of the document consists of a series of absurdities aimed at restoring British public opinion against the USSR.
Ostensibly the "signatories" of the letter - and Grigory Zinoviev himself, and the representative of the British Communists Arthur McManus, and one of the leaders of the Comintern Otto Kuusinen, categorically rejected their involvement in the publication. In the USSR, the search for the author of the letter began. At a meeting of the Politburo on December 18, they suggested that the person who had obtained the "Zinoviev letter" should declare himself, and "he is guaranteed security and impunity". Alas, no one responded!
Let's remember what happened then. September 15, 1924, the British Foreign Ministry received from MI5 (British counterintelligence) a copy of a secret letter allegedly written by Zinoviev, chairman of the executive committee of the Comintern. On October 25, 1924, 4 days before the parliamentary elections in Britain, in the newspaper Daily Mail was published this "Letter by Zinoviev, addressed to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Great Britain. The letter, dated September 15, 1924, called for the strengthening of relations with the Bolshevik government and intensified subversive work in the army and navy, preparing its own cadres for the coming civil war, and proclaiming a course toward an armed struggle against the bourgeoisie. In the letter it was proposed to create cells "in all military units, as well as in factories manufacturing weapons."
The "letter" caused a noisy scandal. It was then about granting Russia a large loan. On the same day as the letter appeared in the media, the British Foreign Ministry sent a special note to the plenipotentiary representative of the USSR in the United Kingdom, Rakovsky, in which the "Zinoviev letter" was interpreted as "instructions for British subjects to forcibly overthrow the existing system in that country and disintegrate the armed forces of His Majesty". In Rakovsky's reply to the note, which followed the very next day, the authenticity of the "Zinoviev's letter" was denied and a number of serious proofs were given that the content of the document consists of a series of absurdities aimed at restoring British public opinion against the USSR.
Ostensibly the "signatories" of the letter - and Grigory Zinoviev himself, and the representative of the British Communists Arthur McManus, and one of the leaders of the Comintern Otto Kuusinen, categorically rejected their involvement in the publication. In the USSR, the search for the author of the letter began. At a meeting of the Politburo on December 18, they suggested that the person who had obtained the "Zinoviev letter" should declare himself, and "he is guaranteed security and impunity". Alas, no one responded!
As a result of the publication of this letter, the Labour Party lost
the elections, and the first in British history, the Labour
government of Ramsey MacDonald was forced to resign. Anglo-Soviet
relations were for many years spoiled. The Anglo-Soviet trade
agreement was not ratified, Soviet Russia failed to obtain loans for
the economic recovery. Agree - the political outcome of the
appearance of "Zinoviev's letter" was very
significant.
The history of the letter developed for a long time. Thus, on March 19, 1928, the Conservative Baldwin delivered a speech in Parliament and brought some newly discovered "mystical circumstances" about the "Soviet" origin of the letter, which were immediately refuted by the USSR People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Chicherin. The origin of the fake was eventually established. As they say: "no matter how tangled the rope is, the ends are in there somewhere." It turned out that the organizer of the scandalous provocation in agreement with his leadership was the British intelligence officer Major Desmond Morton. The original letter was discovered in 1965, resulting in a book-investigation "Zinoviev's Letter" written by three journalists of the British newspaper The Sunday Times.
In February 1968, the same newspaper published publications related to the discovery in the archives of Harvard University of photocopies of the manuscript "Zinovieva-va." The graphical analysis done by the expert John Conway showed the belonging of the "letter" to the intelligence officer Sidney Reilly (he is known to us in Soviet history), who was also involved in the fabrication of the fake. After studying the declassified archives of the United Kingdom's special services, as well as archives in Moscow, the leading historian of the British Foreign Ministry, Jill Bennett, concluded that the letter that caused the Labour government of MacDonald to collapse in 1924 and the relations between Britain and Russia deteriorated was a fake.
What was the purpose of the fake with Zinoviev's letter? Yes, the obvious. Pour mountains of dirt on the Soviet country, cause hatred and disgust for these "bloody" Bolsheviks, undermine the confidence of the masses in the British Labour Party. In this respect, the story with Skrypal pursues exactly the same goals, although the world has changed so much in a hundred years. Why is it that Skripal is a traitor, released by the Russian government as a result of an exchange of spies? I think he turned out to be a successful character for another anti-Russian farce, as, they say, before this character, poisoned with radioactive polonium. Radioactive polonium was necessary here to the organizers of the fake, for intimidating the public (after all, the radioactive polonium!) - what, after all, are these terrible Russians!
How, in fact, was the case of the Skripals? I think it's much easier to find here than in the history of 1924. Subjects do something - here they are! Significant moment - the earliest messages on the Internet clearly called the cause of poisoning - fentanyl - a powerful narcotic analgesic. Both the father and daughter take a prohibitively large dose of the drug (death in such cases is a common occurrence). Feeling that they are ill, they rush for help "to people", crouching and never getting off of the bench in the park. Discovering the injured, a woman told reporters that "the couple were sitting on the bench as if in a "frozen state", "the hands of Skrypal were raised upwards with the palms, as if he was stretching. The eyes stared at the house in front of him. He was conscious, but as if paralyzed, a little swinging back and forth.” Mobile phones for both of them were turned off! It is interesting that an ambulance doctor who helped the Skripals on the spot did not suffer at all. Most likely, they did not "inject" the drug, but "sniffed" it, making their hands "dirty". The consequences of this for the future are clear. It is clear as to why the stubborn refusal to allow even relatives to communicate with the victims, and the destruction of the cat and guinea pigs simply because they turned out to be "redundant" in the official version of events.
How the British authorities are now to act , when from the case of the Skripals in all directions stick out absurdities? Only one way - to remove the Skripals – "Skripal did his job ...". Plans are already seriously being discussed to transfer them to the United States or somewhere too far away, changing their appearance and issuing new documents, and all material evidence on the case - the house of Skripal, a bench where they were found and so on - to put to the fire.
As Hegel said well: "History repeats itself twice: the first time in the form of tragedy, the second in the form of a farce." This phrase is often mistakenly attributed to K. Marx. Its real author is the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), as K. Marx himself points out in his work "The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte."
S.V. Khristenko
The history of the letter developed for a long time. Thus, on March 19, 1928, the Conservative Baldwin delivered a speech in Parliament and brought some newly discovered "mystical circumstances" about the "Soviet" origin of the letter, which were immediately refuted by the USSR People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Chicherin. The origin of the fake was eventually established. As they say: "no matter how tangled the rope is, the ends are in there somewhere." It turned out that the organizer of the scandalous provocation in agreement with his leadership was the British intelligence officer Major Desmond Morton. The original letter was discovered in 1965, resulting in a book-investigation "Zinoviev's Letter" written by three journalists of the British newspaper The Sunday Times.
In February 1968, the same newspaper published publications related to the discovery in the archives of Harvard University of photocopies of the manuscript "Zinovieva-va." The graphical analysis done by the expert John Conway showed the belonging of the "letter" to the intelligence officer Sidney Reilly (he is known to us in Soviet history), who was also involved in the fabrication of the fake. After studying the declassified archives of the United Kingdom's special services, as well as archives in Moscow, the leading historian of the British Foreign Ministry, Jill Bennett, concluded that the letter that caused the Labour government of MacDonald to collapse in 1924 and the relations between Britain and Russia deteriorated was a fake.
What was the purpose of the fake with Zinoviev's letter? Yes, the obvious. Pour mountains of dirt on the Soviet country, cause hatred and disgust for these "bloody" Bolsheviks, undermine the confidence of the masses in the British Labour Party. In this respect, the story with Skrypal pursues exactly the same goals, although the world has changed so much in a hundred years. Why is it that Skripal is a traitor, released by the Russian government as a result of an exchange of spies? I think he turned out to be a successful character for another anti-Russian farce, as, they say, before this character, poisoned with radioactive polonium. Radioactive polonium was necessary here to the organizers of the fake, for intimidating the public (after all, the radioactive polonium!) - what, after all, are these terrible Russians!
How, in fact, was the case of the Skripals? I think it's much easier to find here than in the history of 1924. Subjects do something - here they are! Significant moment - the earliest messages on the Internet clearly called the cause of poisoning - fentanyl - a powerful narcotic analgesic. Both the father and daughter take a prohibitively large dose of the drug (death in such cases is a common occurrence). Feeling that they are ill, they rush for help "to people", crouching and never getting off of the bench in the park. Discovering the injured, a woman told reporters that "the couple were sitting on the bench as if in a "frozen state", "the hands of Skrypal were raised upwards with the palms, as if he was stretching. The eyes stared at the house in front of him. He was conscious, but as if paralyzed, a little swinging back and forth.” Mobile phones for both of them were turned off! It is interesting that an ambulance doctor who helped the Skripals on the spot did not suffer at all. Most likely, they did not "inject" the drug, but "sniffed" it, making their hands "dirty". The consequences of this for the future are clear. It is clear as to why the stubborn refusal to allow even relatives to communicate with the victims, and the destruction of the cat and guinea pigs simply because they turned out to be "redundant" in the official version of events.
How the British authorities are now to act , when from the case of the Skripals in all directions stick out absurdities? Only one way - to remove the Skripals – "Skripal did his job ...". Plans are already seriously being discussed to transfer them to the United States or somewhere too far away, changing their appearance and issuing new documents, and all material evidence on the case - the house of Skripal, a bench where they were found and so on - to put to the fire.
As Hegel said well: "History repeats itself twice: the first time in the form of tragedy, the second in the form of a farce." This phrase is often mistakenly attributed to K. Marx. Its real author is the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), as K. Marx himself points out in his work "The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte."
S.V. Khristenko
