Crazed Bolsheviks killed Tatiania and Olga Romanov. Here:
In the early hours of July 17, 1918, a Bolshevik death squad led by a drunken Peter Irkmakov, opened fire on the Imperial family and their retainers from the doorway of the room in which they were held captive.
Tsar Nicholas died instantly, his wife Alexandra and their children, Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia and Alexei were not so fortunate. It took a further twenty minutes of shooting, clubbing and bayoneting on the part of the enraged Bolsheviks to dispatch the Romanovs until, as one of the killers stated, the floor was slick with blood “like an ice rink.”
Pause for a moment and look on the faces of the young girls. Look into their eyes and imagine the horror of the Communist death gang which clubbed or stabbed them to death.
As you do, ask yourself why this demonic ideology isn't harried from the land, and exterminated root and branch.
Your Friend,
LSP
18 comments:
They did back then, in a most horrendous way to the Tsar's family and to many 'White Russian' children.
Then there's the whole Homodor.
And, of course, the communist/socialist backed US Abortion movement, which has now doubled what Hitler and Stalin have done. And with too many of us (US citizens) standing back, silent and mute.
But wait, won't communism result in me getting everything for free? I won't even have to pay my mortgage. I won't have to put gas in my car !
This is what you get when people are whipped to a frenzy of ENVY that others have more than they do.
SIN is why liberal succeeds. SIN is why Islam succeeds. No wonder they're allies.
@Beans:
And they starved 1/3 of my wife's ethic group - the Kazakhs - to death too.
But...But...Tsars, or Czars and the will of the Russian people!
Beans, we've been rolling over since the '60s. This excrescence needs to be rooted out like the noxious poison it is.
Ah, Kid. A vote for Joe is a vote for Kamala.
WELL SAID, N. A frenzy of envy.
Such a heinous evil, SgtBob.
N -- their crimes scream to heaven.
I can’t remember (I’d blame early onset dementia except my memory has always been this bad ... at least I think it has, I cant quite rem...) from where I recall a quotation, or its exact wording but it ran:
“… the root of all evil lies in seeing, and treating, people as things”.
It’s endemic to the human condition to ‘other’ those ‘not like me’. Those ‘not like me’ aren’t human, they’re things. It may have originally started as family and tribal but the nation-state did no more than expand the classification a little.
I spent thirty odd years being involved with every conflict The UK was (officially and unofficially) involved in, and … I’ve seen just how common acts like this, and worse (you really don’t want my nightmares), really are. (Out of western first world countries this would probably be seen as ‘just another of those terrible, regrettable, but oh so common events’ …. even now. Don’t believe me? Go to any country in Asia, Africa or South America, get away from the city centres/tourist areas and see just what atrocities constitute ‘normal daily life’ there. We’re still living in tiny island of civilisation amidst seas of barbarity even now).
Why is it that western nations aren’t still this way? One word … Christianity. ‘Only’ Christianity demands that those ‘not like us’ be treated exactly as ‘like us’ (Oh, there are other faiths that suggest others not of the faith be treated reasonably, but … only as prospective members, and they’re still not really seen as equal. Yes, Christianity was interpreted otherwise for a period, whilst under brutal attack, but, even now, try being of a different faith in a majority Hindu, Buddhist or, worst of all, islamic area).
The past is mirrored in the current ’political’ behaviour. Christians view those of other faiths as, at worst, uninformed/misinformed but genuine and worthy of respectful treatment. Islam, as the most blatant example, views those of other faiths as evil to be converted at the point of a sword, or wiped out. Marxism (and its current incarnation of socialism/progressivism) follows islams model.
Our societies, and the mores and laws which govern them are based, exclusively, on Judeo-Christian values. Which is why I despair – the very people who demand more and more rights (without all those icky responsibilities of course) are the very people attacking, tearing down, banning the fundamental, foundational basis for those very rights. I still can’t decide whether it is ignorance, malicious intent, blind wishful thinking, or a self-destructive mindset on their part to deliberately destroy that which protects, specifically them, from destruction (witness ‘defund the police’, ‘BLM’, Feminists and gays for islam, etc.).
The average person has little idea just how much they owe to the Anglosphere hegemony (Britain now The US) 'forcing' its values on the world. Imagine a world with where it was Belgian (think their behaviour in the Congo), Russian, Chinese or (Lord forbid) islamic values were the norm. We, in our relatively safe, civilised nations look at this atrocity as just that. Others, elsewhere, see it as the same 'because' we insist they do. If China becomes hegemon?
I'd say you're right on the money, Anon, and I may have to quote you.
If China becomes hegemon? Terrifying prospect, to put it mildly. Let's see how their play for world domination works out.
LL, who has experience in that part of the world, implies that it's by no means a done deal. But I'm no expert. In the meanwhile, the mandarins seem to have bought a large chunk of our political class.
The word "traitor" springs to mind.
Quote?
I’d take that as a complement if I could claim any of it as my own.
Despite having been one of the token working class lads at Grammar school and, in-between seeing the world on Her Majesty’s coin, still managing to acquire a number of pieces of paper, I consider myself an autodidact.
On the rare occasion I re-read my own verbose meanderings I’m embarrassed to admit, despite repeated exposure to ‘the great philosophers’ and ‘the classics’ (usually punctuated with a cane, ‘the slipper’, ruler or, on occasion, a ballistic black-board eraser), spending uncounted hours reading high-brow research (OK and sci-fi and on occasion labels off tins as nothing else is available in the ‘premier tourist spots’ HM predictably always sent me) I notice I overwhelmingly reference/quote only three sources.
The Bible,
Terry Pratchett,
and (please don’t judge me, I’m a child of my upbringing)
Eighties song lyrics.
Why Pratchett? I’d like to claim it’s his wit and his alternative perspective on the common, but the truth is I identify with Sir Samuel Vimes (a character in his books) and (keep this to yourself, I shall deny it if asked) I quite fancy Esme Weatherwax. [If you would like a copy of my monograph on why a persons literary preferences can be predicted by the assumption that they wish to be one of the characters, and fancy another ... it’s been declined by Oxford University press four times so far].
If I need to express any thought, he generally has a suitable quote, and failing that it’s guaranteed someone who used to wear ‘big’ hair, shoulder-pads and way to much fluorescent make-up (or just possibly a linen suit with the jacket sleeves rolled up, and espadrilles) did. Why is it that everything I ever want to say has already been said by someone else, only better?
It’s disconcerting to realise that (in common with everyone else I suspect) as a teenager I had all the answers, yet after decades of study, learning and experience I realise now I know so little, in fact not only do I not know all the answers any more, I’m not sure I even know what the questions are. I used to console myself with the fact that a number of people used to compare me (my conversation) with Sir Terry until I started to wonder – were they saying I was like that great author or … that I sounded like I had Alzheimers. Sigh!
Whilst my writing can occasionally present a vaguely cogent line of thought, conversationally I am known as an ‘intellectual kangaroo’. I try to explain it is due to the fact that my brain works faster than my mouth, so a clear, concise, linear, logical, cogent argument, with side-comments presenting supporting evidence sounds (to anyone not inside my head) as random statements as they hear the beginning, some random, apparently unrelated middle piece, and the conclusion. It’s hard being me, but at least I know what I mean … sometimes.
In case you are wondering, yes, I am renowned for my sense of humour. Hardly a day goes by without someone, often random passers-by, coming up to me and telling me I’m full of wit …. at least I think it was wit they said.
As to China, I’m no expert. I’ve been a ‘couple’ of times (yet again nowhere near the glitzy, high-tech, tourist areas … or running water for that matter) but my belief isn’t that they can compete with The US (and we mere satellites). The issue isn’t whether we are beaten, but whether we destroy ourselves. I often wonder (in the wee small hours) whether how I feel now is how some nameless, faceless Roman did all those years ago (the parallels are way too close for comfort, and my piece of mind).
Consider The Empire, Oh, I like to complain that The US helped the decline along (and it did) but the simple truth is that 'we' destroyed ourselves (socialism, and the NHS and welfare state cannot legitimately be called anything else. The decimation of Christianity. The decadence, sloth and almost total destruction of basic morality, all led inexorably to our rapid decline). [From being the richest, most powerful nation on earth, to a second rate power and penury 'in one generation' for what? To provide freebies to the lazy and incapable]
As you indicate one of the major issues is the politicians. Ours 'were' elitist, snobbish and as grasping and mercenary a bunch as ever existed (and most deride them only because ours were better at all that than theirs were) but they were patriotic. They placed country first (even before their own enrichment). That has completely gone now. Oh, we've never been anything like The US in displaying it (much like the typical British understatement, always misunderstood by Americans, we never needed to shout out how great we are because 'we knew we were and who cares what lesser nations think' ;) Shaw had that wrong, it's more than language that we differ in. Does someone who knows they are the best go around telling everybody? To us it's gauche, or smacks of insecurity at best).
And yet, much as the military is a microcosm of the society it is drawn from (and aren't we lucky that 'certain sections' of the population choose not to serve), politicians represent the values common from that 'elite' (the cream, or something else that floats to the top) that they are selected from (and where did the ideal of selecting them from all walks of life go? Of actually being representative of the people they are allegedly employed to represent). Our Parliament, the Commons and the Lords, used to vaguely approach that ideal. The Commons filled by a variety of 'types' but selected, living, educated locally. The Lords, filled with landed gentry and grand ennobled achievers. The Commons swayed by fashionable public demand, the Lords (established and with the long view) balancing, tempering but not over-ruling. All gone now, all Commons and Lords alike are 'selected' from the same small pool. All go to the same schools, universities, have the same jobs and only the vaguest, if any, association with the regions they represent. All, but the tiniest minority, having been inculcated with the globalist, socialist (big government, tax and spend) agenda. [sound familiar?]
Britain is, for all intents and purposes lost (I'd say the majority of citizens remains as they always were, but they no longer have even minimal say with the Bliar removal of The Common Law, Bill of Rights and Magna Carta, and the active connivance of the media and establishment. They are a shrinking, drowned, demographic and the immigrants and younger generations either don't know, or care, about what has been lost). [Future historians will view Blair and his government as the one who threw this country off a cliff. You've had/have some bad, treasonous politicians but you've yet to have such as he in such a position of power- although I suspect 'she' would have said 'hold my beer']
We may be further along than you are, but you're not that far behind. Beware!
Ah, Anon, I remember the cane, ballistic BBEs and a South African Latin teacher (we called them Masters) who'd tell badly behaved boys to beat their heads against their 18th C desk tops, all the while humming Procul Harum or Deep Purple. If you didn't whack your head into the curiously "1760 was here" desk you had to do it again, "harder!" It caused great hilarity.
And what good sources! Yes, Esme's important but so too is Mary Wardwell. Such a witch/demon! See the new Sabrina, if only for her. But I'm with you, and used to know everything only to discover the question itself now proves illusive. Still, certain things, perhaps, become clearer, the radical nihilism of the bestial Left, the spiritual combat of Light v. Dark, Good v. Evil, God v. Satan.
Speaking of conflict, I totally agree, " whether we destroy ourselves." Kipling, of course, puts it well and Chesterton, imo, was caught left footed on that score. Neither he or I think Belloc, saw the creeping tendrils of Cultural Marxism for the threat they were and are. They didn't see WWI either, which made GKC's "Swords around the Cross" seem wrong headed and irrelevant, though it wasn't.
Miltary as microcosm? Well said and it's curious but I've always thought the UK's officer corps/army embodied or tried to embody the values you write of. I said as much, precociously, to a visitor from the US to our home in Oxford. "What do you want to do in life?" she asked, "Go to Sandhurst. Last place to be a gentleman." She was horrified and I was an idiot, but my point, at the age of 13(!) was yours above and, I think, in its way, true.
Of course I messed that up, sorry Major/Colonel Dewar and the Royal Green Jackets. Still, became a short term term Glorious Gloster after a teen rebellion reading theology in London! Should've gone back in as a Padre but didn't, stupidly. Whatev.
Forgive the short and rambling bio and yes, well said, beware. Patriots here, and there's plenty thank God, have by no means given up. I fully expect a successful UK fightback. Ye Gods, the odds are long, but whoever said it'd be easy?
Not having a TV (intentionally, as soon as you notice that every programme and film since the eighties basically derides and debases men, and specifically white men, as well as western morality, you can’t un-see it. Even films and programmes I used to enjoy are now guaranteed to simply annoy and depress me) so I had to DuckDuck Mary Wardwell (Just what is it with ‘our’ attraction to independent, competent, intelligent – with just a hint of the dark side – ladies? In my average bitter, cynical mode I suspect it’s mirrored in the attraction to young boys of ladies in modern films with super-powers, or just the ability ‘kick-ass’, and may be endemic to masculinity. I’m sure some feminazi would argue girls feel ‘empowered’ by such fictional portrayals whilst boys feel threatened. I would argue that boys feel attracted to them precisely because we’d love women in reality to show even a hint of such character. But what do I know? I did have a prepubescent ‘thing’ for Servalan, Blakes 7, but I’m still not sure whether it was that competence and darkness or … the full leather outfit that stirred my adolescent yearnings).
Kipling? Ah yes. The soldiers poet. I wondered, at first, why he, and Heinlein, were on the Colonels reading list all those eons ago.
The forces do still, to an extent, remain a bastion in a sea of PC precisely because they reflect the mores of the pool from which they recruit (try telling some squaddie from a working class northern estate, or farm lads, that women are not just equal, but better, and they’ll laugh in your face … if you’re lucky) but even that is under constant attack. View any ‘presentation’ of our armed forces now and you’d think it was a majority ‘minority’ and female force (speaking as someone who spent ‘way too much time’ at the sharp end it really, really aint so! Well except for all those safe, air-conditioned, cushy billets at home. Throw in the preferential promotion prospects and you've yet another recipe for disaster). [The police here are an exemplar of what the end result may be, female and minority senior officers, PC requirements for every interaction leaving the service not fit for purpose].
Your beloved Gloucesters (incidentally don’t you still love your compatriots inability to pronounce it?) are long gone (as is my local regiment the DLI), ‘amalgamated’ away to pay for … benefits for indolents and immigrants.
Me, showing my typically impeccable timing, I left the upper sixth and started at the local pit … two days before they closed it down. Joined The RAF (Regiment 2/2) just in time (Sigh!) to be sent South. Post all that (and ‘coming up from the ranks’ that’s ‘mustang’ to you colonials), third tour ‘across the water’ I was ‘loaned’ to The Det. Then, post the peace deal (known colloquially as ‘the sellout’) I was passed to ‘another unit’ (‘swimmer canoeist’ in X then E Sqdrn. - possibly another reason your lot wont let me in, you have enough of your own problem children to be aware off I suppose). [It’s always been amusing, small things please small minds after all, when asked whether I was Army, Navy or RAF and I just say … yes].
Fightback? I suspect, fear, it will come to just that. History appears to be cyclical, and I fear we’re reliving the debauchery of the roaring twenties (remember what comes next?) but without the resilient, independent, self-sufficient, God-fearing and patriotic population of that era. You still do there, they may be under relentless attack from all sides, but away from the metropolitan cesspits they’re still standing strong. No pressure or anything but, you better not fail.
Anon, I know. The Gloucesters were amalgamated with the Hampshires, becoming the Hampsters and then disappeared entirely. All those immigrant votes don't come cheap y'know.
"I just say... yes." For some reason this reminds me of a sales meeting in Detroit, back in the '90s. A weather beaten Brit came to lunch at our enterprise in Troy (Anything to declare? Just me and my wooden horse, Officer). I asked him what he'd done before moving to the States and he replied, a bit truculently, "Sold beans to the Saudis." Having a mind like a steel trap I came back, quick as a flash, "Oh, I was in the Army too, but I left and became a COE priest, hope to be re-ordained as an RC." The wiley oldish fox smelled BS, "A Roman Catholic priest? Go on, recite the Lord's Prayer in Latin then." By the time I got to "fiat voluntas tua" he admitted defeat, "That's enough, mate." I liked that guy.
Forgive the apropos of nothing digression and yes, you're right, we'd better not fail and the pressure's surely on. I reckon it'll be a close run thing. Whether it gets hot in the UK remains to be seen. Let's hope and pray it doesn't.
PS. Anon, I'd forgotten Servalan! And yes, TV is utter rubbish and mostly unwatchable.
Post a Comment