The All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (AUCPB), inheriting Bolshevik principles of the R.S.D.W.P. -R.S.D.W.P.(b) - A.U.C.P.(b) - of Lenin's policiy in the CPSU, is the highest form of proletarian class organisation, advanced detachment of the working class, acting in unity with the peasantry and labour intelligentsia, standing on the Party's positions for: the gain of political power - overthrowing the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the destruction of private ownership over the instuments and means of production, the revival of the USSR, the further strenghtening of the proletarian interests for the complete victory of socialism and gradual transition to communism. The ideological and theoretical basis of the AUCPB is formed by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, is their doctrine in its creative application and development in modern conditions. The AUCPB is a component of the global communist movement with the aim of communism triumphing over the whole planet.

Tuesday, 1 March 2016

FOR BOLSHEVISM - No 03 (156) MARCH 2016

Workers of all countries, unite!



On this day, AUCPB organizations held traditional rallies, meetings and picketing. Where local authorities banned rallies, "one-man" pickets at permitted places. At events organized by the party organizations of the AUCPB together with other parties of the communist direction, the Bolsheviks celebrated the huge role V.I. Lenin played as a theorist and practitioner of the communist movement, as the creator of Bolshevism - a guide to action in the class struggle of the proletariat, as the founder of the Communist Party to head the victorious Great October Socialist Revolution, as the creator of the world's first socialist state. USSR Below we provide information on some of the events held.
In Moscow was held the traditional laying of flowers and a brief rally at the Lenin Mausoleum on Red Square. As always, the meeting began at 18-50 hours, which corresponds to the time of the death of VI Lenin. The ceremony was attended by about 200 people - representatives of almost all the communist parties and left-wing organizations in Moscow: AUCPB, RCWP, Rot Front, Communists of Russia, United Communist Party and others, and at the Mausoleum of VI Lenin red carnations were laid.
In Minsk, in an event organized by the Bolsheviks, the laying of flowers at the monument to VI Lenin (located in the centre of Minsk) was attended by representatives of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the Belarusian Communist Party of Workers (BKPT), Public Association "For democracy, social progress and justice" (DSPS), and other organizations. After laying flowers, at the gathering were the heads of organizations participating in the event who made speeches. The Secretary of the Central Committee of the AUCPB Comrade V.B. Zelikov read out excerpts from a by speech JV Stalin at the II All-Union Congress of Soviets on January 26, 1924, when the country bit farewell to Vladimir Ilyich.
In conclusion, the people gathered at the monument to VI Lenin vowed that they will make every effort for the cause of the restoration of Soviet power as the dictatorship of the proletariat, of proletarian socialism and the Great Motherland of workers, peasants and working intellectuals - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
In Vladivostok, a meeting was held in memory of VI Lenin, with the laying flowers at the monument to him. The meeting was attended by representatives of almost all the left parties Primorye - AUCPB, the RCWP, "Rot Front" and others. The number of people at the rally this time amounted to only 30-40 people, because of the cold weather, storm, wind and traffic jams in the city after the recent snow. The Bolsheviks distributed at the rally leaflets and the newspaper "Hammer and Sickle."
In the North Caucasus
In Pyatigorsk, a meeting was held on Lenin Square near the monument to VI Lenin and the laying of flowers at the monument. Speeches were made by the Secretary of the Central Committee of the AUCPB comrade N.A. Degtyarenko and other comrades. Then there was an open meeting dedicated to the memory of Vladimir Lenin, organized by the Pyatigorsk town committee of the AUCPB.
In Mineral Waters at the monument to VI Lenin was held a public meeting under the slogan "We are for the Soviet Union" The Secretary of the town committee of the AUCPB comrade V.P. Skvortsova made a speech at the meeting.
In the village of Ilsky in Krasnodar Krai, a “one-person” picket was held near the monument to VI Lenin, under the slogan "Lenin's ideas live and triumph!" Comrade L.A. Derbeda, Secretary of the Seversky Krai AUCPB carried out the picket.
Organizations of the AUCPB and VMGB together with representatives of other communist organizations of the city, held a meeting and laid flowers at the monument to the leader of the world proletariat in Revolution Square.
The fear of execution by US forces compelled "the international community" to condemn the DPRK.
On February 7, the DPRK successfully launched from a test site Shohei in the north-west of the country of a missile carrier with an artificial Earth satellite "Kwangmyŏngsŏng -4". The satellite was launched into orbit.
We congratulate our Korean friends on a new achievement of Korean science and technology and wish them further success in the development of space technology.
However, the "international community" condemned the DPRK scientists in their yet another breakthrough in space exploration, attributing to it a purely militaristic provocative thing and there is no trace in the event. The reaction by Japan, South Korea and other countries has shown their fear of execution by the US, which is still playing the role of world policeman, again threatening the DPRK with the introduction of new sanctions against the socialist country.
We are confident that no sanctions by the reactionaries are not able to slow down the victory march of the DPRK on the way to a highly prosperous socialist state. And another victory in space exploration by Korean scientists once again remind any imperialist aggressor the ability of the DPRK to reliably defend the peaceful labour of its citizens.
We are outraged by the cowardly attitude of the Russian leadership, which has still not withdrawn from the US as a state of a perpetual vassal as a result of the counter-revolution of the 1990s, having no self-esteem, and occupies a position of loyalty to the US, as evidenced by the statement of the Russian Foreign Ministry on February 7 this year.
We once again congratulate our Korean friends with another success and we wish them TO CONTINUE to keep this up.

February 7, 2016

At the present time, in contrast to what was happening in the 90s and the following years, when the country's leaders gleefully signed a capitulation agreement, the Russian government still could refuse the "attractive" US disarmament proposals.
Here is the the reply by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov to a question asked by news channel "Russia Today" on the prospects of Russian-American talks on further reductions of nuclear weapons
Question: How can you comment on the call from the White House of the US for Russia to begin talks on the further reduction of nuclear arsenals?
Answer: The position of the Russian side about the prospects for the continuation of the START negotiations, and generally to reduce nuclear weapons remains unchanged. We have crossed the line, for which bilateral US-Russian negotiations in this area are now not possible for several reasons. Firstly, we have reduced the level of available nuclear warheads and their carriers to almost those parameters that existed in the late 1950's - early 60-s. This fact is very important to understand, not only by colleagues in Washington, but all those in the international community who continue to ignore the facts, to agitate for further nuclear reductions. The Russian side proceeds from the need to connect to dialogue on the subject of all states possessing nuclear weapons capabilities. States with such potential are well aware of what is at stake. The bilateral Russian-American track is exhausted due to the "nuclear weapons-arithmetic."
The second factor, which deprives us of the opportunity to negotiate on further reductions, is down to the continuing destabilizing activities by Washington in areas such as the creation of a global missile defence system, the continuation of development of weapons tools capable of inflicting a disarming strike without the use of nuclear weapons, but a destructive force equal to the range of strategic means. I mean the "Global Strike" program. In addition, we are very concerned about the prospect of the transfer of the race of arms into outer space and insist on the need for a legally binding tool that would prohibit the deployment of shock weapons systems in outer space. There are disturbing imbalances (which are not decreasing) also in the field of conventional arms. There are serious problems associated with the lack of progress by fault of the US, on the issue of the of the Implementation of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. The list of our concerns is not exhausted.
The third point needed to say in reaction to the "reminders" from Washington, it is a complete lack of political logic and common sense in the sentence to "disarm" in the conditions when the current US administration for a long time has made a concerted effort to undermine the defence and the defence-industrial potential of Russia , through its sanctions policy. It turns out that they are trying to weaken us via sanctions – it will not work, but, nevertheless, such attempts are being made - and at the same time calling on us for talks on further arms reductions. But this simply does not happen in reality. It cannot be seriously considered a proposal that amounts to the fact that we are "playing with only one goalpost," and, in the long run, to participate in a game without rules or the US changing rules of the game.
If and when all these circumstances change, and our concerns and priorities are taken into account, that is, when the situation will be created, guaranteed to ensure equal security for all and to the strengthening of global security on the basis of sovereign equality of States, then, probably, it will be possible to revisit the question of the continuation of negotiations. But not before.

February 6, 2016

After the stated on January 21 by President Putin negative opinion against V.I. Lenin that caused the righteous indignation of Soviet people, spokesman Peskov hastened to disguise the meaning of the president of the said stupidity. Peskov explained that it was only a "personal opinion," by the head of state.
But the opinion of the president of the country cannot be personal, more-so if it is being publicly expressed.
Simultaneously Peskov distanced himself from rumours of the possible reburial of Lenin, saying that it is not necessary to place such a question on the agenda of the Kremlin. See: http://www.tvc.ru/news/show/id/84981

Nevertheless, it started another round of speculation around the Mausoleum of V.I. Lenin – about the so-called illegality of the allegedly mummification of his body, in violation of the canons of the Orthodox Church and the need to "put right the action of the Bolsheviks" in this issue
For example, the Head of Ingushetia Yunus-Bek Yevkurov said the following: "I, as a religious person believe that the body of Lenin, as well as any person should be buried. Because as it is now, this is somehow not humane... In addition, the fact that the very presence of Lenin's body is in the mausoleum is incompatible with the historical traditions of Russia."
The homegrown Russian liberal intelligentsia in general is unable to calm down in this issue, and permanently aggravates the matter for discussion in society, "pressurising" President Putin, and he manoeuvres accordingly.
But, as before, and now, all the motivation of the servants of the bourgeois regime – the officials, and leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), and the allegedly resisting them liberals testify to their pathological hatred for everything Soviet or, at least, of their historical ignorance.
Pirogov - Firstly, an embalmed body placed in a mausoleum crypt is a form of burial. Quite rare, but not unique .. And in pre-revolutionary Russia there is a historical precedent – the burial in an open coffin on view of the great Russian surgeon Nikolai Pirogov near Vinnitsa in 1881. As described in the definition of the Holy Synod in St. Petersburg, "so that the students and followers of noble and charitable affairs of the servant of God N.I. Pirogov could see the light of his face" .
The article http://arctus.livejournal.com/81277.html lists in detail the requirements for burial in accordance with the Federal Law "On burial and funeral affairs" and compliance with them the corresponding burial of the V.I.Lenin
Secondly , a tradition developed in Soviet times - is also part of Russian historical traditions , is no less worthy than the traditions of pre-revolutionary times.
Of course, atheists are not obliged to follow the Christian traditions, but the Mausoleum of V.I. Lenin does not even contradict them (the traditions).
We note that "Christian traditions" can also be very strange. For example, in the church of Ossuary Kutna Hora in the vicinity of Prague (Czech Republic). Http://lifestripes.ru/world/10-fotografij-neobychnoj-cerkvi-kostnica.html
To finish it, bones were used from the old burial grounds of the monastery cemetery.
It may be said that, so they say, only heretics of the Catholic Czech Republic could do this, but in Russian are the Orthodox traditions.
But something like that we meet, and among the Orthodox customs.
Take the Russian St. Panteleimon Monastery on Mount Athos (Greece) http://www.solun.gr/article/31-panteleimonov-afon
Panteleimonov Monastery on Mount Athos "According to tradition, after the death of the monks, they are buried in a cloth, and dug up three years later.
On the skull of the deceased is written the name and the date of death, and then put on a shelf in the ossuary, the bones are packed away separately http://livelyplanet.ru/structures/771-krasivye-monastyri-afona.html
Hypocrites supposedly cooking up the "tradition", of the "burial of a human being," really only want to destroy the Soviet tradition of Soviet monuments, the memory of the Soviet era.
Would have changed anything, if at that time, was adopted by another in 1924 option to perpetuate the memory of Lenin? For example, the sarcophagus was made to be shut?
Would that have reassured the current gravediggers? No, because in this case, people would still have come to lay flowers. Because the gravediggers do not just want to rebury Lenin, for example near the Kremlin wall, no, they want to get him further away, and not only him, but ALL THOSE SOVIET PEOPLE buried by the Kremlin wall!
What a tantrum is raised every time by the Liberals about the laying of flowers at the grave of J.V. Stalin! For them, this is intolerable that people come to honour his memory. Liberals feel sick, that Soviet people still revere the memory of J.V. Stalin as the greatest of statesmen of the twentieth century, who was able in practice to carry out Lenin's idea of a just society, where the working man is the main figure in the country.
Likewise, Lenin's Mausoleum is hated by slanderers of Russia because it is the place where people come to honour the memory of the founder of the Soviet states.
Let us assume that by the Kremlin walls there would have been no graves but only monuments instead - would the modern guardians of "democracy" and "human rights" not have tried to destroy these Soviet monuments?
The "war on monuments ," we are seeing now and not only in Ukraine ...
It is in this that lies the essence of the malicious human- hating campaign raised by the liberals against Lenin, and not in the "Christian tradition". The issue of the reburial of the body of V.I. Lenin is a purely political question, and has nothing to do with "Christian traditions"

Towards the 60 anniversary of the anti-Stalin report of Khrushchev at the XX congress of the CPSU

A tragic date in our Soviet history is drawing nearer. Sixty years ago, on the morning of February 25, 1956 at the 20th congress of thte CPSU N. S. Khrushchev made his "secret" speech "About the personality cult and its consequences". The report at the "closed" meeting of congress responded by a deafening "echo" in all the history of the Soviet country and in world communist and labor movement and in all history of the XX century.
Some words about the status of the report. The closed meeting and the report in it didn't appear in the initial agenda of congress, and ordinary delegates of congress didn't know about it. But before congress, a meeting of the Presidium of the Central Committee and Plenum of the Central Committee (about which no information was given to the mass media), at which the question of removal at congress of a question of "cult of personality" was considered took place on February 13, 1956 and it was entrusted to N. S. Khrushchev to give at congress the report on this subject. So for the top of party, no "surprise" and "unplanned material" in Khrushchev's report existed.
The flow of the secret meeting of congress wasn't recorded in shorthand. After the end of the speech, N. A. Bulganin presiding over the meeting suggested not to open debate on the report and not to ask questions. Congress unanimously adopted the resolution "About the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" which was published in the press, and also the resolution on mailing of the text of the report to the party organizations without its publication in the open press.
In the hours-long report, N. S. Khrushchev spoke about a cult of personality of Stalin, citing classics of Marxism who condemned "a cult of an individual", quoted Lenin "The letter to congress", supplementing it with N. K. Krupskaya's words about Stalin's personality, coolly condemned Stalin for use of the term "enemy of the people", for violation by Stalin of rules of collective leadership, repression concerning "old Bolsheviks" and delegates of the XVII Congress, exaggerated details of repressions against well-known party members. They "got" to Stalin also for exaggeration of his role in the Great Patriotic War, for deportations of entire people, for the doctors’ plot, for such "mean" manifestations of a cult of personality as songs, names of cities, the text of the Anthem of the USSR in its edition of 1944 — 1956, etc.
In a newspaper article, there is no opportunity in detail to stop on all the lies which were poured out by Khrushchev. Slanderous character of the statements containing in the report is in details exposed in the book of the American researcher Grover Furr "Anti-Stalin Podlost", M., 2007. The author reasonably draws a conclusion: "From all assersions of "the closed report" directly exposing Stalin or Beria there was nothing truthful. More precisely so: among all those from them that were given to check, all were false. As it becomes clear in the speech, Khrushchev didn't speak of anything of the kind about Stalin and Beria that would turn out to be true. In total "the closed report" is weaved entirely from jugglings".
We will give an assessment of some statements of Khrushchev in the report. About the authority of the leader and "cult of personality". Stalin said in December, 1931: "As for me, I only Lenin's pupil and the purpose of my life is to be his worthy pupil... Marxism doesn't deny the role of outstanding persons at all or that people make history... Great people are worth something only so far as they are able to understand correctly these conditions, to understand how to change them. If they don't understand these conditions and want these these conditions to change as prompted by their imagination, they, these people, get to Don Quixote's position... No, individually it is impossible to solve questions. Individual decisions are always or nearly always — one-sided decisions". F. Engels (About authority. K. Marx, F. Engels. Collected works, 2nd prod., t.18, p. 302): "Some socialists began a real crusade recently against what they call the principle of authority. It is enough to declare to them that this or that act is authoritative to condemn him. With this simplified trick, they began to abuse it to such an extent that it is necessary to consider the question slightly in more detail. Authority in the sense about which we talk of here, means imposing on us foreign will; on the other hand, authority assumes submission … anti-adventurists demand that the authoritative political state is abolished with one blow, even earlier than those social relations which generated it are abolished. They demand that abolishment of authority is the first act of a social revolution. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? Revolution is, undoubtedly, the most authoritative thing that is only possible. Revolution is the act in which a part of the population imposes its will over the other part by means of guns, bayonets and guns, that is, means that are extremely authoritative. And if the won party doesn't want to lose the fruits of its efforts, it has to sustain its domination by means of that fear which inspires in reactionaries its weapon".
In the twilight of his days, Mikoyan who originally actively supported Khrushchev in his attacks on Stalin, was compelled to recognize the absurdity of the charges against Stalin of authoritarianism, in intolerance to other opinions. Remembering his participation in meetings with Stalin, Mikoyan wrote: "Each of us had the full opportunity to state and defend the opinion or the proposal. We frankly discussed the most difficult and controversial issues … meeting from Stalin in most cases his understanding and his reasonable tolerance even when our statements were obviously not to his liking. Stalin listened to who spoke to him and advised, with interest listened to disputes, skillfully drawing from them that truth which helped him to formulate afterwards the final, most expedient decisions which are given rise, thus, as a result of collective discussion. Moreover, quite often it happened when, convinced by our arguments, Stalin changed his initial point of view on this or that question". Here for you is the "cult of personality"!
About the "outgaming" by Khrushchev of Lenin’s "Letter to congress". The trick in this one was in the relying on bad memory of the listeners. Very few people remembered that Stalin quoted the annoying for him lines from this letter in his speech on October 23, 1927. Khrushchev made an impression that he had for the first time acquainted the listeners with Lenin's "testament". He gave the impression that Lenin's proposal on Stalin's resignation from the post of General Secretary was a secret. Khrushchev kept back that after acquainting delegates of the XIII congress with "The letter to congress" Stalin actually resigned, but that his resignation wasn't accepted by delegates. It is necessary to tell that already in our time, serious scientific research (was conducted see: V.A. Sakharov’s "Political testament" of Lenin. Reality of history and myths of politics. M. 2003) which showed that there are serious grounds to consider "the last of Lenin letters" (or part of them) a forgery.
Khrushchev persistently claimed that for justification of his evil affairs "Stalin created the concept "enemy of the people". Condemning this "concept", Khrushchev forgot that only 11 days before, he used it himself in a report. Then he spoke: "Trotskyists, bukharinets, bourgeois nationalists and the other worst enemies of the people, advocates of restoration of capitalism made desperate attempts to undermine from within the Leninist unity of the party ranks – and all of them racked their heads about this unity". If one is to understand seriously, it is necessary to say that the term enemy of the people (lennemi du peuple) is an invention and not by Stalin, and not by the Bolsheviks, but instead has an old origin and was widely used even during Great French revolution.
We will talk in more detail about a key subject of the report of Khrushchev: "Stalin repressions", tortures, rehabilitation. In the report it in detail sorts out the cases of R. I. Eykhe. N. I. Ezhov, Ya.E. Rudzutak, A.M Rozenblyum, I.D. Kabakov, S. V. Kosior, V. Ya. Chubar, P.P. Postyshev, A.V. Kosarev, giving to each of them certainly a positive characteristic. It is important to note that in all these cases, the accused declared that all their confessions of anti-Soviet affairs were obtained as a result of torture. Certainly in "trusting" these statements, Khrushchev says: here, everyone condemned under Stalin are innocent victims. From here already nearby and to the ordinary and nowadays (alas!) statements – "here there is no need to verify anything– a person went to prison, was shot under Stalin – this means that person is an innocent victim". At this particular time there was some strange terminology (we will notice - quite "suitable" for the purposes for the sake of which it was created): instead of "convicted", they began to speak about "victims of political repression", and instead of "pardoned by court decision" – it then became "rehabilitated". Thus the big lie about the "Stalin repressions" was born.
M. S. Solomentsev, a former member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU, the Chairman of the commission on rehabilitation already in Gorbachev times, testifies: "It is said that the necessary confessions were obtained through beatings and tortures. However I didn't see neither documents, nor hear oral statements from the victims confirming such statements about them. Owing to service circumstances, I happened to talk to many of those who suffered from the repressions. Everyone to whom I succeeded in talking to, didn't confirm cases of beatings at interrogations. Most often they answered my question with: "They didn’t touch me and as far as others are concerned, I simply don't know …"". A letter by the minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Abakumov to Stalin of July 17, 1947 with a signature stamp "top secret" is interesting. The first line of this quite voluminous document read: "I report on the organs of the MGB on the practice of carrying out investigations on the cases of spies, saboteurs, terrorists and participants of the anti-Soviet underground. Concerning those arrested who persistently resist the demands of an investigation, behave provocatively and in any ways try to sabotage the investigation or divert it from the correct path, strict measures of a detention regime under guards are applied. Such measure are as follows:
a) transfer to prison with a more rigid regime where hours of sleep are reduced and worsened the content of the food of the arrested and other domestic needs;
b) solitary confinement;
c) deprivation of walks, grocery transfers and right of reading books;
d) settlement into a punishment cell for up to 20 days.
Concerning the spies exposed by investigation, saboteurs, terrorists and other active enemies of Soviet people who impudently refuse to give away their accomplices to the organs of the MGB and don't give evidence about their criminal activity, according to the order of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (bolsheviks) of January 10 of 1939 (!), apply physical measures:
In the centre - from sanctions by the ministry of MGB USSR.
In the localities - from sanctions by ministers of the state security of the republics and chiefs of regional and regional administrations of the MGB.
The need of sanctions of the high administration by physical impact is confirmed also by indications of the former chief of the Internal prison of the MGB USSR, A.N Mironova of December 23, 1955. We read: "In the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs Internal prison beating of arrested started in December, 1952, and before, from us, employees went to Lefortovsky prison since November 6, 1952 according to instructions of the deputy minister of state security Ryumin and his deputies. We kept a book of the accounting of the use of physical application in prison. But concerning each arrestee in every case, there was permission from the corresponding deputy minister i.e. which watched certain actions. From my words it is written down truly and read to me. MIRONOV".
There is a natural question that arises – so where there are these books of the accounting of beatings? Why they aren't shown to historians, the general public? After all it is PROOF of enormous force of influence. However, up to the present the Russian government not only abstains from the publication of documents on "Stalin repressions", but also doesn't allow any researchers access to them. Is this not an attempt "to immortalize" the mythology of the report of Khrushchev, the mythology of the XX congress.
Some words about the "rehabilitation of victims of political repressions". It would have been be possible to expect that here the love of the bourgeois democrats to "legal culture" and "legality" would appear. On the contrary! Only mockery at bases of the right is it possible to call the Law of the Russian Federation "About recovery of victims of political repressions" of October 18, 1991 where in article 5 it says: "admitted not containing public danger are the below listed acts and are rehabilitated irrespective of the actual validity of charge of the person, condemned for: a) anti-Soviet propaganda and promotion; b) distribution of obviously false fabrications discrediting the Soviet political or social order". And where the classical: "the law has no retroactive force"? Here speak - those who didn't fight against Soviet power were rehabilitated as innocent, i.e. But then why and after the XX congress which opened the road of mass rehabilitation were they justified and released as a rule not by court, but the decision of the special "three" (one prosecutor, one bureaucrat of the Central Committee and one of the already rehabilitated members of the Central Committee)? Why for rehabilitation most often all there was, was a conversation of members of the commission with the prisoner and short acquaintance to his case, and the cases were destroyed afterwards?
Accusing Stalin of all mortal sins, Khrushchev on the eve of the XX congress twice during one of meetings of Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU spoke about Yagod and Ezhov as innocent. At first in the working legal record of a meeting it is written down as Khrushchev having said: "Ezhov, probably, isn't guilty, he is an honest person". After this he adds: "Yagod is most likely, clean".
Well, Nikita, - Ezhov and Yagod are honest and pure. And what did you do in the times as you speak, of the "Stalin repressions"?. In the report – about this….not a single word. Fine, then we shall look at documents ourselves! "After the arrival into Ukraine of loyal Stalinist Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, we seriously started finishing off the enemies of the people" — the chief of the Ukrainian People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs Alekksandr Uspensky claimed. All those arrested (except one) were members of the Politburo, Organizational bureau, Sekrektariat of the KP(B)U. Khrushchev's attitude towards the "repressions" is characterized brightly by his speeches. "We have to conduct a resolute fight against enemies, provocateurs and slanderers — he said in June, 1938 at the XIV congress of KP(B)U. — Until then, the struggle was conducted too inertly. We have to... ruthlessly finish off the spies and traitors. It is necessary to be finish them off once and for all". The historian Yury Zhukov claims that he saw the document where Khrushchev petitions for an increase in the list of those to be convicted on "the 1st category" up to 20 000 people without instruction indications of any surnames. M. S. Solomentsev reports: "The chairman of the KGB V. Chebrikov informed me a bit later that in the Committee there are documents confirming that Khrushchev, working in Ukraine and in Moscow as the first head of the party organizations, headed the "three" according to the decision to which in Moscow some tens of thousands of people were repressed, and in Ukraine several times more". That N. S. Khrushchev intensively destroys the papers in the archives compromising him, was almost openly spoke about in the years before his "leaving" in resignation. According to the historian V.P. Naumov: "In 1955 according to Khrushchev's order, Beria's papers, documents on Stalin and on other heads of party were destroyed. In total 11 sackloads of papers were destroyed. The more reliably the documents disappeared, the more Khrushchev especially emotionally condemned the crimes in which he himself took part in".
It is interesting to see in an interview by V.P. Pronin, the chairman of the Moscow Soviet from April, 1939 to 1945 published in "The military and historical magazine" No. 10 for 1991. "Many heads of the districts were negative towards Khrushchev. And here is why. Khrushchev was semiliterate person, that was his problem. He actively promoted repressions. The matter is, that over him hung the sword of Damocles. In 1920, Khrushchev voted for the Trotskyist platform. And therefore, obviously, being afraid of reprisal, he himself especially diligent "fought" against carelessness, loss of political vigilance, political blindness etc. Khrushchev in Moscow authorized repressions of a large number of party and Soviet workers. Under him, 23 secretaries of district committees of the city were almost all arrested. And almost all secretaries of district committees of area. All secretaries of the MK and MSK of the party were repressed: Katselenbogen, Margolin, Kogan, Korytny. All managers of departments, including Khrushchev’s personal assistant. Fear for deeds committed, aspiration to cover up tracks - here is what, I think, pushed first of all Khrushchev to undertake at the XX congress the exposure of a cult of personality, therefore he so energetically tried to accuse of all ill-deeds the person who couldn't in any way neither object, nor shed light on truth and actual facts. If he, Khrushchev, had high ideological reasons and honest intentions, he himself would have had to confess and self-critically assume his share of blame, having called on this from others".
After "Stalin repressions" in Khrushchev's report there are questions lower in rank. We will stop only on three of them. S.G. Kara-Murz remembers the deportations of the Crimean Tatars, Chechens etc: "To us came a dressmaker — a Tatar from the Crimea. The surname Kara-Murz is well known there, my grandfather on my father’s side was from the Crimea, and it was placed with my mother, with trust. When the Crimea was freed, she cried, spoke very much with emotion. Then she calmed down, and repeated: "Thank God! Thank God!" I did not fully understand about what she was talking about, afterwards only comparing and understanding. The dressmaker was afraid for her Tatar relatives. I thought that they will be judged for cooperation with Germans, and under laws of wartime would mean certain death. When it became known that nobody began to be judged individually, they moved all the Tatars from the Crimea, and she felt happy". From M. S. Solomentsev's memoirs: "Nowadays it is often said, that Chechens were repressed by Stalin, and that they strongly suffered from it. But I remember that when I worked as the chairman of the Karaganda Economic soviet, I met many deportees, including, from Chechnya, and they said to me that they live not bad at all, they all work, but as supply managers, in trade, in public catering. None of them went to work in mineshafts, but even then, under me, Karaganda gave out 35 million tons of coal". As a matter of fact, J.V. Stalin showed unusual softness concerning these people, making nobody responsible for war and high treason crimes, having allocated funds for their arrangements at their new residence. (see the section "library" on the site vkpb.ru Pykhalov I.V. For why Stalin relocated people? M of 2008 of 1,7 Mb of Word)
"The doctors’ plot". The first of the “doctors’ plot” were letters by L.F. Timashuk written in 1948. They concerned methods of treatment of A.A. Zhdanov shortly before his sudden death. No Jewish doctors in these letters existed. And in general, Timashuk had no concern to the "doctors plot " and the affair which arose only 4 years later. After the closing of the "case of the doctors" in 1953, the doctors treating A.A. Zhdanov recognized that in 1948 (as well as what wrote Timashuk!) medical care appeared to have been administered to the patient incorrectly, which eventually, led to his premature death. The "case of the doctors" got to "investigation" by the MGB from 1952, and was "inflated" by an investigator nationalist, "flying up the ranks on it" to post of deputy minister of state security, who was quickly exposed and paid with his life for his actions.
Perhaps, the most shameless lie about Stalin in the report is the lie on the subject "Stalin and Great Patriotic War". Here are excerpts from the report: "After that (the start of the Great Patriotic War) he for a long time actually didn't direct military operations and didn't start affairs at all but returned to the leadership only when some members of the Politburo came to him and told him that it is necessary to take urgently such measures to correct the situation at the front", "Stalin was very far from understanding of that real situation which developed on fronts", "Take, - I say, - a map, Alexander Mikhaylovich (Comrade Vasilevsky is present here), show to comrade Stalin what situation has developed. And it is necessary to say that Stalin planned operations by the globe. (Liveliness in the hall.) Yes, comrades, take a globe and show the frontline on it. And so I also tell comrade Vasilevsky, show the situation on the map".
It is possible to talk about the anti-Stalin lie in N. S. Khrushchev's report indefinitely. The report was only a priming in a huge "tectonic" break in the history of the Soviet country. I remember how in 1956 my parents said to me (a twelve-year-old teenager): "Seryozha. You understand nothing. Khrushchev betrayed everything! He betrayed everything!" It is possible to speak about a mean, unscrupulous position of the former Stalin party leadership and state of not defending Stalin, and about who really inflated "the cult of personality of Stalin", and about the terrible lie by Khrushchev – "There are no enemies of Soviet power!", which played a fatal role in all subsequent history of the Soviet Union. We will take that same experienced "bison" of perestroika– Anatoly Chubais who says: "… The fact is that I hate Soviet power. Moreover, there is little in my life that I hate as much as Soviet power. It began with morning switch on of the radio and a vigorous voice with that so especially disgusting Soviet intonation: "Hello, comrades! We now begin morning exercises!" For many normal people school days are a happy childhood. But I hated my school. The school was with advanced military patriotic education. We marched in uniform with a collar as worm by naval seamen, and sang the song: "The sun shines bright…. hello, fine country!" My school doesn’t stir any tender feelings inside me. And the main reminiscence consists in that we with friends at some time decided to pull it to pieces, and better still, set fire to it. We managed to tear off only one step off a porchway and a tear off seagull welded on a military patriotic monument. We weren’t able cause bigger damage to it. But we hated it all together".
The XX congress of CPSU was over. Delegates parted their own ways and "the post –XX Congress history" of Khrushchev's report began. From Enver Hodge's memoirs: "It (Khrushchev's report) was read only by First secretaries of the brotherly parties participating in congress. I read it during the night and, very shaken, gave it to read also to Mehmet and Gogo … Having read it, we returned at once to the authors their awful report. We had no need to take with ourselves this garbage tin of low-standard charges invented by Khrushchev".
Congress was followed by a "cannonade" in Georgia. In March, 1956 Georgians, as well as all Soviet citizens, were going to honour Joseph Stalin's memory. The "secret" report "About a cult of personality and its consequences" of which almost at once it became widely known, revolted residents of Georgia. The streets of Tbilisi, Kutaisi, Telavi, Gori were full of indignant people. They came out to defend Stalin. The outcome came closer by midnight on March 9. The commander of the Transcaucasian military district, General Ivan Fedyuninsky brought into Tbilisi military equipment, including tanks and artillery. Bloody events were played out at the House of communication – where 27 people were killed. On the embankment armored troop-carriers and tanks were thrown into the "fight". Protesters carried Lenin and Stalin's portraits in the first rows. That didn't help. From bullets and under tank caterpillars were killed from 60 to 150 people.
Also the bloody events in Hungary which led to many thousands of the victims by all parties of the conflict turned out to be the natural consequence of the "anti-Stalin setup" at the XX congress. Thus the West German newspaper "De Welt" reported: "In Gellert, security service specialists were captured. Hundreds them were killed in other districts of the city. They were burned in scores of underground galleries where they tried to hide".
The "secret" report by Khrushchev was in fact secret only for the Soviet people. In Poland in a copy of the text was made by a worker of the Central Committee of the PORP and transferred to Victor Grayevsky who by means of the Israeli Embassy forwarded the copy into hands of the chief of the Israeli counterintelligence of ShABAK, and from there it got into the west. In June, 1956 the report for the first time was published in the USA at first in English, and then in Russian. In the USSR the report for the first time was officially published only in 1989. Perhaps this is natural. If the speech was widely published right after its reading – to the Soviet people who perfectly knew the real Stalin and events of national history, all falsity of the speech, all artificiality of the charges against Stalin would have become clear at once.
With the flow of time, the anti-Stalin report by Khrushchev not only not "consigned to the past", but became an even more important factor in the development of the political situation. And not just in the Soviet Union. Events both in Hungary, and in GDR, and in Czechoslovakia, the relationship of the USSR and People's Republic of China – all these were the direct consequences developed by Khrushchev and his gang on course towards "de-Stalinization", are wider – "de-sovietization" of the entire culture, life, and views of the broad masses of people. Here the catastrophic phenomena appeared in communist parties of the capitalist countries, universal splits of Communist Parties into those "recognizing the report" and those "rejecting the report".
Molotov in a confidential conversation noted subsequently that if before the XX congress at least a large half of the world supported the USSR, after congress it wasn't necessary to speak about that any more. The subject of "Stalin repressions" became the main subject in the psychological war (the concept which was developed as part of the cold war). The USSR lost support of the leftist intellectuals of the West — who in turn transferred over towards transition to the sides of the opponents of the USSR in cold war. This process "was imported" into the environment of the domestic Soviet intellectuals, thereby generating "dissidents".
Soviet society during the post-Stalin period began to quickly degenerate morally and spiritually, becoming more and more defenceless under the powerful impact of petty-bourgeois and consumer psychology which actively "pleased" the leadership of the by then non-communist CPSU. Here and the active war against the ideas stated by J.V. Stalin in "Economic problems of socialism in the USSR" in 1952, the destruction of the bases, of the socialist economy of the USSR constructed in his time. Here and profanation of the ideology of the Soviet state, the destruction of its spiritual bond with the people and at the same time the creation of a complex of guilt and blame at those who built this state and defended it. The destruction of high communist ideals was conducted and the image of fair and brotherly life under communism was replaced by a pragmatical criteria of consumption like "to catch up with America on meat and milk". To Khrushchev belongs such pearls as "Communism means a free pass on city transport", "What is communism? Communism is pancakes with oil and sour cream". Paradoxically, but Khrushchev finished his political career off, having left the country without grain, with serious interruptions in the delivery of bread to the population.
The Krushchevites, "democratizers" sought to change the soul of the Soviet person, to take away from them a feeling of unity with other Soviet people, a feeling of a common Motherland – the Soviet Union, the pride of the great and fine Motherland, pride of the heroic Soviet history, the history of labour feats and struggles, and finally – to run off the road this terrible and awful Stalinist "democracy", in practice - a symbol for millions of people of a wonderful, decent and fair life.
Looking back, we see that J.V. Stalin correctly called on the party and the people for political vigilance and for understanding of that in the process of advancing forward, the class struggle doesn't fade, but on the contrary, becomes aggravated, and that achievements and progress don't nullify wrecking. "A feature of modern-day wreckers – was emphasized by Stalin, – in that they possess the party-membership card, play on the political trust awarded them as to party members, and use political carelessness of the Soviet people". These thoughts of Stalin had closely something in common with what Lenin said: "The destruction of classes is a lengthy affair, a difficult, persistent class struggle which after the overthrow of the power of capital, after the destruction of the bourgeois state, after the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, doesn't disappear (as vulgar persons of old socialism and old social democracy imagine) but only changes in its forms, becoming in many respects even more fierce" (Lenin. PSS. T.38. Page 387).
About what it can lead to (and actually led to) the denial of the Stalin experience of construction of a communist society was written by Mao Tse Tung and Enver Hodge in their Joint Statement "About the birthday of J.V. Stalin" from December 21, 1964: "The criminal acts committed by Khrushchev and his handy henchmen will have long-term consequences, they will lead to the degeneration, and then to the destruction of the USSR and the CPSU".
The Gorbachev "perestroika" which generated "heroes" as the A.N. Yakovlev type became the direct continuation of the report of Khrushchev and the final stage of destruction of socialism and the Soviet Union, that same Yakovlev who "announced" the true purposes of "perestroika" clearly and openly. We will listen to him. In 2001, A.N. Yakovlev, remembering his activity, admitted: "At the beginning of perestroika, we had to lie, play the hypocrite, dissemble partially – there were no two ways about it. We had to – and in this, the specifics of a perestroika (reconstruction) of a totalitarian system – to break the totalitarian communist party". And in the introductory article to the edition of "The black book of communism" Yakovlev speaks in Russian: "After the XX congress, in a super-narrow circle of closest friends and adherents, we often discussed problems of democratization of the country and society. They chose a simple as a sledge hammer method of promoting the "ideas" of the late Lenin. The group of true, but not imaginary reformers developed (certainly, orally) the following plan: to strike using Lenin's authority Stalin and Stalinism. And then, in case of success, Plekhanov and social democracy can beat up Lenin, using liberalism and "moral socialism" – strike at revolutionism in general. The Soviet totalitarian regime could be destroyed only through glasnost (openness) and the totalitarian discipline of the party, masking themselves thus with so-called interests of modernising socialism. Looking back, I can say with pride that the smart, but very simple tactic – the mechanisms of totalitarianism against the system of totalitarianism itself – worked well". There is nothing to add to these words – everything is explained clearly and precisely.
Work on "beating up" everything Stalin and Soviet is being carried on by the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights. Member of the Presidential Council S. Karaganov made a speech at a meeting on February 1, 2011 in Yekaterinburg in the presence of the Russian President with a developed and far-reaching statement concerning de-sovietization. He directly said in the speech: "The people and elite after the last 100 years almost have nothing to respect", "It is necessary to recognize the Soviet period of our history as one big crime, and the Soviet Union – a criminal state". There you go!
We are left now with the need to understand only one question – and what are people’s attitude towards this restless vanity for "destroying", at last, this moustached monster of J.V. Stalin. And here the "democrats – liberals" have obvious disagreements. Suddenly J.V. Stalin wins first place in a television poll, "Stalin – the name of Russia"! In broad poll on a subject "If in Russia they decided to hold a public referendum to ask: whether "it is necessary to carry out a program assuming recognition of the Soviet Union as a criminal state which was carrying out genocide of its own people and guilty of unleashing of World War II", then how would you answer? And, you represent - 89.7% of all respondents answered - No, it isn't necessary. And only pathetic 9.6% supported, answered – yes, it is necessary. Numerous periodic polls show a steady growth of "popularity" of Stalin. Already more than 50% of the population speak positively about Stalin. Winston Churchill was it seems correct, during Khrushchev’s times when he said: "Khrushchev began a fight against a dead man who then came out of it victorious ".
Paradoxically (at first sight) that the Soviet, "totalitarian" system, the "totalitarian" thinking was provided in the USSR many decades of stable economic growth, cultural and scientific development of the country, and yet the "democratic" reforms which "spread" over the country a quarter of the century ago brought about only one thing – regress in everything – in the economy, industry, science, a crisis state of culture and art, full degradation of moral views and behaviour of people. The same as the "spread" of "democracy", led only to catastrophic ruin while in horror they see a totalitarian Soviet Union where in reality everything was better, good, kind, and people "grew" and multiplied?
What are we Bolsheviks to do, in this hardest period for the country and people, when in opposition to the present bourgeois regime is disorder where there is no light at the end and when the ordinary people are repeatedly deceived by the advertising promising fantastic riches, who in essence don't trust anybody and anything? There is one great and mighty feeling in each former Soviet person – a feeling of former belonging to a great and mighty Motherland who always remembers you and which you have to defend from all troubles and adversities. I am sure this mighty feeling will be the major engine in fight for the liberation of our great and fine Motherland from the present capitalist slavery, from the trap of lies and humiliation.

Secretary of the Central Committee of the AUCPB S. V. Khristenko
The Juche Idea Study Group of England supported by the Association For the Study of Songun Politics UK and the UK Korean Friendship Association held a successful meeting to mark the Day of the Shining Star , the 74th anniversary of the birth of the great leader comrade KIM JONG IL , in central London on the 30th of January . The meeting was honoured by the attendance of the diplomatic representatives of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea and was attended by members of the Juche Idea Study Group of England, the Association For the Study of Songun Politics UK, UK Korean Friendship Association and also members of the New Communist Party which included Andy Brooks general secretary as well members of its central committee, members of the Communist Party of Great Britain Marxist Leninist and Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain Marxist Leninist . A member of the Sweden Korea Friendship Association also attended .
Chairman Dermot Hudson opened the meeting saying that it was very important to celebrate the Day of the Shining Star as a practical act of solidarity with Peoples Korea.
The chairman read out a message from KFA member David Munoz de Castro which read in part "I congratulate the Korean people for the success of H bomb text which is the symbol of the victory of Songun.
This demonstrates the socialist superiority against imperialism and also against the decline of the revisionists propaganda which is the puppet of the imperialism and enemy of the working class.
Our support, solidarity and fight is always with the People of Korea.
Stop the imperialist and revisionist propaganda against the DPRK!
Andy Brooks said that meetings like this one were very important to increase solidarity with the DPRK . He said that the H bomb test by the DPRK was a successful act of self defence and that the DPRK was committed to no first use of nuclear weapons.
Alexander Meads , JISGE member and student spoke about the life and revolutionary activities of the great leader comrade KIM JONG IL the sun of Songun. He said that comrade KIM JONG IL was born the son of guerrillas on Mt Paektu . Throughout his life he was at one with the people for example he participated in the construction of 20,000 flats in Pyongyang . KIM JONG IL began his Songun revolutionary leadership on the 25th of August 1960 at the Seoul Ryu Kyong Su no 105th tank division of the KPA and continued with it throughout his life. He was a great revolutionary . Alexander concluded with a rallying call to carry forward the ideas of great comrade KIM JONG IL.
Comrade Thae Yong Ho from the DPRK embassy exposed the falsity and hypocrisy of those who argued against the DPRK nuclear deterrent , apparently the UK must have its own nuclear deterrent but not the DPRK . More must be done to expose anti DPRK propaganda. Comrade Thae took some questions from participants in the meeting. Asked about the 7th congress of the WPK he said that congresses of the WPK are concerned with programmatic tasks.
Dermot Hudson chair of the JISGE addressed the meeting on the subject of the Juche Idea and Songun Idea today saying in part "
The US and other imperialists turn their hatred and venom towards the
DPRK not because of “human rights “ nor because of the nuclear issue but because the DPRK under the banner of the Juche idea is self-reliant and is committed to self-development . This is what irks the imperialists the most. They also fear the spread of the Juche Idea and Songun Idea throughout the world , they do not want the DPRK’s example spreading to other countries
However the imperialists are in vain . The influence of the Juche Idea and Songun Idea are spreading rapidly...
The Juche Idea and Songun are not abstract but firmly grounded in the realities of the world and are enjoying increasing support from the world people because they show the way to true independence.
James Taylor , UK KFA member and JISGE member who is also head of Eastern region of the CPGBML read out the statement "Power of the DPRK " from the AINDF saying in part "the power of the DPRK demonstrating throughout the world, the boundless pride of the people under wise leadership of the benevolent leader.
The fact tells that the audacious defender of people, the long-awaited savior of destiny of humankind, leads the world in the DPRK."
Theo Russell UK KFA Communications Secretary and member of CC of NCP said that the propaganda of the imperialists and revisionists against the DPRK is false.
Shaun Pickford secretary general of the JISGE made a short speech praising the life of the great leader comrade KIM JONG IL.
Participants enjoyed a film about the DPRK Sporting Achievement in 2015.
A photo exhibition showing the exploits of the great leader comrade
KIM JONG IL was staged.
There was also an exhibition of the works of President KIM IL SUNG , chairman KIM JONG IL and Marshal KIM JONG UN as well as publications of the DPRK plus publications from JISGE and UK KFA
Links to some of the Speeches

The UK Korean Friendship Association along with the Juche Idea Study Group of England and the Association for the Study of Songun Politics UK held a picket of the south Korean puppet embassy on the 4th of February at 4pm to demand independent reunification without outsiders and also to call for the release of political prisoners in south Korea and an end to the suppression of the labour movement and pro reunification forces.The picket was also supported by the New Communist Party and their general secretary Andy Brooks was present at the picket.
Dermot Hudson Chairman of the UK Korean Friendship Association and President of the Association For the Study of Songun Politics UK made a speech to introduce the picket saying " This picket is very timely as we have learnt that on the 29th of January held a trial of Han Sang Gyun, chairman of the south Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU). Last year the police issued a warrant of arrest for him for the mere reason that he led an illegal demonstration and arrested him in December by hurling a huge repressive force. This is a shocking and diabolic act of fascist repression by the south Korean puppet authorities . Can you imagine if the head of the British TUC was arrested and brought to trial.
In south Korea the right wing fascist puppet regime is pursuing an anti people austerity policy just like the Cameron government here and a number of other capitalist countries . However , it is far more ruthless in suppressing the labour and trade union movement in south Korea. Protests against austerity in south Korea have been met with water cannon and tear gas . In one incident an old farmer Baek Nam-gi was knocked by a water cannon and hospitalised on the 14th of November 2015.
As a matter the only human rights violator on the Korean peninsula is the south Korean puppet regime not the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea . It has even been condemned by the UN who said that the “the freedom of assembly and association has stepped back in south Korea in recent years. In Peoples Korea the people are masters of their destiny, they enjoy full employment , free medical care , free education and low cost housing but in south Korea there is no sovereignty as south Korea is a puppet of the US and people’s rights are violated....

South Korea is also still holding 23 long term un-converted prisoners . These are people who were arrested in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s . One them Kim Ki-chang e is 96 years old
We are also here to support the independent and peaceful reunification of Korea . South Korea has no independence and is occupied by 37,000 US troops. In his New Year dear respected Marshal KIM JONG UN called for independent reunification saying “The whole nation should struggle resolutely against the sycophantic and treacherous manoeuvres of the anti-reunification forces to cooperate with the outside forces. The south Korean authorities should discontinue such a humiliating act as going on a tour of foreign countries touting for cooperation in resolving the internal issues of the nation”. Thus the south Korean puppet regime have been trying drag all kinds of foreign forces into the Korean peninsula. The Korean reunification question should be discussed in Pyongyang , Seoul or Panmumjom not New York, not Tokyo, not London or Paris , not the UN but in Korea by Korean people themselves.
It is also highly regrettable that the south Korean puppet regime have joined the unseemly and hysterical clamour over the DPRK’s satellite launch . The DPRK has every right to launch its own satellites and this is something that no has the right to interfere in.
So in conclusion we call on south Korea to stop repressing the labour and progressive movement, supporting jailing pro reunification activists and stop depending on outside forces !
Andy Brooks general secretary of the New Communist Party also made a speech condemning human rights violations in south Korea.
The statement "south Korea is a colony of the US was read out .
Slogans such as "Korea Is One " , "US out of Korea" and "Down with the south Korean fascist puppet regime " were chanted.
Leaflets handed out to passers and discussions held.
Picket concluded at 5.45pm

London 7th of February Juche 105(2016)
The Association For the Study of Songun Politics UK(ASSPUK), the Juche Idea Study Group of England(JISGE) and the UK Korean Friendship Association(UK KFA) today issued a statement congratulating the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea on the successful launch of the Kwangmyongsong-4:
Our organisations, the ASSPUK, JISGE and UK KFA, wish to congratulate the government , party and people of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea on the successful launch of the earth observation satellite Kwangmyongsong-4. This is another great achievement and miracle of Juche science, the most advanced form of science.
The DPRK National Aerospace Development Administration reported Carrier rocket Kwangmyongsong blasted off from the Sohae Space Center in Cholsan County, North Phyongan Province at 09:00 on February 7, Juche 105(2016). The satellite entered its pre-set orbit at 09:09:46, 9 minutes and 46 seconds after the lift-off.
The satellite is going round the polar orbit at 494.6 km perigee altitude and 500 km apogee altitude at the angle of inclination of 97.4 degrees. Its cycle is 94 minutes and 24 seconds.
This is another great leap forward for the DPRK which contributes to building a thriving socialist country. It is indeed a momentous event in developing the country's science, technology, economy and defence capability of Peoples Korea.
The Kwangmyongsong-4 was launched using indigenous technology, resources and labour . It is a graphic and striking testimony to the correctness and overwhelming superiority of the Juche Idea , Songun Idea , the line of self reliance and the policy of self development .
Some are jealous that they cannot do such a thing themselves and others want to hold back the development of the DPRK, ultimately to stifle the socialist system of Korea and to subjugate the Korean people into imperialist slavery.
The satellite launch of Peoples Korea is its independent and sovereign right which no one should seek to challenge nor interfere. It is quite absurd for other countries to take issue with it as the launch has been carried out on the DPRK territory. Those condemning the launch remind us of a bully and irate person telling his neighbour that they cannot have a barbeque in their own backgarden.
Those making an unseemly noise about the launch are not the "international community" but simply the US imperialists and their puppets ,lackeys and vassals as well as some big powers who have sold out and kowtow to the imperialists.
We admire, and salute, the courage of the plucky and brave Korean people and their supreme leader respected Marshal KIM JONG UN in defying US and world imperialism , bravo comrades !.
The launch of the satellite Kwangmyongsong-4 is a powerful inspiration to us,
Juche Idea , Songun Idea followers and friends of Peoples Korea. In the coming weeks and months the progressive people of the UK and the world should wage a powerful solidarity campaign with Peoples Korea !



The UK Korean Friendship Association issued the following statement in response to the statement of Foreign Secretary Hammond on the recent successful launch of the DPRK's satellite Kwangmysong 4:
Firstly , it is the absolute inviolable right of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to explore space and to launch space vehicles. Space is not owned by the US or anyone else nor is there a monopoly granted to a small numbers of states to explore space . The launch of the Kwangmysong 4 was carried out on the DPRK own territory using its own resources . It is no one else business whether the DPRK launches satellite or not . It is certainly not the business of the UK which is thousands of miles away from the DPRK.
Secondly, Hammond cites UNSC 'resolutions' but these are illegal ones that are actually contrary to the UN charter and were railroaded through the UNSC using bullying ,diktat and influence buying . The UNSC resolutions were a violation of the DPRK's sovereignty and the DPRK rejected them when they were passed .Thus the DPRK is not legally bound to obey any UNSC resolution.
Thirdly, the DPRK's launch of the satellite was not a threat to anyone nor was it detrimental to regional peace and security. The DPRK followed all international procedures by informing all relevant UN bodies of its intention to launch a satellite . The DPRK is a signatory to the Outer Space Treaty(5th of March 2009) and is therefore entitled to launch satellites. It is a false assertion of Hammond that the DPRK is prioritising nuclear and missile development over the living standards of its people. In fact the launch of the Kwangmysong greatly contributes to the well-being of the people of the DPRK by contributing to the improvement and advance of the independent economy of the DPRK.
The UK should not meddle in the affairs of the DPRK nor should it act as a poodle of the US . It is time for the UK to recognise the DPRK's right to independence and develop relations with the DPRK on that basis.

No comments: