How Zionism Censors the Red Army Out of Jewish Holocaust History


Zionist Jewish organisations have a policy of writing the Soviet Red Army out of Jewish holocaust history because they oppose Socialism and prefer racism and fascism. Although hundreds of thousands of Soviet soldiers died ‘liberating’ the Nazi German Death Camps holding the Jews (and other victims), and cared for the survivors they found, people like Steven Spielberg (in ‘Schindler’s List’) remove virtually all positive reference to the Red Army, but instead perpetuate the US Cold War myth of Soviet ‘anti-Semitism’.


The capitalist West knew about the Nazi Death Camps but said nothing and did nothing. The Red Army knew nothing and did everything. The Red Army knew first-hand of Nazi brutality – but when the Death Camps were found – a whole new chapter in human depravity was revealed. When British BBC correspondent Alexander Werth reported that he had been in the Red Army frontline when it discovered the Majdanek Concentration Camp (situated in Poland), Winston Churchill forbade the BBC from transmitting the details – referring to it as ‘Soviet propaganda’, designed to make people feel ‘sorry’ for Soviet suffering! Churchill, of course, had eulogized Hitler prior to WWII, and did not want to believe that the rightwing thug that he had backed could have carried-out these racist crimes.


I have heard that the British ‘Special Air Service’ (SAS) encountered Nazi German Death Camps in their forward operating positions (far inside enemy territory in Western Europe). However, during the ongoing fighting, local cease-fires had been arranged between belligerents which saw the Nazi Germans dismantle the camps and attempted to ‘hide’ or ‘eradicate’ the thousands of dead bodies. The shocked SAS Troopers were told to ‘pull-back’ and not harass the Nazi Germans whilst the ‘concealing process’ unfolded. Jewish people lived happily in the USSR and many fought with distinction during WWII. It was only the Zionist representatives of the Modern State of Israel (from 1948) which caused trouble in the Soviet Union, by trying to encourage a Jewish uprising against Communism. This negative attitude toward Communism has its basis in US foreign policy – which Israel represents in the Middle East. Only the Soviet Red Army gave its blood to free the Jews when nobody else in the world would do so.


Just after posting the above, I received a moronic far-rightwing comment containing ‘holocaust denial’, ‘anti-Semitism’, and US Cold War ‘anti-Soviet’ propaganda all wrapped-up in two short paragraphs of fascist ignorance:

‘Bolshevism was largely a Jewish affair. The Jews cannot successfully falsify history for ever.

The so-called holocaust is fake history. The forensic examinations of the alleged death camps do not support the official yarn, but rather contradict it.’

This is the kind of fascist ignorance that is now running riot in the USA following the election of the racist (and intellectually challenged) Donald Trump. Zionism is not Jewish – it is White racism employed by non-religious people of Jewish origin. Zionists, as fascists, utilise ‘lying’ as advocated by Adolf Hitler – and so Zionists (like all fascists) routinely lie about everything. Marx rejected all religion and was not ‘Jewish’ in the practising sense – Bolshevism was not Jewish in origin (as Lenin was not Jewish) – but there were many fine (secular) Marxist-Leninists of Jewish ancestry. Hitlerites committed untold crimes against humanity and were military crushed as a consequence. The fascist idiot who wrote the above is a White practitioner of that other fascist pursuit – Japanese Zen Buddhism – or that distorted and hate filled ideology that killed millions in Asia during WWII. Do not listen to the Zionists or the White fascists – their pseudo-science will have you believing in geocentricism, hollow earth and flat earth conspiracies, as wellii as scapegoating minorities, and making Nazi Germany appear to be the true ‘victim’ of WWII. Down with all fascism and holocaust denial!

CIA Documents Suggest Hitler Survived WWII and Fled to Latin America (1954)!


Hitler allegedly imitated his suicide and disappeared under the name of Adolf Sittelmayer. Declassified US documents from the archives of the CIA indirectly confirm that the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler did not commit suicide in 1945, but fled to Latin America.



An American intelligence informant in 1955, reported that former SS Officer Philip Citroen allegedly met with Adolf Hitler after the end of the Second World War, whilst hid in Colombia under the surname ‘Sittelmayer’. The agent’s report states that Citroën contacted the Führer about once a month. This happened during business trips from Venezuela to Colombia. Attached to the report documents is a photograph of Citroen with a man like Adolf Hitler, taken in 1954 in Tunja (Colombia). After some time, according to the informant of the CIA, Hitler moved to Argentina. According to the official version, Afolph Hitler and his wife Eva Braun committed suicide on April 30, 1945 in Berlin during the storming of the German capital by Soviet troops. Their bodies were burnt in the garden of the Reich Chancellery.

Russian Language Reference:


Why was Sergey Korolev (Сергей Королев) Arrested? (1938)


(Research and Translation by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Author’s Note: Despite the Cold War being over for at least 26 years, it is extraordinary how Western academic discourse has not been able to shrug-off US-generated ‘disinformation’ about the Soviet Union, and directly access reliable Russian-language texts as a means to ‘correct’ the bizarre lies and improbable myths. Probably about a year ago, I attended a ‘Cosmonaut’ exhibition held at London’s Science Museum. Despite the esteemed reputation of this fine British institution, the narrative it pursued was the usual ‘illogical’ plurality that the Soviet Union was both extraordinarily ‘advanced’, whilst simultaneously being ‘backward’ and ‘despotic’. Sergey Korolev was treated as a genius who produced his best work after being arrested by Joseph Stalin, imprisoned on trumped-up charges, tortured and finally released. In fact, none of this is recorded as true within Soviet-era records. It was the NKVD (Soviet Secret Police) which moved against Korolev, with Stalin being informed at the end of the evidence gathering process. Korolev was not sentenced to death (as incorrectly stated by the English language Wiki-page dealing with his biography). Korolev was sentenced to 10 years hard labour, (which transpired to mean being well-cared for within a technological, working environment). Korolev was not tortured, and did not confess any crimes during his imprisonment. The only time that Joseph Stalin had any direct involvement with Korolev, is when he personally ordered Korolev’s release in 1944 (after just 6 years of imprisonment). During his imprisonment, Korolev carried-out vitally important scientific work for the Soviet State – hardly the behaviour or actions of a man supposedly betrayed by the State that he served. From my own research, Sergey Korolev was a potential target of Nazi German and Trotskyite agents operating in the USSR during the latter part of the 1930’s. The Soviet Authorities devised a plan to remove Sergey Korolev from public view until the threat of fascism was removed – by 1944 – that situation had arrived as the forces of Nazi Germany were being driven back to Berlin. Sergey Korolev was a staunch supporter of the Soviet System, and he used his genius to beat the US during the early Space Race. ACW (10.12.2017)

In the quite frankly ‘illogical’ world of US Cold War hysteria, paranoia, disinformation and plain bad Western academia, the Soviet Union is depicted as an armed Concentration Camp bristling with a disaffected population seeking ‘defection’ to the ‘capitalist’ (free) West at the earliest opportunity. This almost comical misrepresentation of world history is not so funny, when it is considered that the warmongers in Washington were seriously prepared to put the lives of tens of millions of people at risk around the world, simply in the maintenance and pursuance of this myth. The Soviet Union was a vast improvement upon the backward and corrupt feudal system it had replaced in 1917, but its success irritated the US ideologues due to its complete rejection of predatory capitalism. This meant that the dominant US corporate families (such as Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford and the Rothschild, etc) spread throughout the capitalist world (together with the Catholic and Protestant Churches) had no direct say (or influence) over a large swathe of humanity. (The Jewish Rockerfeller and Carnegie families, amongst others, funded ‘eugenic’ programmes in the US prior to the outbreak of WWII). This general rightwing capitalist approach to the expansion of markets and generating of profit, led directly to an expressed antipathy toward the ‘Socialist’ USSR, which intended to inspire and support a world-wide Revolution, and the usurption of the capitalist system. In-short, the Soviet System protected millions of people from the ruthless expansion of a free market economy, and got in the way of the extension of predatory capitalism into Russia (at least until the end of 1991).

The rise of Leon Trotsky complicated matters between 1929 and his death in 1940. Whilst receiving financial support from leading American Zionists, Trotsky embarked upon the mission of developing a capitalist-friendly ‘pseudo-Socialist’ movement, which whilst appearing to support ‘Revolution’ in the name of the workers, actively strove to co-operate with the Bourgeois State and wed his movement to an alliance with world fascism. Trotsky, acting in concordance with the Roman Catholic Church, openly opposed the existence of the Soviet Union, and supported any and all rightwing movements around the world. This reached a peak in the mid to late 1930’s, where Trotsky and his supporters opposed the democratically elected ‘Socialist’ Republican government, and supported the fascist General Franco (the British Trotskyite George Orwell heeded this call and even travelled to Spain to join a Trotskyite militia). In 1938, Trotsky openly called for his followers to fully support Nazi Germany and its preparation for an attack on the USSR. Trotsky also called for the population of the Soviet Union to murder Joseph Stalin, and where possible, carry-out acts of sabotage and terrorism against the Soviet State. Although never ‘popular’ in the USSR, nevertheless, Trotsky did have a minority of followers in influential places, who were able to put into practice his call for illegal activities. The point of this sabotage was to weaken the Soviet State from within, and make it easier for the military forces of Nazi Germany to destroy the Red Army in open combat. By sabotaging the development of military equipment and technology, the Red Army would have its fighting efficiency drastically reduced.

This is the historical background to the time period within which Sergey Korolev (1907-1966) – the eventual father of the Soviet Space Programme – was arrested in 1938, and imprisoned within the Soviet Union. As usual, most Western narratives (including the English-language Wikipedia) are deficient or misleading when dealing with this episode. Korolev was not ‘tortured’ whilst in custody awaiting trial, or whilst in prison. In fact, he was treated very well, and was allowed to continue his scientific work whilst within a secure environment. The fact that he continued to develop scientific innovations whilst ‘detained’, is hardly the activities of a man under duress, and has led some to speculate that the Soviet State took him into protective custody to continue his crucial scientific work (concocting a ‘criminal’ cover story in the process). It could be that Nazi German and Trotskyite spies were conspiring to kill Sergey Korolev, and so it was in his best interests that he ‘disappear’ from public view for a time.

During the Spring of 1937. Reactive Scientific Research Institute No. 3 (RNII-3 – Scientific Research Institute for Jet Propulsion, later – NII-3) – came under intense governmental scrutiny. This was because of the action taken by the Head of Division Andreya Kostikov (Андрея Костикова) who wrote to Nikolayu Yezhovu (Николаю Ежову) of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B), stating that funds had been embezzled and new technology sabotaged by the Institute’s Director Ivana Kleymenova (Ивана Клейменова), the Deputy Director Georgiya Langemaka (Георгия Лангемака), and leading engineers Valentina Glushko (Валентина Глушко) and Sergey Korolev (Сергея Королева). Initially, the charges were aimed primarily at Kleymenova and Langemaka, with the two engineers accused of incompetence and mediocrity rather than collusion. Indeed, during the nights of the 2nd and 3rd of November, 1937, Kleymenova and Langemaka were arrested, and under interrogation, both admitted to ‘wrecking activities’. In the general narrative, it is believed that at this time, Kleymenova and Langemaka also implicated Glushko and Korolev (as well as others), but a close examination of the historical facts (within Russian language sources) indicates that at least in the case of Sergey Korolev, this assumption is incorrect. As matters transpired, once the NKVD had gathered and verified all the evidence pertaining to this case, acting in accordance with Soviet Law (which specified the ‘Death Sentence’ for this type of ‘political’ crime), Kleymenova and Langemaka were executed (by being ‘shot’). Although all the engineers were also ‘recorded’ as participating in ‘wrecking activities’, no further action was taken against them at the time. This suggests that Kleymenova and Langemaka, as corrupting influences, were removed so that Sergey Korolev (one of the USSR’s most prolific rocket experts), could do the progressive work that his bosses had prevented him from developing.

However, not long after these events, engineer Valentina Glushko was arrested and admitted to ‘wrecking activities’ alongside Nikolayem Il’inym (Николаем Ильиным) – the former Head of the Gas Dynamic Laboratory – but records show that no mention was made (either by Glushko or the NKVD) of Sergey Korolev.  It was surprising, therefore, that the NKVD arrested Sergey Korolev on the 27th of June, 1938 (as he was being released from hospital). Writing in the Russian-language book entitled ‘Father’ (Отец),  Natalia Korolev (Натальи Королевой) confirms that her father’s arrest had nothing to do with Glushko (or his bosses Kleymenova and Langemaka). Although Western narratives continuously assert that Sergey Korolev was arrested on ‘false charges’, this interpretation is incorrect – as Soviet-era records clearly show that Sergey Korolev was arrested with ‘no charges’ being levelled at him. It is interesting to note in passing, that in the opinion of Yaroslav Golovanov (Ярослава Голованова), in his book entitled ‘Korolev: Myths and Facts’ (Королев: факты и мифы), that Sergey Korolev had made an enemy of Kostikov – by standing in the way of him becoming the Director of Reactive Scientific Research Institute No. 3. Kostikov had been behind a number of reports implying that engineers had been involved in sabotage activates – but there is nothing in writing directly linking Kostilov to Korolev. Even so, biographer Georgiy Vetrov (Георгий Ветров), in his book entitled ‘SP Korolev and Cosmonautics’ (С.П. Королев и космонавтика), states that Korolev was ambitious to be in-charge of his own Institute – and was actively competing with Kostilov to influence the direction of jet engine design.

An intriguing clue as to the genius of Sergey Korolev is given by fellow employee Georgiy Vetro Leonid Dushkin (Георгий Ветро Леонид Душкин), who stated in an interview published in the Russian-language magazine entitled ‘Wings of the Motherland’ (Крылья родины), that one of the reasons for Korolev’s arrest, was that he had developed his own cruise missile device, as well as a rocket-propelled aeroplane. The engine did not use oxygen, but rather nitric acid (a development which Glushko knew about, but did not report). Again, it is assumed that whatever else was happening at Reactive Scientific Research Institute No. 3, it was a personal grudge held by Kostilov that led to Korolev being arrested. Yes, Korolev had broken protocols by acting without permission or direction, but on the other hand, he had demonstrated advanced ‘Socialist’ thinking in the service of the Soviet Union. This explains why the Soviet Authorities arrested Korolev without any ‘charge’ being given. He was removed from the obstructing influence of Kostilov, and within a highly disciplined and controlled technological environment, he was allowed to safely pursue his own developmental direction.

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2017.

Russian Language Source:

Zhang Danhong (张丹红) – Maintaining Journalistic Truth Under the Spectre of German Racism (2008)


Zhang Danhong (张丹红) – Chinese Journalist

During the summer of 2008, an extraordinary outburst of institutional anti-Chinese racism occurred in modern Germany. Although not reported widely in the English-speaking press, nevertheless, it appears to have been orchestrated to cause maximum disruption to the opening of the Beijing Olympic Games. German racism, of course, is nothing new. This is a country that inflicted upon humanity one of its greatest tragedies in the form of the Nazi German holocaust, and which (through the US colony of West German), actively participated in the bringing-down of Communist East Germany and the Soviet Union. During imperialist times, Germany sent troops into China as a means to steal land that did not belong to Germany, whilst between 1898-1900, German troops ruthlessly participated in an international effort to viciously put-down the indigenous Chinese Boxer Uprising (a mass movement against Western imperialism). Fascistic German attitudes toward Socialism are not new, however, as in 1918 (whilst German troops were still fighting British troops in France), the Kaiser ordered German troops into Revolutionary Russia to fight alongside British troops, with the objective of ‘destroying’ the Socialist Regime developing there. Imperial, fascist and now ‘democratic’ Germany has a well established racist and anti-Socialist attitude that is historically clear for all to see. Little more can be expected from a country that treats former SS Officers (and ‘War Criminals’) with the utmost respect, providing such odious individuals with State-owned lavish accommodation and generous State Pensions.

Zhang Danhong, (who was 42 in 2008), was born in Beijing and studied Germanic language and literature at Beijing University and Cologne, Germany. In 1990, she became a Chinese journalist for the Chinese Department of ‘Voices of Germany’, and has been the Deputy Director of that department since 2004. As a German media expert and expert on Chinese affairs, (and since the violence of ‘smashing and robbing’ that occurred in Tibet in March of 2008), Zhang Danhong has frequently appeared at various seminars and on television programmes in Germany to make the case for China. Zhang has consistently maintained that the West should not criticize China with an ulterior attitude, but rather recognise China’s progress in Human Rights (and other key areas).

Four days before the opening of the Beijing Olympics, Zhang Danhong, reportedly said that ‘The Communist Party of China has more than any political force in the world implemented Article 3 of the Declaration of Human Rights’, referring to the Chinese Authorities pulling more than 400 million people out of poverty. Similarly, on a TV talk show in late July, Zhang reportedly said that the Chinese government had done much to protect local culture in Tibet, and criticized German Chancellor Angela Merkel for deliberately sabotaging relations with Beijing. The German media is said to have reacted strongly to Zhang’s remarks. On August 11th, German magazine Focus attacked Zhang as someone who was ‘courting’ China’s Communist Party. On August 20th, the Berliner Zeitung Newspaper quoted parliamentary representative Dieter Wiefelsputz as saying that Zhang’s performance was a ‘catastrophe’. Two days later (on the August 22nd), the same newspaper confirmed Zhang’s suspension from work. Zhang’s employer – German Voices – (without any sense of irony) stated Zhang ‘Did not uphold the values of freedom, democracy and human rights that Germany has consistently adhered to.’ Even a cursory examination of German history exposes the lie of this statement.

After the German Chancellor Angela Merkel met with the 14th Dalai Lama in the Prime Minister’s Office in 2007, a major diplomatic crisis was triggered between Germany and China, with the media in Germany initiating a racially motivated smear campaign against China. After the ‘March 14’ incident in Tibet in 2008, the German media reached fever pitch in its rhetorical war against China. Even in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake in Sichuan, some of Germany’s mainstream media outlets did not stop unwarranted accusations against China. For example, “Der Spiegel” attacked the Chinese government for its earthquake relief work in Sichuan Province as ‘making the disaster a public relations initiative.’

On a talk show entitled ‘Fighting for Markets and Medals – Fear of Emerging Power in China’ which aired on TV2 in Germany, Zhang Danhong criticized German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for pursuing a confrontation with China by meeting with the 14th Dalai Lama and undermining the historically good relations between China and Germany. Zhang also praised the Chinese government for its great efforts in protecting Tibetan culture. It is understood that around 20,000 people watched this programme on the day in Germany. Zhang Danhong said she received a large number of letters from viewers after the programme was aired, agreeing with her point of view.  On the issue of Tibet, Zhang has repeatedly and outspokenly criticized the Western media for its non-factual reports. At a conference in Bonn held by the Dalai Lama’s representative in Europe – Gusang Gyinzan – Zhang on the spot questioned Gusang Gyinzan as to why it was that the 14th Dalai Lama had told the Western media that he had given-up his demand for an ‘Independent’ Tibet, whilst the so-called ‘Constitution of Tibet Government in Exile’ (written in the Tibetan language) still retained the ‘Independence’ clause? Gusang Gyinzan was shocked into silence in front of the world media.

In the meantime, Zhang Danhong stated that her suspension was due entirely to her objective reporting about China, and her refusal to accept or repeat Western lies. The Western support for the 14th Dalai Lama and the Falun Gong Cult is the real reason her approach to objective and factual reporting has been attacked in Germany as such truthful reporting is a threat to the Western misrepresentation of China and her historic developments in all aspects of progressive development since 1949.

(Other Chinese sources state that Zhang Danhong was ‘sacked’ as ‘Deputy Director’ of the Chinese Department of ‘German Voices’, but was subsequently allowed to assume her role as an ‘Editor’. This followed the December 1st, 2008 decision taken by the German Broadcasting Authority that ‘German Voices’ had done no wrong in its treatment of Zhang Danhong. However, after this ‘indicent’, Zhang Danhong continued to be the target of German racism whilst at work for her objective approach to journalism)

Chinese Language References:张丹红/19347

Cultural Hitlerism – the Mainstreaming of Far-Right Rhetoric in the West


Cultural Hitlerism is my descriptive name for the mainstreaming of a racist nationalism across the West. Although an argument can be made that the US has always pursued a rightwing narrative in the service of predatory capitalism, within Europe it has been a different story. Although European governments have undoubtedly pursued vicious and highly destructive colonial policies across the world, within those European countries has generally existed a very strong leftwing tendency amongst the working class. Of course, the strength and direction of this tendency has varied from country to country, and increased or decreased with intensity over-time, but as bourgeois governments murdered and massacred non-White people in other parts of the world, there were robust Socialist or Communist resistances from within European domestic populations. Even within Italy and Germany prior to the rise of fascism in the 20th century, there were healthy Marxist-Leninist Movements, often in alliance with various types of religiously inspired utopian socialism. Obviously, the Catholic Church a priori opposed any and all Socialist Movements (and still does) due to the emphasis upon atheism as a means to raise the educational level of the working class, and actively assisted Nazi Germany in its perpetuation of the holocaust against Jews, Roma, Communists, Slavs, Disabled. Homosexuals and anyone who disagreed with Hitler’s insane ideas of racial purity. Following Hitler’s defeat in 1945, the US emerged onto the world scene as a major player, demanding that all European governments pursue a rightwing capitalist path, and steer their respective populations away from Socialist Movements. America achieved this political and cultural influence through the power of the debt associated with its ‘war loans’ to the devastated European countries, and by the presence of its troops throughout Europe. The demand that all European countries renounce their Socialist ideals and join the US in an aggressive military pact against the Soviet Union was firmly established through NATO – and the preference for rightwing ideology was firmly established. The idea of Hitlerite racist attitudes came to dominate the European mind, as it became immersed in US-style White Supremacist thinking. Indeed, so successful as this brain-washing become, that many people in the West now think it is culturally acceptable to be ‘proud’ of one’s ethnicity (to the exclusion of all others), and to think in racist terms about identity. In this Hitlerite psychological climate, the notion of ‘racism’ is not viewed as ‘aberrant’ as it was prior to 1945, but is now seen as a legitimate viewpoint to be held, providing it conforms to certain culturally accepted norms of expression. This only applies to White people of course, as Hitler intended, and does not apply to non-White communities living either in or outside Europe, which are continuously labelled as a ‘threat’ to the survival of the White race. This is the inherently ‘racist’ educational climate in the UK that our children are now being raised within.

Soviet Photography and the Presentation of Socialist Reality – Exposing the Trotskyite Work of David King


(Research and Translation by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

After spending hours reading through Russian language source materials, I remain unconvinced that elements within the Soviet Government conspired to deliberately ‘alter’ photographs in a manner that would today constitute the production of ‘fake news’. However, such an allegation fits-in well with the machinations of US-produced (anti-Soviet) Cold War propaganda, and it is an allegation that the British graphic designer David King made a lucrative career trumpeting through his numerous books. David King ‘collected’ Soviet public information posters from the former USSR (which were issued ‘free of charge’ as a public service), and ‘sold’ these most distinctive of Russian ‘working class’ expressions, to the unsuspecting Western working class. King took the Socialist propaganda of one chapter of the international working class and sold it back to another – this understanding should give an indication of the true ‘bourgeois’ and ‘Trotskyite’ credentials of the man. Although it is true that from the earliest days, photographs were clarified and categorised, the idea of a sinister plot remains highly suspect. This article rejects a priori the bourgeois assumption surrounding the subject of Soviet photograph editing, and encourages the reader to look anew at the situation and attempt to scrutinise afresh what usually passes as ‘evidence’. This process requires the operation of a direct working class approach that is not distracted by the baubles of bourgeois assumptions. My considered opinion is that this phenomenon is part US fabrication, part the imagination of David King, and partly the product of the Soviet Government retaining the ‘purity’ of Socialist Realism’. Those who originally assisted the Bolshevik Revolution – and then outrageously ‘betrayed’ it, have no moral right to be historically associated with it, and it is interesting to note that the deliberate fabrication of photographs and film in the West and in Nazi Germany (before its destruction by the Soviet Union) is not given the scrutiny allotted to the case of the Soviet Union.


Modern Russia is a capitalist State with a Socialist past. Whereas many people assume for forward moving of evolutionary forces, whereby things progress in one direction from simple to complex forms, in fact evolution does not work like this, and can produce less complex forms from more complex forms, as environmental conditions demand. Marx understood that evolutionary forces can be progressive as well as regressive, and stated with regards to the eventual idea of a (permanent) World Socialist Revolution, there will be many false starts, set-backs ad defeats. Modern (capitalist) Russia is just one such example, whereby the power of capitalist greed eventually brought-down the egalitarian Soviet System, and inflicted the highly unequal and vicious system of modern capitalism upon the Russian people. Although this has led to severe hardship and suffering throughout Russia, this is understood as being irrelevant to the advocates of capitalism, just as long as a ‘few’ Russians become multi-millionaires. This situation has led to the wide-scale importing into Russia of US-generated Cold War disinformation about the Soviet State, translated into the Russian language, and uncritically accepted by younger Russians as being representative of ‘genuine’ Soviet history. This is an example of pseudo-history at its worst. The point of this exercise for the US, is to ‘colonise’ the minds of modern Russians, and teach them to ‘hate’ the history of the Soviet Union, as if it had nothing to do with them, and was not acting in their best interests. Although there are modern Russian historians who are well-aware of this phenomenon (and take active steps to combat it), nevertheless, this ‘ahistorical’ approach to Soviet history negatively influences the opinions of many (fulfilling its primary propaganda purpose). The rather stupid US assumption appears to be that if English language disinformation about the Soviet Union is translated into the Russian language, no one will notice that these ludicrous stories DO NOT arise from within the genuine narrative of Soviet history as defined by the indigenous Russian intelligentsia.


Whereas once anti-Soviet disinformation only existed outside of Russia, today it also exists firmly within Russia, but it can be easily discerned by accessing information correctly. Soviet history stems from a progressive and non-inverted, proletariat mind-set, whilst the bourgeois mind-set is essentially ‘inverted’ and views reality a priori the ‘wrong way around’. Simply, the bourgeoisie propagate the myth that god created man, whilst the proletariat know that the mind of humanity created god, and so on, and so forth. The proletariat mind-set takes the material world as the basis of reality, whilst the bourgeois mind-set exists in the realm of mythic imagination. US anti-Soviet disinformation, therefore, emanates from the bourgeois (inverted) imagination, and is not reliant upon the correct and accurate recording or interpretation of history as it unfolds. US anti-Soviet disinformation exists in a realm of imagination and myth that is divorced from the conditions of material reality. In this regard, much of the US approach to misrepresenting the Soviet Union, is to mimic the Christian Church (and its theology), and (falsely) present the Soviet System as being ‘evil’, and its leaders as being personifications of the ‘devil’. This is a simplistic and regressive inverted mind-set, but it can be effective amongst general populations that lack any progressive elements in its education. Of course, those populations which lack a general degree of any progressive education, are the easiest to manipulate with this kind of disinformation. Undoubtedly, one of the most important propaganda victories for the US is creating a mythical climate within Russia whereby many Russians know believe the US lies about Soviet history.


Western attempts at manipulating Russian opinion are not new, and can be seen with the development of the bourgeois deviation now known as ‘Trotskyism’. This distortion of Socialism advocates that the workers of the world should ‘unite’ not against the forces of capitalism, but rather in alliance with the forces of capitalism. Workers should not follow Marx or Lenin, but rather the incoherent ramblings of Leon Trotsky – who built a major part of his theory upon the requirement of the working class to ‘co-operate’ with the forces of international fascism, and not to oppose the enemies of Socialism in anyway. This anti-working class mentality Trotsky termed ‘Socialism’, and it was welcomed in the West by those liberals who resented any working class attempts at self-rule, and who naturally opposed the Soviet Union for that purpose. One such example was the British graphic designer (and supporter of Trotsky) David King (1943-2010), who made a career ‘selling’ books in the West of Soviet public information posters that he had collected since the fall of the USSR in 1991. His obsession with Trotsky led to him fabricating the idea that the Soviet System (by which King specifically meant ‘Stalin’), was fundamentally ‘dishonest’ and routinely manipulated Soviet public opinion by altering photographs (thereby changing the meaning and content of specific pictures). This (false) narrative has now penetrated both Western and Russian narratives (a poignant example of the Trotskyite principle of ‘entryism’ or gaining influence through deception), and is generally accepted as being true without question. Whilst misrepresenting the Soviet Union in this manner, King remained steadfastly ‘silent’ about the numerous well-known and well-documented instances of Western governments (and media) fabricating news events and news stories around the world. This is understandable, as King was directly involved in such a deception.


The government of the Soviet Union represented a proletariat approach to interpreting, directing and ordering material reality. This is the application of an ‘honest’ and ‘non-inverted’ mind-set and has nothing to do with the bourgeois moralising and sentimentalising of reality. More to the point, many Soviet pictures that David King claims were ‘altered’ for nefarious reasons, were nothing of the sought, and easily explained. Simply lifting key figures out of group photographs (such as in the picture at the top of this article), is not ‘dishonest’ as King suggests, but is an example of Soviet ingenuity and technology. An important point that David King does not want a Western audience to understand is that although he claims pictures were altered for deceptive purposes, the ‘original’ photographs continued to exist in the public domain (thus rendering all alterations pointless, if the main aim was indeed ‘deception’). Obviously, where alterations occurred, there was good reasons for them, but the fact that David King possessed not only the altered images but also the originals, suggests that his entire ‘Trotskyite’ approach was typically ‘dishonest’ and deliberately misrepresentative of Soviet reality, as King (falsely) implies that the Soviet Authorities presented ‘fake’ images to the Soviet public after eradicating all alternative versions. David King’s own work (which utilises what he considers the dramatic ‘before’ and ‘after’ format) proves its own central assumption thoroughly incorrect. Furthermore, there is a distinct element of ‘dishonesty’ to King’s work which was not exposed at recent exhibition at the Tate Modern (London) entitled ‘Red Star Over Russia’. One example of this attempt by King to manipulate public opinion can be seen, his presentation of two similar (but separate) photographs (of Bolsheviks in 1915) featuring the same location and many of the same people (including Stalin who is in both), being described as indicative of Soviet alteration:



The people involved simply ‘posed’ twice – many holding different positions with others appearing in one photograph, but not in the other, etc. The question is how many pictures are presented as ‘altered’, when in fact they are different pictures, or products of zooming ‘in’ or zooming ‘out’? These types of pictures are not ‘alterations’, but of course David King was highly focused upon protecting the historical presence of Leon Trotsky within the Soviet media, and was willing to practice exactly the same ‘fabrication’ he accused the Soviet ‘Marxist-Leninists’ of perpetuating. Here is an example of ‘zooming’ presented as deliberate ‘alteration’:


Another question to be asked is that of the ‘authenticity’ of many photographs purportedly ‘altered’ by the Soviet State. What would be the point of ‘altering’ pictures when many copies or versions of the images seeking to be repressed from public attention, are already freely circulating within the media? The answer is none at all. Certainly within Russian language sources, this is not a common subject indicative of a deliberate, wide-spread or sustained Soviet policy, and only comes into being with the dubious work of David King. Of course, whilst defending Trotsky and accusing Joseph Stalin of all kinds of (imagined) crimes, King firmly establishes his ‘anti-Soviet’ and ‘pro’ US Cold War credentials. The glaring problem for King is that in so doing, he completely ‘omits’ any mention or recognition of Leon Trotsky’s extensive collaboration with fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and the forces of international Jewish Zionism in the 1930’s. King also fails to refer to Trotsky’s 1938 demand to his followers to support the fascist countries in the world, in a collective effort to ‘destroy’ the Soviet Union. King ignores all of Trotsky’s bourgeois and rightwing attitudes, opinions and behaviours, and instead choices to misrepresent history by turning the ‘science’ of Soviet photographic ‘editing’ into something of an obsessive fetish. Leon Trotsky, as a convicted criminal and proven enemy of the Soviet State, no longer deserved the honour of being ‘historically’ associated with the Soviet State he played a small part in building, and which he subsequently set-out to destroy. I have speculated elsewhere that Trotsky’s contradictory, paradoxical and at times ‘bizarre’ behaviour contains all the hallmarks of the on-set of mental illness. This inconsistency is evident from the incoherent ramblings that pass as his ‘collected works’. Lifting perfectly good and historically significant and important images of Lenin and Stalin from photographs ‘tainted’ by the presence of Trotsky (and other proven traitors to the Bolshevik Revolution) is not a sinister act, if indeed it really happened at all. One example of ‘clarifying’ a picture of Lenin is:



The Soviet Union led the world in the development of photography and film technology (which reached its apex during the space race). The ability to perfect the process of recording events in either ‘still’ or ‘moving’ images was elevated to a high science within the Soviet Union. Clarifying old or damaged photographs was a matter of importance with regards to properly recording the historical events that led to the 1917 October Revolution in Russia, and this logical demand generated the development of advanced technology and progressive editing processes. Trotsky was an anti-Bolshevik criminal whose image was quite rightly removed from certain photographs (if the sources can be trusted). Of course, it could be that the entire idea of photographic editing has been a US-Trotskyite collaboration of disinformation from start to finish. Whatever the case, the Soviet Union had a responsibility to the international working class it represented, and expunging fascist traitors from prominence within Socialist Society should be interpreted as an enlightened act – similar to how the Western (bourgeois) societies destroy and side-line the lives of those people they considers the most heinous of criminals (such as the British paedophile Jimmy Saville). Trotsky’s crimes were no less repugnant to the proletariat mind, and the dubious and misleading work of David King must be exposed for the deceptive (Trotskyite) nonsense it represents.

Russian Language References:



Remembering the International Stalin Prize ‘For the Strengthening of Peace Between Nations’ (1949-1955)


For six years (1949 – 1955), the ‘International Stalin Prize – For the Strengthening of Peace Between Nations ‘ (Международная Сталинская премия «За укрепление мира между народами») was a serious ideological threat to the bourgeois ‘Noble Prize’, and was an impediment to the full deployment of US anti-Stalin (Cold War) rhetoric. Although the Soviet Union had been brought to the brink of destruction during the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945 (suffering between 27 – 40 million casualties), The capitalist West re-invented the Red Army (that had defeated the SS and the Wehrmacht), as being no different to the Nazi German Forces it had opposed, and Joseph Stalin as being no different to Adolf Hitler. Soviet Communism was equated with Hitler’s ‘National Socialism’, and the ‘Scientific Socialism’ of Karl Marx was considered just another example of fascist thinking. The fact that the two ideologies – i.e. ‘Communism’ and ‘fascism’ are diametrically opposed to one another did not prevent the US (capitalist) ideologues from falsely claiming that both systems of thought were the same, or that Joseph Stalin was a ‘dictator’ whose mishandling of the Soviet Union had killed millions, etc. This view, although common within the rhetoric of the West, is nevertheless entirely mythological in nature and ‘ahistorical’ in reality. Marxist-Leninism, or Leninism-Stalinism for that matter, does not deviate from the writings of Karl Marx or Friedrich Engels, and is the antithesis to the racist, capitalist, and genocidal thought produced by Adolf Hitler. Of course, the Trotskyite Nikita Khrushchev, after he ascended to power in the USSR in 1956, assisted the US from within the Soviet Union, and did his best to attack the reputation and truly constructive history of Joseph Stalin. Khrushchev had problems with Stalin in the past, particularly in regard to his (Khrushchev’s) cowardice during the early days of the Nazi German invasion of the Ukraine, and Khrushchev’s tendency to use the Ukraine (and its Communist Party) as a personal fiefdom. Khrushchev had to re-package Stalin as an unbridled tyrant as a means to ‘purge’ Stalin’s memory and paint himself (falsely) as the ‘great liberator’. This is a short sketch of how the capitalist West and the Trotskyites colluded to attack the USSR.

This understanding is important because the Stalin Peace Prize was cancelled in 1955 by Khrushchev on the (false) grounds that it represented Stalin’s ‘cult of personality’ – ignoring its ideological importance as a distinctly ‘Socialist’ Award that stood as an alternative to the thoroughly ‘bourgeois’ Noble Peace Prize, which has been used after WWII to reward those who support aggressive US Cold War foreign policy, and recognize those who have actively strived to bring down World Socialism (the duplicitous 14th Dalai Lama and the traitor Mikhail Gorbachev are just two obvious examples of this policy in action). Khrushchev transitioned the Stalin Peace Prize into that of the much more low-key ‘Lenin Peace Prize’. Alfred Noble, of course, used his scientific knowledge as a means to encourage an ever more destructive means for human-beings to kill one another during warfare, and then without any sense of irony, initiated a ‘peace prize’ in his own name. Alfred Noble, the greatest killer of humanity, developed a thoroughly ‘bourgeois’ and typically hypocritical device to ‘reward’ the capitalist system he so admired, and which Stalin detested! Stalin, through his leadership of the Soviet Union during WWII, destroyed Nazi Germany and in so doing, assisted in the survival of the West, the very same West that now colluded with US anti-Stalin thought, and which worked to remove Stalin from his rightful place in history as one of the greatest political leaders of humanity.


Although Stalin fully supported a ‘peace prize’ formulated in his name, he did not personally establish the award. The International Stalin Prize ‘For the Strengthening of Peace Among Nations’ was a honorific award issued annually by the USSR, which was established by Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on December 20th, 1949. The size of the award was 100 thousand rubles (around $25,000), with between 5 – 10 individual awards being granted world-wide on December 21st (Stalin’s birthday) each year. The initiative to establish this award was first discussed on December 17th, 1949, at a meeting of the Committee for the Development and Organization of Events (to coincide with Stalin’s 70th birthday). At this meeting, the Committee’s Chairman, – NM Shvernik – voiced the proposal ‘to establish 5-10 International Stalin Prizes – For the Strengthening of Peace Among Nations’. According to V Molotov (who participated in the meeting), the issue of a medal, certificate and a cash award ‘has great political significance not only for our country, but for the whole world. It will reflect the deepest thoughts and aspirations of the masses at the present time, and will meet the wishes of all our people.’ It is noteworthy that at this meeting the film director GV Alexandrov, suggested ‘that the first prize be awarded to Comrade Stalin.’ A Mikoyan put forward the proposal: “How should the Stalin Prize be awarded?.’ As a result, GM Malenkov suggested: ‘A special committee will be in charge. We should seriously discuss this proposal and take the appropriate action.’

In accordance with the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR entitled ‘On the Establishment of the International Stalin Prizes – For the Strengthening of Peace Among Nations’, which establishes this award, ‘the prizes shall be awarded to citizens of any country of the world, irrespective of their political, religious and racial differences, for outstanding services in the fight against warmongers and for the consolidation of peace.’ This Decree established that persons awarded with the International Stalin Prize receive a diploma of a laureate, a gold medal with the image of JV Stalin, and a cash prize of 100,000 rubles. By the same Decree it was established that the prizes ‘are granted annually to the amount of 5 to 10 (individual) awards by the Special Committee deciding the granting of International Stalin Prizes – formed by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR from representatives of the democratic forces of the various countries of the world’ – with the awarding of prizes ‘to be issued on the birthday of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin – December 21st – of each year.’  Stalin received the 1949 award for his selfless lifelong work for the development and defence of the Soviet Union, and his opposition war. However, the first ‘official’ award (by Decree) was established in 1950. Between 1950 and 1955, the International Stalin Prize was awarded to 44 recepients world-wide (including Paul Robeson in 1952).

After the XXth Congress of the CPSU, during which the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee (Nikita Khrushchev) issued his report entitled ‘On the cult of Personality and its Consequences’, Khrushchev had a Decree issued in the name of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet (on September 6th, 1956) which renamed the award as the ‘International Lenin Prize ‘For the Strengthening of Peace Among Nations’ (Международную Ленинскую премию «За укрепление мира между народами»). At this time, Khrushchev ordered the removal of Stalin’s embalmed body which had laid beside Lenin in Red Square’s mausoleum, and instead re-buried alongside the Kremlin Wall. Khrushchev had also discussed the possibility of the so-called Soviet psyche Wolf Messing ‘lying’ to Soviet Government, and (falsely) stating that he had seen by Lenin and Stalin in the ‘spirit realm’, who had both said that they wanted their bodies ‘buried’ and moved out of sight. Wolf Messing immediately rejected this ‘non-Communist’ attitude, stating that he was not a ‘spiritualist’ and did not believe in religion or an afterlife! The fact that Khrushchev was willing to resort to this kind of bourgeois deception and hocus potus shows something of his corrupt and unreliable nature.

Russian Language Source:Международная_Сталинская_премия_«За_укрепление_мира_между_народами»



Croatia: Communist Monument Dedicated to the Uprising of the People of Kordun and Banija (Petrova Gora)


During WWII, the fascist government of Croatia openly collaborated with the Nazi German regime, and began a racially motivated pogrom against ethnic Serbs. It is believed that Croatian fascists murdered around 500,000 ethnic Serbs in a purpose-bulit Concentration Camp. However, ethnic Serbs came into contact with Communist partisan units and joined the anti-fascist effort. This eventually led to a battle between Serbian partisans armed only with pitch-forks, attacking heavily armed fascist Croation troops that had infiltrated the Petrova Gora area. The Yugoslav government had this monument constructed in 1981 to remember the bravery of the anti-fascist partisans – but with the collapse of the USSR in 1991 – Yugoslavia also disintegrated due to Western pressure. Far-right attitudes resurfaced in Croatia, and Communist Era monuments have either been destroyed or left to fall apart through neglect.



English Language Reference:

Tate Modern: Red Star Over Russia (19.11.2017)



Many, if not all Western exhibitions purporting to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of the Russian October Revolution, are merely excuses for the prevailing bourgeois, capitalist system to continue to attack and denigrate the reputation of the Soviet Union, as a means to discredit Marxist-Leninism, and influence the working class away from positively relating to Soviet (Bolshevik) Socialism. It is perhaps ironic that the Tate Modern, a complex of art galleries constructed within an old (and huge) Central London factory, should host such a poorly conceived, badly organised and thoroughly ‘revisionist’ exhibition designed to convey not only the prevailing bourgeois negative view of the Soviet Union, but compounds this error by dedicating an entire room to the criminal Leon Trotsky! As the bourgeoisie has a tendency to ‘fetishize’ Trotsky, this exhibition focuses upon the removal of his image from all Soviet documentation, and completely ignores Trotsky’s open collaboration fascist Italy, fascist Spain, fascist Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany throughout the 1930s! Furthermore, this exhibition (based upon the collection of Soviet propaganda posters formerly owned by the British Trotskyite David King), has a number of historical facts incorrect. The 1905 Revolution had nothing to do with the Bolsheviks, and the February Revolution of 1917 also had nothing to do with Lenin. Stalin died in 1953 and not 1955, and Leon Trotsky was expelled from the Soviet Union in 1929 and not 1927! Lenin is treated as a potential criminal, whilst Stalin is treated as an actual criminal. Lenin disagreed with Trotsky but thought that he could be reformed through labour – but Trotsky always remained a bourgeois leftist and self-serving careerist. Whilst dedicating the last 11 years of his life to trying to destroy Lenin’s masterpiece creation of the Soviet Union – the Tate Modern commentary laughingly insists that Trotsky was Lenin’s greatest supporter! I have photographed a number of interesting Soviet posters because their original purpose was to express an entirely ‘new’ and ‘proletariat’ way of viewing the world, but I reject the Trotskyite viewpoints of David King, and the ludicrous bourgeois interpretation of events as conveyed by the Tate Modern. Nothing positive is said about the Soviet Union, and just as Trotsky’s dalliance with world fascism is ignored, so too is the Soviet Sacrifice in its war with, and subsequent victory over Nazi Germany (where the USSR lost between 27-40 million men, women and children killed and wounded). David King erroneously makes much of police photographs of suspected and/or convicted criminals which he gathered from the USSR, but the fact remains that if capitalism ever collapsed in the West, there would be millions of similar photographs ‘liberated’ from the bourgeois police archives!









The following is the official Tate Modern propaganda:


A dramatic visual history of Russia and the Soviet Union from 1905 to the death of Stalin – seen through the eyes of artists, designers and photographers

2017 marks the centenary of the October Revolution. Rebellion brought hope, chaos, heroism and tragedy as the Russian Empire became the Soviet Union, endured revolutions, civil war, famine, dictatorship and Nazi invasion. A new visual culture arose and transformed the fabric of everyday life.

The core of this exhibition comes from the extraordinary collection of photographer and graphic designer David King (1943–2016). He started his collection of over 250,000 items relating to this period while working for The Sunday Times Magazine in the 1970s. The collection was acquired by Tate in 2016.

This show is an opportunity to see the rare propaganda posters, prints and photographs collected by King – some bearing traces of state censorship. Including work by El Lissitzky, Gustav Klutsis, Dmitri Moor, Aleksandr Deineka, Nina Vatolina and Yevgeny Khaldei, it is a thrilling journey through a momentous period in world history.

Photographer Unknown, Preparing for May Day in the Railway Workers' Club 1929. Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Photographer Unknown, Preparing for May Day in the Railway Workers’ Club 1929. Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Aleksandr Rodchenko, USSR in Construction, Issue 8 1936, Journal, Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Aleksandr Rodchenko, USSR in Construction, Issue 8 1936, Journal, Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate

Winston Churchill’s Support for Adolf Hitler (1935)


The British Winston Churchill is well-known for his racist opinions and anti-Socialist attitudes. Despite despising the British working class, Churchill would call upon it to sacrifice its lives to defend the UK during WWII, and Britain’s imperial conquests over-seas. The final stab in the back for the British working class, came with Churchill’s opposition to the Labour Party’s plans to introduce a Welfare State and National Health Service as a ‘thank you’ to the demobilised British working class (in 1945). What many do not know is that like the British royal family of the 1930’s, Winston Churchill fully admired Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist regime – implying that the British working class would benefit from a dose of fascism. In his 1935 book entitled ‘Great Contemporaries’ (reprinted unedited in 1937), Winston Churchill argues that:

‘(Adolf Hitler is) a genius born of the miseries of Germany. We may yet live to see Hitler a gentlier figure in a happier age.’

Winston Churchill: Great Contemporaries (1935)

In 1936, hundreds of thousands of British working class people (inspired by the Communist Party of Great Britain, but not the Labour Party of the day) stopped the fascist Oswald Mosley and his ‘Blackshirts’ during the Battle of Cable Street (in East London). An incensed Winston Churchill, writing as he was for the middle class elite, had his book re-published in 1937, so that the British nation (and its elite) could read yet again his glowing words about Adolf Hitler.


Stalin’s War Through the Eyes of His Generals: By Albert Axell, Arms and Armour, (1997), Page 38

%d bloggers like this: