DNA may solve mystery of what happened to Russian czar's family...

Answers to the mystery of what befell the heirs of the last czar of Russia nearly a century ago may rest behind locked laboratory doors in Moscow and New England.

[Indy]

What nice people, the Bolsheviks who shot innocent children.

[eyes rolling]

[Mr Because]

Believe me Bolsheviks didnt shoot at children.
Yes they were merciless just the same way as the opposite force they fought with. Just the fact there was Baron Ungern fon Shternberg who teared skin off the body of communists (workers and pesants mainly) and user that skin to make gloves.(There is a collection in Russian Museum).
They (bolsheviks) fought for political ideals. Actually Bolsheviks are members of Bolshevik party. This party was in the first Russian parlament before revolution.
Well my tatar grandgrandpa was poor before revolution, as other 95% of population, so he had to move from Moscow suburbs to the south - to Volga where he could earn their livin (a family of 9 people after all!) I guess all my ancestors could get education, and increase
their way of living only after revolution. People (the majority) got real benefits of it.
I really dont feel sorry for the Czars family they were all incompetient morons. Remember 1905 at least. The fate they daserved.

[Indy]

Mr Because wrote:

Believe me Bolsheviks didnt shoot at children.
Yes they were merciless just the same way as the opposite force they fought with. Just the fact there was Baron Ungern fon Shternberg who teared skin off the body of communists (workers and pesants mainly) and user that skin to make gloves.(There is a collection in Russian Museum).
They (bolsheviks) fought for political ideals. Actually Bolsheviks are members of Bolshevik party. This party was in the first Russian parlament before revolution.
Well my tatar grandgrandpa was poor before revolution, as other 95% of population, so he had to move from Moscow suburbs to the south - to Volga where he could earn their livin (a family of 9 people after all!) I guess all my ancestors could get education, and increase
their way of living only after revolution. People (the majority) got real benefits of it.
I really dont feel sorry for the Czars family they were all incompetient morons. Remember 1905 at least. The fate they daserved.

Nothing you can say will make me believe the czar's CHILDREN deserved that fate.

[Krishnamurty]

Mr Because wrote:

Believe me Bolsheviks didnt shoot at children.
Yes they were merciless just the same way as the opposite force they fought with. Just the fact there was Baron Ungern fon Shternberg who teared skin off the body of communists (workers and pesants mainly) and user that skin to make gloves.(There is a collection in Russian Museum).
They (bolsheviks) fought for political ideals. Actually Bolsheviks are members of Bolshevik party. This party was in the first Russian parlament before revolution.
Well my tatar grandgrandpa was poor before revolution, as other 95% of population, so he had to move from Moscow suburbs to the south - to Volga where he could earn their livin (a family of 9 people after all!) I guess all my ancestors could get education, and increase
their way of living only after revolution. People (the majority) got real benefits of it.
I really dont feel sorry for the Czars family they were all incompetient morons. Remember 1905 at least. The fate they daserved.

Russia's genocidality is not justified --neither for murdering czar's children and --neither for murdering Ukrainian farmers' children during the Bolshevik Russian Terror-Famine genocide of 1932-1933 in Ukraine.

[huh]

A child should never die before a parent. It's a tragedy.

[Felix]

Not an unthinkable reaction to wanting to ensure that the gene pool is destroyed.

We have arrived at the point where we need to wipe out terrorists and their families. Lowers the probability that one of their offspring will be a suicide bomber and kill one of our kids in the future.

[Mr Because]

"Nothing you can say will make me believe the czar's CHILDREN deserved that fate."
Of course it was brutal what they had done to them. But it was the time of Civil War. And one force wanted to restore Monarchy the other to pick a new way. Restoring monarchy meant that the new czar would be picked from one of the family of Nickie. Thats why they were shot.
And btw millions died in the Civil war.
About the Ukraine... people suffered building a new country everywhere. So it was not a genocide. Peasants suffered greatly. The aim of government was to get as much of bread from peasants as they only could. And then sell it to west to buy factories (Stalins Industrialisation). Of course they were taking too much from those farmes.
Only the dictatorship and brutal force could build the country from a bunch of hald destroyed disorganised lands. And they did.
About the Kennedy. Dont mess. Kennedy was killed by the American Oligarhs and CIA.
And Nikolas was hated.

[duh]

huh wrote:

A child should never die before a parent. It's a tragedy.

They shot the parents first!

[Indy]

Mr Because wrote:

"Nothing you can say will make me believe the czar's CHILDREN deserved that fate."
Of course it was brutal what they had done to them. But it was the time of Civil War. And one force wanted to restore Monarchy the other to pick a new way. Restoring monarchy meant that the new czar would be picked from one of the family of Nickie. Thats why they were shot.
And btw millions died in the Civil war.
About the Ukraine... people suffered building a new country everywhere. So it was not a genocide. Peasants suffered greatly. The aim of government was to get as much of bread from peasants as they only could. And then sell it to west to buy factories (Stalins Industrialisation). Of course they were taking too much from those farmes.
Only the dictatorship and brutal force could build the country from a bunch of hald destroyed disorganised lands. And they did.
About the Kennedy. Dont mess. Kennedy was killed by the American Oligarhs and CIA.
And Nikolas was hated.

Weren't the czar's children descendants of Queen Victoria (one branch of their family)?

They should have been given the option of exile in western Europe. That would have been the right thing to do - not brutal slaughter.

Two wrongs don't make a right ....

[Mr Because]

"Weren't the czar's children descendants of Queen Victoria (one branch of their family)?"
Yes they were. And on the other hand the infamous German Cancellor at the time of First world war was his brother.
So the first world war was actually the war of one "Family". Because all these monarchs in europe were kinda reletives.
Bolsheviks couldnt afford them leave country. As every member of that family would have been treated as a monarch in exile. A basis for organising new Russian Government in exile. Bolsheviks forseen that and of course wanted to be the only legitimate power in the country. All these considerations were made during the Civil war that lasted for nearly 10 years. When "brothers fought fathers" for ideology.
Actually during the war people dont pay any attention to terms like brutal or inhumane... They just shot each other for any available reason.

[Ms Christian]

Americans murder children when it suits us. Iraqis today, Vietnamese awhile back, indians who were on these lands before us, and many, many others in more limited engagements. Such disgusting arrogance to object to others doing what we do. (And that's WHY we murder children - American arrogance.)

[DannyBoy]

Ms Christian wrote:

Americans murder children when it suits us. Iraqis today, Vietnamese awhile back, indians who were on these lands before us, and many, many others in more limited engagements. Such disgusting arrogance to object to others doing what we do.(And that's WHY we murder children - American arrogance.)

SHHH...it's unpatriotic to speak the truth in free America .

[Stefanya]

Indy wrote:

What nice people, the Bolsheviks who shot innocent children.
[eyes rolling]

Eyes Rolling. What nice people the Nazi Germans were to shoot millions of innocent men, women and children, who were jews, Slavs and Gypsies, and gas them and heinously torture them and put put them on an assembly line of death in factory like atmospheres extracting even their teeth for the gold in them, along with taking all of their posseions along with taking their hair to make munititions. What lovely people they were. So much nicer than the Bolsheviks.

Eyes rolling, mouth shaped in disgust.

[Stefanya]

DannyBoy wrote:

<quoted text>
SHHH...it's unpatriotic to speak the truth in free America .

Especially when you talk about the three-year old boy whom a coloradan adopted at age two and then beat him to death, and the dozens other little Russian kids like him.

Or how about adopting Russian kids at age 5 and using them like sex slaves and then taking picutes of them in Disney hotel rooms and sharing those pictures on line with all the perverts of the world.

Or how about those devout and good and kindly christian in the south, who adopted a four-year old Russian boy and then used scissors to cut off his ears because his big sin was, HE DIDN'T SPEAK ENGLISH WELL ENOUGH. Well most four-year-olds don't speak english well enough.

But the point is...... it's only those bad Russians who do not deserve a break for anything no matter how oong abo it was done.

[Stefanya]

Mr Because wrote:

"Nothing you can say will make me believe the czar's CHILDREN deserved that fate."
Of course it was brutal what they had done to them. But it was the time of Civil War. And one force wanted to restore Monarchy the other to pick a new way. Restoring monarchy meant that the new czar would be picked from one of the family of Nickie. Thats why they were shot.
And btw millions died in the Civil war.
About the Ukraine... people suffered building a new country everywhere. So it was not a genocide. Peasants suffered greatly. The aim of government was to get as much of bread from peasants as they only could. And then sell it to west to buy factories (Stalins Industrialisation). Of course they were taking too much from those farmes.
Only the dictatorship and brutal force could build the country from a bunch of hald destroyed disorganised lands. And they did.
About the Kennedy. Dont mess. Kennedy was killed by the American Oligarhs and CIA.
And Nikolas was hated.

Unfortunately that is true and the Soviet Union had to pull itself up by its bootstraps selling its treasures as well because the honorable west wasnt' going to do business with them like they are so honorably doing in China now, sending them most of America's manufacturing jobs along with the complete factories.

[Stefanya]

Krishnamurty wrote:

<quoted text>
Russia's genocidality is not justified --neither for murdering czar's children and --neither for murdering Ukrainian farmers' children during the Bolshevik Russian Terror-Famine genocide of 1932-1933 in Ukraine.

And people who had nothing to do with the famines of 32-33 shouldn't be held responsible for events which took place over 70 years ago. However, there's that money involved, and besides everyone can and must be forgiven for any transgressions except the Russians, according to some it's actually written in the bible that this must be so.(scarcasm) However, I think God has already taken into account the disgressions because so many millions of Russians died.

[Krishnamurty]

Ukraine is stepping up its Holodomor educational program around the world.
Ukraine is stepping up its campaign to educate the world about the Russian genocide in Ukraine in 1932-1933.

Actions dedicated to memory of Holodomor 1932-33 victims in Ukraine will run in April 2008 in 15 countries

16-04-2008 16:44

The events will be held in frames of the International Arts Action "Ukraine Remembers - the World Recognizes", Culture and Tourism Minister Vasyl Vovkun announced.

According to him, the project aims at promoting recognition of the Great Famine in Ukraine as genocide of the Ukrainian nation by all world countries.

The events will take place in those European cities where the influential international organizations are headquartered, particularly in Brussels (EU, NATO), Paris (UNESCO), Vienna (UN, OSCE). Participating in the events on the basis of Ukraine's diplomatic missions will be politicians, scientists, representatives of civil society from many countries.

The commemorative events will also take place in Great Britain, Greece, Spain, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Slovakia, the USA, and the Czech Republic.

In the early 1930s,in Ukraine, in the very heart of Europe - in a region considered to be Europe's breadbasket - Russia's Bolshevik imperialist regime committed a horrendous act of genocide against up to 10 million Ukrainians.

Russia subjected Ukraine, an ancient nation of agriculturists to murder by starvation, one of the most ruthless forms of torture and death.

Russia imposed exorbitant grain quotas, in some cases confiscating supplies down to the last seed.

The territory of Soviet Ukraine and the predominantly Ukrainian-populated Kuban region of the Northern Caucasus (Soviet Russia) were isolated by Red Army NKVD and Komsomol armed units to prevent Ukrainian farmers from searching for food in neighboring Soviet regions where it was more
readily available.

Having scoured the land for all available edibles, the NKVD army and occupation forces started killing all the cats, dogs and birds, to ensure that the mass murder of Ukrainian farmers and their children was perfected.

Specific to Ukraine, Russian occupation forces prevented farmers and their children from leaving their villages to ensure they would suffer and die in secret.

The purpose of the Kremlin-engineered famine was to break the will and back of the Ukrainian nation, to depopulate Ukraine for Russian settlement and colonization.

The result was the Russian Bolshevik genocide of 1932-33, in which millions of Ukrainian farmers and their children were murdered.

It is known in Ukrainian as the Holodomor, or extermination by artificial famine.

The Russian government shamelessly denies it was genocide.

Russia must be made to account for the Holodomor.

http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/index.php...

[Robespierre]

The killing of the Tsar and his family was justified in the context of the revolution. Once overthrown, the tsar was still representing a threat to the bolsheviks, because his supporters kept the countre-revolution alive, with the aim of liberating him and restauring monarchy in Russia.

So, the Tsar and his descendants had to die, to make a restoration impossible. Killing the tsar decapitated the white Russians insurection, and marked a point of no-return in the revolution. It was a clever move.

Why the Tsar didn't go in exile? Under Kerensky, that was possible and attempts were made to send him abroad. Russia was still at war with Germany and Austria, so that was out of the question. France was still at war, and no pro-monarchist anyway. France is a republic that killed its own king!!

Only Britain could have taken the Tsar, and his cousin, the then English king was in favour of it, but the British prime minister was against it. Nicolas II stayed in Russia, and then the bolsheviks took over from Kerensky.

[Indy]

Stefanya wrote:

<quoted text>
Eyes Rolling. What nice people the Nazi Germans were to shoot millions of innocent men, women and children, who were jews, Slavs and Gypsies, and gas them and heinously torture them and put put them on an assembly line of death in factory like atmospheres extracting even their teeth for the gold in them, along with taking all of their posseions along with taking their hair to make munititions. What lovely people they were. So much nicer than the Bolsheviks.
Eyes rolling, mouth shaped in disgust.

Are you on "Dancing with the Stars" by any chance?
:)
A little defensive are we ....?

[Indy]

Robespierre wrote:

The killing of the Tsar and his family was justified in the context of the revolution. Once overthrown, the tsar was still representing a threat to the bolsheviks, because his supporters kept the countre-revolution alive, with the aim of liberating him and restauring monarchy in Russia.
So, the Tsar and his descendants had to die, to make a restoration impossible. Killing the tsar decapitated the white Russians insurection, and marked a point of no-return in the revolution. It was a clever move.
Why the Tsar didn't go in exile? Under Kerensky, that was possible and attempts were made to send him abroad. Russia was still at war with Germany and Austria, so that was out of the question. France was still at war, and no pro-monarchist anyway. France is a republic that killed its own king!!
Only Britain could have taken the Tsar, and his cousin, the then English king was in favour of it, but the British prime minister was against it. Nicolas II stayed in Russia, and then the bolsheviks took over from Kerensky.

What a surprise that someone using the tag "Robespierre" would take this position.

Didn't Robespierre meet with a bad end himself?:)