Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remains of 190 people found at Ukrainian monastery, suspected victims of Soviet secret police
ap ^ | 7/18/02

Posted on 07/18/2002 3:55:27 PM PDT by Ranger

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:08:00 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) The bodies of 190 people were discovered at a monastery in western Ukraine that was used by the Soviet secret police after World War II, investigators said Thursday.

The remains including those of 70 children, some less than 1 year old were discovered by monks restoring a Greek Catholic monastery in Zhovkva, 340 miles west of the capital, Kiev, said Mykhailo Pavlyshyn, a leader of a team of experts investigating the burial site.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: kgb; ukraine; ussr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 07/18/2002 3:55:27 PM PDT by Ranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ranger
2 posted on 07/18/2002 4:33:35 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ranger
Thanks for the article, Ranger.

I recently took a tour of the KGB Museum in Moscow. It was conducted by a Colonel in the FSB (a successor organization to the KGB). He was a career intelligence officer. He said the KGB (and its predecessor and successor organizations) had undergone thirteen name changes since the Revolution, and he'd been there for seven of them.

Since they've undergone a change of government, I half-expected that the tour would be all about the horrible things the evil KGB had done in the past. No way! For all the name changes, it's still apparently the same bunch of people, and the tour was all about the glorious history of the KGB -- how "our professionals" had saved us all from the Nazi's, etc.

If the NKVD truly did commit the massacre alluded to in this article, what do you suppose are the chances the KGB/FSB/(whatever) museum will add an exhibit about it?

3 posted on 07/18/2002 5:24:55 PM PDT by solzhenitsyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ranger
Good article. Thanks. And here is a companion piece:

Terror in the Ukraine

4 posted on 07/18/2002 5:29:21 PM PDT by JMJ333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ranger; struwwelpeter; Stavka2
The remains including those of 70 children, some less than 1 year old

Solzhenitsyn's estimate was 66 million people for the full Soviet era.

They'll be finding these little monuments to socialist achievement for centuries to come.

5 posted on 07/18/2002 5:38:50 PM PDT by denydenydeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJayneJ; denydenydeny
"They'll be finding these little monuments to socialist achievement for centuries to come."

Jayne, I nominate this gem from denydenydeny as a Quote of the Day. Obviously, you'd have to give a bit of context to make the quote work.

6 posted on 07/18/2002 6:07:35 PM PDT by solzhenitsyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ranger

Since WW2?

I don't know about you, but if I had a room that was "sealed off with bricks" I would have to get out the sledgehammer immediately.

It would be like a slow form of torture to me to wonder just what was in there exactly.

7 posted on 07/18/2002 7:01:56 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
During most of the Soviet period, curiosity was a capital crime.
8 posted on 07/18/2002 7:04:17 PM PDT by denydenydeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny

Then it would have claimed both myself and the cat..

Because nothing could have kept me from busting a hole in there big enough to crawl through.

9 posted on 07/18/2002 7:06:55 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny; aculeus; Orual; general_re
They'll be finding these little monuments to socialist achievement for centuries to come. / During most of the Soviet period, curiosity was a capital crime.

Man, you're on a hot streak!

10 posted on 07/18/2002 7:11:11 PM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: solzhenitsyn
Thanks for the nomination! };^D ) I will combine it with the headline of the thread. That should do it.
11 posted on 07/18/2002 7:42:05 PM PDT by RJayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dighton; Orual; general_re
A few years ago during a flood the bank of a Russian river collapsed. Hundreds of corpses ended up in the river.
12 posted on 07/18/2002 9:20:28 PM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ranger
Speaking of monuments, I believe that some day, Russia will have a great national monument for the victims of Communist tyranny. Wonder how long it will take ...
13 posted on 07/19/2002 3:08:19 AM PDT by solzhenitsyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: solzhenitsyn; denydenydeny

Before the Russians put up memorials to victims of the tyranny, they need to take down a bunch of old monuments and rename a lot of streets and cities first. Even today, almost every city and town in Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus still has Lenin squares, Ilych and Ulyanov streets, Komsomolsk and Komunarov prospects, '50 Years of USSR' avenues, etc etc. This government building in Donetsk two months ago still bragged about its commie awards.

Communism isn't coming back, but they certainly don't seem to be ashamed of it.

14 posted on 07/19/2002 4:05:04 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: zhabotinsky
True, most people just go along with it. But the Germans at least are managing to find closure.

When do you suppose a few of these will be going up in the Kolyma?

16 posted on 07/19/2002 4:32:48 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: zhabotinsky

I agree, but fear that Putin isn't as firmly entrenched as the West believes. The army might decide that they've had enough bardak.

Nor is Putin a western puppet, 100% oriented towards the US - as he shouldn't be.

When my Russian/Ukrainian friends bitch about GWB, I ask them who they voted for - that shuts them up. And likewise, I don't criticize Putin. His job is to look after Russian interests, just as Bush's is to look after US interests.

When Putin is as unpopular in Western Europe as Bush, then I'll know that he's doing good work.

18 posted on 07/19/2002 5:23:32 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: zhabotinsky
Here's an article on Clinton and Yeltsin that caught my eye awhile back, that you might find interesting:

Source: Moskovskiy Komsomolets (Moscow Young Communist), 23-30 May 2002, p4-5.

Title: How Clinton Manipulated Yeltsin

Sensational disclosures by the former US cabinet official.

Three years ago Yeltsin offered to hold a summit with Clinton on a submarine. During his telephone calls with the American president Yeltsin twice hung up the phone in anger. But during another conversation the receiver fell from Clinton's hands and loudly struck the floor - this Yeltsin didn't even notice. During one of his last rendezvous with the American president, Yeltsin couldn't remember the last name of Premier Putin.

These are but a few of the scandalous facts from the sensational memoirs of the former first assistant US secretary of state Strobe Talbot. In America the book by the name of "Russia Hand" only stayed on the shelves for a few days.

For a greater part of the last decade Strobe Talbot was privy to the most valuable secrets of the relationship between Moscow and Washington. But he first touched on the mysteries of the Kremlin many years earlier. In 1970 the young Oxford student was a translator for the memoirs of our former leader Nikita Khrushchev, which was illegally smuggled to west . Around that time something happened which seriously effected Talbot's life - his neighbor in the dormitory was a new student, an unknown fellow from Arkansas named Bill Clinton. After becoming president Clinton tried to recruit professional journalist Talbot to his team. The university chum of the president refused to serve as ambassador to Moscow - Talbot stated that it would be a hardship for his teenage children. But he agreed to head a special cabinet department on the CIS, and within a few months became the first assistant secretary of state. Talbot stayed at this key post for more than seven years. And during this time the main object of attention for this friend of Clinton was Moscow.


Just like any high-ranking American official, Talbot was required to offer the manuscript of his memoirs for censorship at his former place of employment. It's been said that the censors worked untiringly over the book. All the spiciest parts were taken out, but what remains is more than enough. The idiosyncrasies of our former president have been no secret to anyone for quite some time. But until now no western government official has publically acknowledged them. Strobe Talbot was the first who decided to break this taboo. Reading his memoirs is shameful, painful, and unpleasant. But necessary, since the number two man in the US state department tells in detail how dearly the "Yeltsin strangeness" cost Russia.

Just after his inauguration Clinton was made aware of the extravagant conduct of the Russian leader. During his first telephone converstation with the American president Yeltsin was drunk. As Talbot writes, the Moscow chief's conversation was extremely slurred. He was in absolutely no condition to understand what Clinton was trying to express. The situation was merely amusing for the future "friend of Bill." If only Clinton knew what lay ahead.

During the first Yeltsin-Clinton summit in Vancouver in April of 1993 our president gave his American friends a complete show. Clinton had the poor judgement to invite his partner to a boat cruise about the island of Vancouver. And here's what happened: "Just as soon as the boat left the dock, Yeltsin downed three scotchs. Earlier that night at supper he drank three glasses of wine and didn't eat a thing... his conversation became more and more jumbled ('Bill, we're not rivals, we're friends')... he became more agitated with every minute as his assistants tried to chase away waiters with drinks, which the president kept ordering."

An even more interesting image awaited the Yankees during Yeltin's flight to Washingon in September of 1994. Talbot then was sent to meet the Russian president at the airport. "According to protocol I was supposed to ride in one limousine with Yeltsin, escorting him to the residence of honored guests at Blair House, while my wife was to accompany Naina Yeltsin in a different vehicle. But the Russian ambassador Yuliy Vorontson told me on the tarmac: 'The president is tired from the flight and prefers to ride with Mrs. Yeltsin.' Despite the attempts of the bodyguards and Naina Iosifovna, the president barely made it down the boarding ramp. Worse than this was yet to come. "That evening at Blair House Yeltsin was dead drunk and wandered about in his underwear. Later he came downstairs and tried to come on to a female secret service agent... Later still he came downstairs, demanding 'Pizza! Pizza!' Finally his bodyguards grabbed him firmly by the elbows and carried him upstairs to bed."

After his first rendezvous with Yeltsin, Clinton noted with melancholy: "Well, at least he's not aggressive when he's drunk." Very quickly the US leader understood this remark was a grave error. During his talks with the Americans Boris Nikolaevich demonstably ridiculed his ministers, but this quickly seemed insufficient. During the time of his trip to the US in October of 1995 Yeltsin had already decided to fire his minister of foreign affairs, Kozyrev. Once he got to New York, he decided to help his "friend Bill" do the same with his secretary of state. "Yeltsin noticed Warren Christopher and Madeline Albright at the same time that a waiter brought them champagne. He grabbed one of the champagne glasses from the tray. 'Mr. President,' said Christopher. 'There's already fingerprints on that glass'. Yeltsin bellowed, demanded his own glass, emptied it in one swallow and again turned to Christopher. 'Haven't seen you in awhile', he said with a clouded expression that it seemed almost comical. 'You and Kozyrev are both losers! Absolute losers!"

Soon it was not enough for Yeltsin to ridicule American ministers. Sometimes he even used Clinton as the target for his jibes. In October of 1998 the two leaders were talking on the telephone during a series of conversations. "Yeltsin repeated several times the Russian word 'nel'zya' (forbidden). Clinton twice tried to answer, but Yeltsin interrupted him, saying 'okeh okeh'. When Clinton tried to talk for the third time, Yeltsin simply hung up.


The patience which Clinton showed to Yeltsin's excesses often astonished the assistants of the American leader. Strobe Talbot even writes that during one episode he was even ashamed of his boss. During a joint press conference the Russian leader started to rudely berate the journalists. But Clinton couldn't find a better exit from the situation except to support his friend. All the insults that the Yankees had to suffer from Yeltsin were more than compensated, however. Behind closed doors, where the real decisions were made, Clinton almost always succeeded in manipulating the Russian president.

Close to the beginning of his book Talbot gives a rather murderous assessment of Yeltsin's conduct at the Russian-American summits. "At the plenary meetings where there were a large number of witnesses from both sides of the table Yeltsin played the part of a decisive, even mightly leader, who knew what he wanted and insisted on getting it. During the closed door meetings he became more docile and receptive to the wiles of Clinton. Later at the press conferences Yeltsin made a big fuss to hide what he'd given away in the secret meetings." As far as matters pertaining to the concrete details of treaties, it's clear that Talbot is going to easy on Yeltsin.

April of 1993, the Clinton-Yeltsin meetings in Vancouver. In front of the delegation Yeltsin proposes one initiative after another, all of them offers from Moscow which Washington had already refused during many other conferences, lightly camouflaged and set out as something completely new. "Let's decide this right now, Bill! You are a man of business, I see! Seize the moment!" repeated Yeltsin. The Americans in attendance didn't change their stance. Boris Nikolaevich humorously complained to Clinton: 'Bill, your bureaucrats are trying to prevent us from reaching solutions which only presidents can decide!" Clinton took this to mean that Yeltsin was not serious. Result: not a single Yeltsin initiative even was considered. But the Russian leader was happy nonetheless. To the observers it may have seemed that it was he, and not Clinton, who dominated the meetings.

September of 1994. A one on one meeting in Washington. The official Russian position was that the expansion of NATO towards the east was completely out of the question. But Clinton laid his hand on Yeltsin's shoulder and exhaled a lengthy speech, full of banalties about 'our friendship'. And Boris Nikolaevich broke down on the spot. In answer to the warnings about the gradual expansion of the North Atlantic alliance our president declared: "I understand, thank you for informing me." After this Moscow will cry for a few years about the "absolutely unacceptable" expansion of NATO. But Washington won't touch any of these threats and warnings. They already now what the Russian president actually means.

October of 1995, high-level summit in Hyde Park. Clinton talks Yeltsin into not departing from an agreement on limiting conventional weapons in Europe, which our military is demanding. The story about how the American president succeeded is similar to a comedy film. The first time Clinton tries his luck at dinner, during which Boris Nikolaevich drank three glasses of California wine: "last time he had success was with a drunk Yeltsin, so he decided to give it a try..." He tried. The Russian president, however, was to drunk to be bothered with matters.

After dinner Clinton was lucky. On a pretext, the foreign political assistant of our president, Dmitriy Ryurikov, is sent out of the room. And for several minutes the clever Bill takes Yeltin on his arm and talks him into agreeing to absolutely everything: "Boris, look at me! It's not important what that fellow over there is saying. This is only between me and you... We should do this quickly. Do you agree?" Returning to the room Ryurikov was preparing the Russian responce when his jaw dropped open - his president had already agreed to the American proposal.


Clinton only knew about the changing of the guard a few days before the nomination of Putin to the post of premier of Russia. This information was transmitted to him by the Israeli premier Ekhud Barak. There are not many details about cooperation between Clinton and Putin in the pages of Talbot's book. During the period of the Putin presidency Clinton was already a "lame duck". Until the end of his term he was already virtually powerless. And so, wasting time in conversation with "friend Bill" did not interest Putin very much. But it does not matter - that which Talbot writes about Vladimir Vladimirovich is still very informative. Every once in awhile a Russian leader succeeds in looking after the interests of his country.

Clinton always manipulated Yeltsin with the help of one or another trap. In principal agreeing to everything, he pronounced many pretty and correct words, promising the most tender friendship. But at the same time he insisted on his position without compromise. In the relationship between Clinton and Putin this same tactic was used against the American president. As Talbot observes: "Russian foreign affairs has gone on to a new phase - less pliant, but not less bellicose. When Yeltsin said 'nyet' he meant 'let's talk'. With Putin it's the other way around. Instead of beating his fist against the press podium, he says: 'you have an interesting point of view' or 'we acknowledge your critique'. Behind closed doors, on the other hand, Putin rarely gives ground.

Unfortunately, we are unable to end this material on an upbeat note. Writing about the relationship between Washington and Moscow during the Bush era, Talbot acknowledges that does not understand the developments. Why did Moscow completely acquiesce to Bush's stance on ABM? "The Russian leader, like his predecessor, gave in to the USA!" - openly declares the former assistant secretary of state. According the author of "Russia Hand", Moscow should have fought harder for its interests.

20 posted on 07/19/2002 5:48:53 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson