Russia angered by plan to alter monument

Warning to users of this forum: do not feed the troll (screen name "Jiri Hubacek").

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QAVtFuN9Cg&feature=related

>>would have to be far more inteligent than humans in order to be able to get here.So your crack is silly.

I don't see a lot of logic in that argument. Assuming that a few members of their society invented the technology - or, more likely, copied it from elsewhere - then the rest could be as dumb as you.

Incidentally, the word "intelligent" has two "l"s in it.

The axis of powers; Nazi; facist; communist, gained control of Greece in 1941; British forces escaped to Crete and Egypt. The blitzkrieg of Crete delayed the Russian offensive enough for the winter to arrive at Stalingrad. My father recalled firing his machine gun in the sewers at close quarters but had no knowledge of death resulting from it. He went on to fight at El Alamien; crucial to Rommels defeat in Africa. He was part of the British 8th Army under Montgommery. This article concerns itself with a war monument; there are thousands all over Europe and the world; as memoirs of war and loss of life.

" my father climbed down sewer's in Greece to fight dictatorship."

Just wondering Jan.Was your father a Greek?
If not,what he was doing in Greece to fight for?
I am assuming that he is too young to fight in WWII,but stand corrected if I am wrong.

"Aliens have higher IQs than you do. It's just a little sad that you have nothing to do all day apart from defending a few war-mongers in Washington. Does your employer know that you spend all day doing this?"

Thank you Margaret.There goes girl.
If there were any aliens on this planet they would have to be far more inteligent than humans in order to be able to get here.So your crack is silly.
However,your inteligence could be questioned if you do not understand the time difference between Canada and central Europe.
When at work,I work.

I saw some footage of 'the other side' of Toronto; disturbing stuff. I have never been to Canada although it appeals in natural beauty. Hope the olympics go well and the country gets a psychological lift.

>>Further,Marge,you are giving me too much of credit.As far as any government is concerned,I am nobody and I like it that way.
In your fevered conspiracy mind I am : a spy?a wolf in sheep skin?a provocateur?an alien?

Aliens have higher IQs than you do. It's just a little sad that you have nothing to do all day apart from defending a few war-mongers in Washington. Does your employer know that you spend all day doing this?

Regarding Yalta; I accept that not enough was done to keep the Czech/Polish independance. In particual the Czech; as the borders had clear definition and seperation. Its why I; and many others regard the C.R. as an equal partner in Europe; and that its regaining what was thiers from the start. As time goes on; the C.R. can determine its own path; as opposed to wars dictating the politics of a free country. A Europe not at war can only surpass its history with progress; which no one said would be easy. My grandfather returned from the front lines in France a changed man for ever; my father climbed down sewer's in Greece to fight dictatorship. I have not been asked to go to war; the first generation without a call up to arms. Its to the future generations this responsibility of no more wars in Europe is shouldered here; so far cautious diplomacy has all nations talking. It would be naive to think debate would always be quiet and agreement like. I wonder what my grandfather would say of modern Europe; I would imagine better than the trenches of Pachendale 1917.

" Or is it the case, as most people here suspect, that writing pro-government drivel on web forums *is* your job.""

Further,Marge,you are giving me too much of credit.As far as any government is concerned,I am nobody and I like it that way.
In your fevered conspiracy mind I am : a spy?a wolf in sheep skin?a provocateur?an alien?

Get real,girl!!

"The designers of our Constitution, our Founding Fathers, made a 50/50 deal; they borrowed the House of Reps from Great Britain and borrowed the Senate from the USA and joined them. It works just fine"

You might be a "hicks" Karel-as you are saying- but you are "sly as a fox,"as the saying goes.
I would say that politically Australia is well ahead both of Europe and Canada.

Do your senators represent provinces in equal numbers like in USA?I mean every state in USA has two senators no matter of population, to make an interests of states more equal.
Congress,however,has representatives in numbers reflecting the population of the states,meaning that there is more congresmen from more populous states than from less populous.I guess that sort of reflects the democracy.Unfortunatelly,it makes the congress bloated with "busybodies" that taxpayers have to support.Still,it probably serve its purpose.

"Don't you have anything better to do? Or is it the case, as most people here suspect, that writing pro-government drivel on web forums *is* your job."

What a horror!I dare to write in this blog and "barge" on the territory of "Foreign Legion."
Too bad Margaret,I will comment on anything I want to.If you don't like it means nothing for me.

By the way,you are -sort off-commenting on my own comment about the Senate in Canada.That one is hardly supporting of any government,is it?
If you can't either refute or confirm my factual information stay within your limits,will you?You should know them by now,I would think.

"Perhaps you know that Canadian senate is appointed by government(Prime Minister in fact)and is a collection of "pork barreling"nonentities that automatically endorse Prime minister's policies."

Jiri, this seems very odd to me. Here in Australia we have a House of Representatives and a Senate. At federal elections we vote for both. Our Senate is far from being a rubber stamp of the government. At present the Labor Party controls the House of Reps, and the Conservative opposition controls the Senate and has played merry hell with a few of Labor's bills, including the Emissions Trading Scheme, which is likely to not be passed, thank God! Climate Change, so-called, is getting a rough time time down here, because we're all hicks, I dare say.

The designers of our Constitution, our Founding Fathers, made a 50/50 deal; they borrowed the House of Reps from Great Britain and borrowed the Senate from the USA and joined them. It works just fine.

The more I discover about the political systems of other countries the more I like my own!

It looks as though Jiri has more or less taken over this forum.

Don't you have anything better to do? Or is it the case, as most people here suspect, that writing pro-government drivel on web forums *is* your job.

"I'm hopeful 2010 will see a movement towards the center ground where balance is easier to achieve."

Here is to it.It is likely that coalition will be governing after the May election.
If you consider the governments in Canada that usually have majority and then engage in "parliamentary dictatorship" it would be improvement.
Perhaps you know that Canadian senate is appointed by government(Prime Minister in fact)and is a collection of "pork barreling"nonentities that automatically endorse Prime minister's policies.Thus it was since the establishment of Canada.
What a difference from elected senate in USA where quite often senators do not vote along the party lines but actually represent the needs of their constituents or their own beliefs.
I hope that Canada will eventually get to that stage of political sophistication.

>>Also backed by whole of Europe and Canada.Long live anarchy Margaret,right?

Certainly not the whole of Europe. As ever, Jiri, you talk too loudly about things of which you know very little.

a"much more likely explanation is that the previous, US-backed, government, has been a complete disaster which has almost bankrupted the country."

Also backed by whole of Europe and Canada.Long live anarchy Margaret,right?

Jiri; the constitution guards against dominant ideologies; bearing in mind what the people have suffered; this seems good practice. If there is growth in coalition partnerships; two new parties; then middle ground building seems more likley. I agree that a mature view of voting options will be needed; the incentive being a government that has to work for the people. The growth in center liberal views would counterbalance the old 'left right war' protecting against 'revenge swings' or runaway 'charismatic' fantasy politics. Male dominated politics will be less and a broader representation of needs and aspirations transpire. 2005 to 2009 saw a vacum of cohesive policies and friction with constitutional values. Having wrote this I notice it is full of technical jargon that lacks a human touch. I say this as the basic common idea of doing the best thing for the country may need more than political input. Various working groups on policy would do well to have input from those people the policies would directly effect. The constitution seems to protect against power; and looking back 70 years; that seems a smart thing to do. Dangerous politics seem to arise from those desperate for power; I'm hopeful 2010 will see a movement towards the center ground where balance is easier to achieve.

"Of course,it is true in this context.Ukraine has,unfortunatelly disadvantage that large part of its populations are Russians who migrated to the country from Russia proper since 1917 when bolsheviks took over.That was done in order to saturatedUkraina with communist symphatizers(the old trick that is used by China in Tibet and was always used by any invading country in history-see British,French,Spanish,Dutch,Portugues,German etc, imperialism and colonialism)Now,that Russia is free from communists(but not necessarily from its mentality)these Ukrainian citizens of Russian descent will do anything in their considerable power to ensure that Ukraina will stay under domination of Russia.The tensions like that are likely to be with us for very long time.
Coalition governments around the Europe are reality.
Even in Germany the winning side of second last election had to form coalition with socialists.Luckily for them,the last election proved that it did not have to last for long."

This seems pretty unlikely, not least because Russia is no more socialist than Ukraine.

A much more likely explanation is that the previous, US-backed, government, has been a complete disaster which has almost bankrupted the country.

As ever, common sense prevails over ideology.

"Jiri; I expect most Czech citizens will read the news from the Ukraine and be able to say 'We have come a long way indeed'"

Of course,it is true in this context.Ukraine has,unfortunatelly disadvantage that large part of its populations are Russians who migrated to the country from Russia proper since 1917 when bolsheviks took over.That was done in order to saturatedUkraina with communist symphatizers(the old trick that is used by China in Tibet and was always used by any invading country in history-see British,French,Spanish,Dutch,Portugues,German etc, imperialism and colonialism)Now,that Russia is free from communists(but not necessarily from its mentality)these Ukrainian citizens of Russian descent will do anything in their considerable power to ensure that Ukraina will stay under domination of Russia.The tensions like that are likely to be with us for very long time.
Coalition governments around the Europe are reality.
Even in Germany the winning side of second last election had to form coalition with socialists.Luckily for them,the last election proved that it did not have to last for long.

It is with this in mind that I predict that "big" coalition will also form in Czech Republic after the May election.
Certainly not an ideal situation but perhaps necessary for further stability.Ideologies will have to take secondary role in that situation.

Jiri; I expect most Czech citizens will read the news from the Ukraine and be able to say 'We have come a long way indeed'. In short I am saying the support the C.R. has in achieving its own destiny is immense. The outlook for democratic progress in the C.R. is huge; in as much as it may well become an export. A sucsessful coalition system is a tall order; but the Czech constitution and its progress are a possibility that is supported by people just because; they wan't it to sucseed. The prospect of Czech M.E.P''s sharing thier experience of struggle towards sucsess is good. Also the flowering arts as a part of an integral society that welcomes reflection is an export asset. The best critisism is that of leading by example, that's what many wan't to see; and supporting that needs no apology.

Jiri; Articles 1&2 in the general provisions for the fundemental Rights and Basic Freedoms in the constitution is impressive legislation. The protection from an 'exclusive ideology' through democratic values is healthy. I hope with a broad coalition the views of the majority are heard and a peaceful country with happiness as a value is realised. It will take time to grow listening and compromise skills for the greater majority. I feel most of that exsists anyway and the constitutional values keep the vision of freedom in the hearts of the people.
The goal of achieving constitutional values in harmony with government wont be easy; however I think the Czech people if any can do this. The desire within the nation is historical and I sincerely hope the country grows into an image of its constitution that is not false. The arts help reflect the reality of the society, and that is very healthy in the C.R.
I have faith that things will turn out well; eternal optomism through adversity has few equals.

Archduchess Regina von Habsburg Lothringen, Heiress to the thrones of Austria, Hungary, Bohemia and Moravia, Croatia, Vojvodina, Bosnia-Herzegovina and other lands died (Daily Telegraph).



Archduchess Regina von Habsburg, who died on February 4 aged 85, was the wife of HIRH Archduke Otto von Habsburg - formerly Crown Prince of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and latterly a highly respected member of the European parliament; had history taken a different turn, she would have been Empress of Austria and Apostolic Queen of Hungary and Bohemia.



The Archduchess with her husband, Dr Otto von Habsburg, at a mass to mark their 50th wedding anniversary in 2001 Christened Regina Helene Elisabeth Margarete, she was born in Würzburg, Germany, on January 6 1925, the youngest of four daughters of Duke Georg, the titular Duke Georg III of Saxe-Meiningen, and his wife, Princess Clara-Marie von Korff genannt Schmissing-Kerssenbrock. Her father, died in a Russian prisoner-of-war camp at Chernopevetz a year after the war ended, when she was 21. Her sister died at only three months old, while one of her brothers, Prince Anton Ulrich, was killed in action at Albert-sur-Somme in 1940. Another became a Carthusian monk at Grande Chartreuse in Grenoble.



Further back, her great-grandfather was Georg II, Duke of Saxe-Meiningen (1826-1914), who after the Franco-Prussian War became a well-known patron of the theatre, and is sometimes described as having been the first modern stage director - he is remembered particularly for developing the Meiningen Ensemble, using his court theatre and designing costumes and props himself.



As a young girl, Regina studied social work at Bamberg, and later worked at a refugee home in Munich. In 1949 Archduke Otto von Habsburg came to visit some of his former Hungarian subjects who were being cared for at the home. The following year he and Regina became engaged.



Otto von Habsburg was barred from entering Austria until 1966, and owing to this injunction the couple was forced to marry elsewhere. The service eventually took place in France on May 10 1951 at the Eglise des Cordeliers in Nancy (the burial place of several members of the House of Lorraine), with the blessing of Pope Pius XII.



Although Otto was the heir to the Austrian Empire, he was unusual among "pretenders" in electing to ignore his aristocratic title, preferring to style himself Dr Otto von Habsburg; in 1979 he was voted into the European Parliament as Christian Democrat member for North Bavaria and served for the next 20 years, becoming the highly-regarded Father of the House and its only member to have been born before the First World War. He never claimed the throne of Austria, and in 2000 renounced his sovereignty of the Order of the Golden Fleece, the last sign of his leadership of the Imperial Family.



The Archduchess proved a devoted wife, and her husband acknowledged that, but for her support, he would not have been able to make such a success of his political career.



She herself was Protectress of the Order of the Starry Cross, an all-female Roman Catholic order founded in the 17th century; Grand Mistress of the Order of Elisabeth, a similar organisation; and an Honorary Lady Grand Cross of the Sovereign Order of Malta.



For some years she had suffered from heart problems, and in December 2005 had a stroke; but she recovered sufficiently to attend the wedding of a grandson in 2008.



The Archduchess died at Pöcking über Starnberg, Bavaria, at the villa where she had lived with her husband, who survives her, since 1953. They had two sons and five daughters. Their elder son, Karl, married Baroness Francesca Thyssen-Bornemisza, daughter of Baron Heini von Thyssen and his third wife, Fiona Campbell-Walter and Georg a full ambassador of Hungary married to a Princess von Oldenburg Holstein.

Jiri; it is my non apologetic dream that the C.R. masters the art of coalition government and exports it free of charge. I have always been aware that changes in the C.R. were faced; overcome; and developed by the people of the Czech Republic. In many ways; the people of the Czech Republic have achieved the impossible; and I have never ever lost sight of that.
I hope that 'extremes' are avoided development towards harmony within the country prevails.
Politics is far to important to be left to polititions and development by a multi-coalition is an ideal worth passing on to generations who will continue the work of a free people.
I have no wish to offer opinion in this election period; that would be inappropriate

" A sucsessful internal C.R. coalition may offer diplomatic pragmatism that other E.U. states can learn from; at least it's a positive view."

We should hope for this.
However,keep in mind that the almost bankrupt economies of Greece,Spain and Portugal that is causing great distress in Schoengen Zone are all led by Socialist governments-the similar to CSSD that according to polls is leading in public opinion and is leaning to coalition with Communists-a course of action that they will regret in long term,I am sure.
However,in meantime they could cause a lot of damage.
I hope that voters in Czech Republic are mature enough to see that.

Does anyone remember Czechoslovakia from 1948 to 1989? Can you recall
August 1968? The Russians did not liberate the Czechs....Roosevelt gave Stalin
a free hand at Yalta and that was the beginning of the end. So the Russians soldiers
were fighting for your (Czech) freedom....think again.
Take down the "Hammer and Sickle", in fact take the whole damn monument down!

The objections to E.U. policies and everything it does are welcome. So is suggesting constructive alternatives and standing up against 'Fedarlist fantasy'. In many ways a 'modest coalition' is the state of the E.U. at present and the difficulties that come with coalition. Co-exsistance is a reality that has to be faced; and political soloutions seem unlikely to solve all problems faced in union. The 'marriage' will be unable to produce a family home if it's basis is constant political power fighting. Coalition in the E.U. will need compromise in quantity; the history of nation 'divorce' and the resulting power posturing produced war and chaos. The hard won experience of the C.R. in facing change that few have ever done; is a priceless asset of export to other aspiring nations. In many ways the C.R. is the cutting edge blueprint for others to learn from if they so desire. The hope and encouragement at the diplomatic disposal of the C.R. has few equals. It may well be in time the coalition building experience within the C.R. prevails at difficult E.U. development junctures. I support Mr Klaus's call for a 'better mood' in 2010; pragmatic optimism in these recession times beats negative defeatism. The U.K. is about to build a new 'clean coal' energy plant with E.U. money; this opportunity for shared buisness models; outcomes; and 'coalition' (poor pun) is one example of what can be. The E.U. working together is a better ideal than protracted infighting that tears apart the fabric of E.U. coalition. Common bonds offer the chance to overcome mistrust and produce mutual gain. A sucsessful internal C.R. coalition may offer diplomatic pragmatism that other E.U. states can learn from; at least it's a positive view.

"Herr Klaus is a populist and a demagogue, who has the support of the Communist for a long period of time. This is the main difference with Poland, the USA can trust in Warsaw but not in Prague"

You are talking as if "populist and demagogue" was something filthy.President Klaus has very wide support of Czechs and speaks well.Louis,you are a demagogue but you certainly are not populist or popular.

President Klaus does not care for communists.
Democrats in USA are roughly equal in their philosophy to CSSD in Czech Republic therefore President Obama will do anything to "rub it in face " for Republicans who supported closer relationship with Czech Republic.
As far as wide dislike by Poles for Russians- that goes far to the history as you should know.Also both Germany and USSR(Russians)attacked Poland in late nineteen thirties and they had even more reasons to hate Russians than Czechs.Czechs were only invaded by Russians as part of defeating of Germans.They just have "forgotten" to go back home after the war.
So there is stronger sense of trust in USA for Poland than for Czechs,I will give you that.However,main reason why USA vaccilate toward Czechs now is desire by Democrats to do anything as much as possible differently than Republicans.
Perhaps it will backfire on them.

Herr Klaus is a populist and a demagogue, who has the support of the Communist for a long period of time. This is the main difference with Poland, the USA can trust in Warsaw but not in Prague, were former apparatchiks made millions and own properties confiscated to the Bohemian and Moravian nobility and entrepreneurs during the communist era. In Warsaw the Communist party is the past, and the poles are fiercely anti communists and anti Russians, or to be more accurate anti Putin and his ferocious tyranny, where many journalists were murdered just because they opposed their regime. This is the simple reason why Washington had chosen Poland as its main partner in Central or Eastern Europe giving them patriot missiles to defend themselves from the "Red Army" and not the Czech Republic, as the Washington Post published a month ago, Herr Klaus doesn't deserve any trust, which is the same opinion expressed by diplomats in London, Paris and Berlin.

To take away Hammer and Circle is a shame. but anticommuinism is also a big shame. Under Stalin sovied did great progress and the wellbing of people increased, despite all the losses in world war 2. It is liberalism that are conneted to fascism It was the liberal owners of german newspaper chains that gave room for Hitler and his propaganda. The Nazis had very little newspapers at that time. Stalin was a big liberator of the peoples.

"How about you, Jiri? You were born there, grew up there, were schooled there, had many good times there."

Sure,I am nostalgic at times.You know Karel that people have a fantastic ability to adapt to any situation,so despite the political and police state activities in the country people will have a good times even in perpetually bad situation.
In my case even when I was often hungry and neglected I most of the times enjoyed my childhood tremendously.My teenage years were not so good but I lived on my own since I was 16 years old and had a measure of freedom that allowed me to do my own things.So yes, I feel that there were many good times together with bad ones and sometimes I think maybe returning to finish my life overthere.
Of course,my family is entrenched in Canada -my wife being of British heritage and being born in Canada so it is not likely to happen.I can though visit when I retire as often as I want.

As to vosi hnizdo I thought that maybe you got offended by my suggestion about the nostalgy- and you know what happen if you step on vosi hnizdo -so I was awaiting some reaction from you,which did not really happen.

"Where European Union is not welcome; then it is the duty of the European Union to allow for a grander alliance of partners that have no wish to participate in a shared common value system."

If a group of nations decides in the future to form different entity in Europe there will be no need to ask EU to allow them to leave.In theory at least EU is not federation-yet.
It was supposed to be just a economic partnership in the start.
It is being transmutted to political entity that slowly and surely dwarfs constitutions of individual states.Most of the common values Jan is talking about was already part of constitution of individual states even before EU and Lisbon Pact.If EU will didintegrate in the future those values will still be in effect in separating states.You don't really suggest that the only values that are common and worthy were just in western Europe,do you?

After the disintegration of USSR East Europeans changed their constitutions-even before becoming members of EU -to reflect what was not possible for several decades.

Mr.Klaus has right to differ in his opinions with EU bureocracy.

Karel; the point I'm making is that Mr Klaus has been very vocal in his assesment; opinion; and demeanour towards the European Union. As is any free democracy people are encouraged and free to participate as thier conscience permits and this is protected by the laws of human rights. Mr Klaus has had a consistant line of distain; critisism; objections; as well as legal mounted opposition at attempts to formulate a European Union that moves forward. His recent attitude and reception of the European Prime Minister is in line with his deep rooted attitude which included a comparison of negativity as to the function of the E.U. comapred to the old U.S.S.R.
It seems fair to allow him all options to accomadate this entrenched and protracted opposition to E.U. development and to listen to alternative political process as he would invisage. My own view is that the C.R. is fully engaged in the E.U.and it's people should benefit on equal terms as any E.U country. Within that there is room to listen to constructive critisism that enriches the base shared value systems agreed in legislation and negotiation.
Where the viewpoint is one of direct opposition with a shared democratic platform that the E.U. is damaging the prospects of any member state; then that member state has the freedom to determine its membership. This allows a window to accomadate Mr Klaus's consistant objections to the E.U. and an opportunity to listen to his alternative vision of that which he views as so objectionable.

Jan Fleur, if I understand your comment correctly, you would be pleased to see the Czech Republic leave the European Union, correct? That's interesting, as I remember reading a report at the time of President Klaus' signing of the Lisbon Treaty that someone in his office had suggested the CR might do just that some day. I wonder how many people in the CR see things the same way?

Rene Pelan is absolutely correct in his action. Hammer and sickle are symbols of terrorism and oppression. While russian soldiers "liberated" some places in Czechoslovakia in persuit of the germans, lets not forget the wholesale rape and plunder by them.
And what about 1968 when they raped the whole country!
Go to hell ruskis!

With Mr Klaus's reception of the European Prime Minister it is now time to let him advocate change. The rhetoric and line points time to seek senator support to pull out of the European Union. Mr Klaus's; with his vast political experience; should be given the political leverage to forge a right wing breakaway alliance with his preferred partners.
A possible economic alliance with the USA and Russia.; by-passing anything European; is an option.
The realities of 1933/1989 are something I am not prepared to comment on; the history is all over Europe for anyone to draw conclusions on. Where European Union is not welcome; then it is the duty of the European Union to allow for a grander alliance of partners that have no wish to participate in a shared common value system.

Where you have polititions; law; and judiciary that are unnacountable to democratic statute books of law built on morals and ethics; you have corrupt government. The furthest left meets with the furthest right; the result, mass murder.
You can quote me on this.

How about you, Jiri? You were born there, grew up there, were schooled there, had many good times there. Surely you have been nostalgic. You're the one who has reason to feel nostalgia, not me. I spent five weeks there during a particularly cold winter and couldn't wait to leave. Returning to West Germany I felt like I was 'home'. Thank God for the West Germans! Let's hear it for the Germans! And let's hear it for the Hapsburgs!

Wasp's nest? Vosy hnizdo? Que? Shto?

Well, I will admit, my mother has at her home some Supraphon '45's from the 50's and 60's, as well as ornaments, ceramic and glass, which were sent over from the hell-hole by relatives, tajterlici, but, thinking back as far and as hard as I can, I can't remember these items ever generating a feeling of nostalgia; not even a frisson.

"Seriously nostalgic"? How on earth could you arrive at such a conclusion? As you have said once or twice in these pages, get real buddy"

I read the minds as any hippie does.Did I tripped over the wasp nest?

"I know that you are not communist symphatizer,but are just seriously nostalgic for the period of time in Czechoslovakia that you never experienced yourself."

"Seriously nostalgic"? How on earth could you arrive at such a conclusion? As you have said once or twice in these pages, get real buddy!

"Go ahead,make a fun of me ... ". No Jiri, I was actually trying to make fun WITH you, now that we have the very prolix Louis back in the mix. Hergott, kdes byl Ludvo?

Batyushka Stalin skazau ....

"Louis and Jiri, two sides of the same coin. Truly, will wonders never cease?"

That may be in this particular coin Karel.There is a lot of roughage in between those sides though.

How about:There is more between Earth and Heavens that you can imagine.

Seriously,though.
I know that you are not communist symphatizer,but are just seriously nostalgic for the period of time in Czechoslovakia that you never experienced yourself.If that means that you see USSR and communism as a lesser evil, so be it.
Still,you can't expect that anybody who is familiar with the facts will agree with you.

" "Are you serious?""

John Mv Enroe was an idiot.You should not ask his questions lest some people will confuse you with him.

Karel,I am not New Ager,I know too much of how much darkness there is within the souls of mankind.New Agers avoid this.
Also,I believe in personal responsibility which hippies certainly did not.

Go ahead,make a fun of me but it will not change the facts as they were and as they are now.

"We normally associate gulags with Stalin. But the Solovki prison camp started under Lenin; it was a central ingredient in the Red Terror, Lenin and Trotsky's policy of terrorizing the anti-Soviet opposition. In 1923, the Bolshevik regime kicked out the last remaining monks and handed the islands to the secret police. The monastery became the headquarters of the Solovetsky Camp of Special Designation, or SLON, where the Bolsheviks sent their most incorrigible opponents. Prisoners came from across the political spectrum; there were anarchists and Mensheviks, scholars and aristocrats, Orthodox clergy and Islamic mullahs from Central Asia. As Stalin consolidated his grip on power and reached evergreater heights of paranoia, the population of the prison exploded. By 1928, the Solovki held about 60,000 prisoners, Solzhenitsyn writes in "The Gulag Archipelago." SLON was the mother of the gulag system, according to Solzhenitsyn; by the time it closed in 1939 (purely for logistical reasons); similar camps had "metastasized" throughout the USSR, from the nearby Kola Peninsula to distant Vladivostok.

Prisoners faced horrifying conditions in the "special" camp. During the winter, guards stuffed them by the dozen into tiny, unheated cells; the prisoners had no choice but to sleep in piles for warmth, and inevitably, some would die during the long Arctic nights. Many of SLON's guards were convicted criminals who revealed in sadistic acts of torture and execution. In one such torture, called the komarik, prisoners were tied to a stake in a mosquito-infested swamp; the aggressive insects would literally eat the victim alive.

All of this took place on sacred ground. For the Russian Orthodox faithful, the perversion of the holy Solovki islands was an unspeakable act of cultural vandalism. According to one well-known priest, Father Georgy Chistyakov, it was as if the Nazis had built Auschwitz on the shrine of St. Francis of Assisi.

The result of this painful history is that the Solovki have tremendous symbolic resonance for the Russian people. After the collapse of the USSR, when human rights groups placed a memorial to the victims of totalitarianism on Lubyanka Square (facing the headquarters of the former KGB), the monument they chose was a rock from the Solovki. Meanwhile, for Orthodox believers, the reopening of the Solovetsky monastery in 1990 was a triumphant sign of spiritual revival. Of course, the present-day monastery is a shell of its former self. There are only a few dozen monks, and they awkwardly share their living space with the museum. But with the return of monastic life, the islands have regained their reputation as a holy place. Thousands of palomniki, or pilgrims, come here every year to pray in the newly restored churches.

The landscape of the Solovki is filled with signs of religious revival. One such sign stands smack in the middle of the harbour: a towering wooden cross, called a poklonny krest (cross of worship), which rises up from a rocky platform to greet ships as they arrive on the island. These distinctively shaped crosses are something of a specialty in the Russian North; you can find dozens of them throughout the Solovki. Many of them were made by a retired architect named Georgy Kozhokar. When I met Kozhokar, he was oiling up his mountain bike for a ride across the island. With his thick, slightly greying beard, he wouldn't have been out of place in an Orthodox monastery. Indeed, he has lived on the Solovki for the past 17 years - but he was originally born in far-off Moldova. "The Solovki is my spiritual homeland," he explains.

Later, Kozhokar took me on a tour of his cross-making workshop. Besides the cavernous space where he assembles his monumental crosses, there is also a room where he creates small, intricately carved crosses that will hang on the walls of churches and private houses. Kozhokar never signs his work; he considers himself a servant of God, rather than a commercial craftsman.

Labyrinths of Mystery
The Solovki museum has changed radically since my dad worked there. It is now a well-financed operation with a fully modern, Internet-enabled office, and it receives millions of dollars from the federal budget for the restoration of the Kremlin. It has also taken over much of the archipelago's tourist industry; today it offers tours to every main island of the Solovki. At the museum's comprehensive Excursion Bureau, I signed up for a tour of the Zayatsky Islands. These are the home of the Solovki's most mysterious attraction - the Neolithic labyrinths - manmade rock formations over 4,000 years old.

Before the gulag, before the monastery, and even before Christianity itself, there were people on the Solovki. They left their mark on the Zayatsky Islands, a pair of small, windswept rocks off the coast of Bolshoi Solovetsky Island. From a distance, there isn't much to see there: only a small wooden church, the remnant of an 18th-century monastic hermitage. But just out of sight, there lies a unique archaeological treasure.

The museum's boat landed at a remote stone dock. We trekked past the wooden church and entered an alien landscape. Thanks to constant winds, the island is Arctic tundra filled with stunted birch trees no taller than Japanese bonsais. After a minute's hike, we stopped to gaze at a labyrinth. Shaped like a spiral and made of moss-covered rocks, it rested like a fingerprint at the top of the hill. Although the rocks only came up to my knee, the labyrinth was gapingly wide, filling a circle nearly 100 feet in diameter.

Nobody knows why the labyrinths were built. The most likely explanation is that they were used for religious rituals - but there are countless other theories. For example, some Swedish New Agers recently performed an experiment to settle the matter once and for all. They tested the "auras" of human subjects who walked around the spiralling labyrinth paths. Their conclusion was that circumnavigating the paths had a positive biological effect; unfortunately, the tour guide discouraged us from walking on the ancient rock formations.

But you don't have to walk around in spirals to refresh your body and soul on the Solovki. After I returned to the big island, I passed a crowd of Russian tourists dressed in Speedos and bikinis; they were incongruously bathing in the Holy Lake, a body of fresh water directly behind the monastery. Indeed, it was perfect weather for swimming and sunbathing. The heat was sweltering and there was hardly a cloud in the sky.

Of course, there was something strange about tourists frolicking in a former gulag. The Solovki are a mass graveyard. So is it right to turn them into a tourist attraction? Or, on the other hand, would it be wrong to freeze them in time and deny them the chance to develop? Amid the chatter and laughter of the sunbathers, I realized that Russians had already made their decision. The contradictions of the Solovki, like the contradictions of Russia itself, are all part of the show" by Alexei Ossipovich Demidov, Saint Petersburg News 1996

Louis and Jiri, two sides of the same coin. Truly, will wonders never cease?

From your philosophical view point, and the way that you see things in our times, I must confess that I agree with you Jiri let's say 90%, and I cannot understand the blindness of a man who lives in a very open society as Australia, a nation of migrants, a true melting pot, even we have our cousins Erdödy de Monyorókerék et Monoszló, who found refuge in 1951 after escaping from Hungary, like thousands of other Magyars who live in Australia until now. Australia is an example of openness, so even people like you Karel, who are accepted without any claim, and in spite for your sympathies towards the horrendous Soviet regime, which condemned to death by starvation or simply shoot of dozens of millions of Ukrainians peasants, or Russians, that Stalin who even killed their own "heroes" of their criminal revolution of 1917 purge after purge. General Volkoganov estimated in some 35 to 40 millions the total of victims from Lenin to Stalin, without taking into account those murdered during the uprising of Hungary in 1956, Berlin, Warsaw and finally the Spring of Prague. In his recent book "L'Ideologie de la Terreur" (Gallimard, 2009) Patrick Gueniffey expressed how deeply the French terror from 1789 to 1795 influenced all the totalitarian regimes in the last hundred years, starting by the Bolsheviks or Communists (Lenin was persuaded like Jacob Sverdlov, to use terror as a weapon to destroy all "enemies of the revolution"). That's why they killed 23 Romanov's and they organized the first concentration campo in Solovietsky or Solovky, where two millions were murdered since 1920 till 1932 when Stalin closed it, was too near to Moscow and Petersburg. Siberia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan were better places. A whole branch of the Trubetzkoy family was murdered in 1936 in the last country, some 31 were assassinated in just half and hours. Gueniffey continues with his thesis, reminding us who Alfred Rosenberg the ideologist of the Third Reich had a great deal of admiration towards Robespierre and their "special tribunals". Mao and the Khmer Rouge followed the path; we know quite well the results and how millions perished in the last century. Helmuth James Graf von Moltke (hanged in 1944) was asked in 1934 why he condemned so much Hitler's regime and he simply answered to the Times "there is no difference in the methods of the Nazis and the Communists". This was the day after General Baron von Schleicher and his wife were murdered by the SS.

Louis, on the tennis, I could only watch some of it because it didn't stimulate me. Good tennis it was, but it wasn't a contest and it was boring. I like contests that go right down to the wire, where they slug it out for hours and the result is victory by the smallest of margins. Federer is too good for my liking.

Oh Jiri, I was expecting something of the order of the 1939 Molotov-Von Ribbentrop Pact between you and Louis. You're not going to disappoint me, are you? Or is the fat lady already on stage, singing?

" ... but time did not stand still and attitudes changed in very many fields of human behaviour.That's why of my positive beliefs in humanity."

Very noble of you, Jiri. And a believer in progress to boot. You're not an ageing hippy are you - Age of Aquarius, Woodstock, all that stuff ?

Since Louis has mentioned tennis, I would ask, as John McEnroe used to, "Are you serious?"

Hmmmmm.

"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose", I say.

" ja sam, vzidcky sam, sve konicky osedlam"

No you are not alone.I just do not prescribe to your theory of "magnitude" of wrongness as you apply it to Nazism and Communism.

There sure was an attitude of"higher and better" from Germans towards Czechs during first Republic in Sudetenland(and of course even more prior to that)-we will always keep it in the back of our minds- but time did not stand still and attitudes changed in very many fields of human behaviour.That's why of my positive beliefs in humanity.If that makes me naive,so be it.

"Now you have an ally, Jiri, you ol' Hapsburg you!"

Karel,nobody is all black or white like in Holywood movies.In this particular case I and Luis converge in our beliefs.Not so on anything prior to establishment of Czechoslovakia.

I do not think I am naive about German nation in these modern times.As I said there surely are extremists but I stand for my belief that most of them are decent people.That goes also for most of other nations.
If you want to believe in "dark" side of humans in any context I can't stop you.As for myself despite of my frequent criticism or disagreement with others I would like to believe that humanity is in progress to improve their thinking with a proviso that there is always a potential for outbreak of darkness.

Seriously Louis, welcome back!

Sitting with others on the front of a T-34, my Red Army uniform, dirty and smelly, holding my Red Army kulomet, and singing Katyusha :

Rastsvetali yabloni i grushi,
Poplyli tumany nad rekoy;
Vykhodila na bereg Katyusha,
Na vysokiy bereg, na krutoy.

Somewhere in East Prussia, Ost Preussen.

Karel the only important issue with you, considering that you live in Australia is that Roger Federer had beaten Andy Murray, well done for the Swiss player, excellent match. By the way, it doesn't worth a penny to discuss with a pro Soviet anything that has to do with Stalin and his regime, he was a monster and a tyrant, murdered millions of Russians and Europeans, including Polish officers, Jewish doctors after WW2 and all the opposition to his regime in the countries liberated, they have their own Concentration Camps, as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn related in his book about the Gulag and others, or in the excellent book of the New York Times columnist and writer Serge Schmemann. Most of his victims were even officers of the Red Army like the generals and marshals of the Red Army killed in 1938, before he signed the agreement with Hitler in Moscow only few weeks prior to the invasion of both totalitarian states to Poland. Or I am wrong and the historians are mistaken, and the files of the KGB revealed by General Dmitri Volkoganov were a fraud?

A ja sam, vzidcky sam, sve konicky osedlam!

Well welcome back Louis v. Wetzler!

Now you have an ally, Jiri, you ol' Hapsburg you!

Never mind, the more of you there are the harder I'll fight. I like to fight you know. Rvac.

It is questionable that the Soviet Union liberated the then Czechoslovakia, we know quite well as historians that the US Army was very closed to smashed all the German resistance and they even started the occupation of Bohemia and Moravia plus Slovakia, General Patton and others of his staff wanted to be the first to liberate the country, but Ike following instructions of Washington, decided that Staling "deserves the merit of the "liberation" of Czechoslovakia". Was a direct consequence of the treacherous Yalta agreements, which gave up almost all Central Europe, the Balkans, excepting Greece and in the north Poland to the Soviets and Stalin who was a monster as Hitler. Your country suffered too much under the occupation of the Red Army and the purges and crimes committed by the Soviets. So I find quite natural to remove all what has to do with this totalitarian regime, including the so called "liberation", which was just a changing from the Nazi oppression to the Soviet one.

"I hope that you will accept this."

No I do not.

Let's just focus on Bohmen-Mahren, Jiri. In six years nazismus(Germans really), managed Terezin, Lidice, executions of students na Stary Namesti in Prague, Spilberk Castle in Brno(I was 'lucky' enough to visit this place), 40,000 ethnic Czechs who perished at its hands, 78,000 Jews likewise. Lovely! Boy, those commos sure have a lot to answer for, eh?

Now let's shift our gaze to Poland where three thousand Poles, ethnic Poles and Jewish Poles, perished at the hands of nazismus for every day of the war. On and on I could go.

Are you serious, Jiri? Communism was rotten to the core, evil (and still is in North Korea). Nazismus was rotten to the core squared because of its absolute depravity.

Have I minimised enough for you?

"look forward to amplification from you as to how you think nazism and communism were different sides of the same coin"

I think it should be fairly obvious from what we know about these two systems on the extreme sides of political spectrum.
I already wrote in one of other opinions on this blog how I see it.
Political cpectrum is a closed circle.If you start in the middle going to the left or right it does not go straigth into infinity but rather it curves until it meets.At that point the left or right ideology is virtually identical especially in the means it uses.
Like "Worm Ouroboros," it swallows its tail.Or two sides of the same coin.

I hope that you will accept this.

Russia certainly needs to raise no cry over what is being done to the war memorial in Brno, as it is the residents of Brno who ultimately decides what should stay and go in their town. But the residents of Brno do have a responsibility to history in preserving the hammer and sickle along with the star even if they don't like it for political reasons. Communist rule may not have been to their liking in all of the tenure it was an authoritarian regime all over Czechoslovakia. But the war memorial pre-dates that and is there as a memory to those Russians who laid down their lives protecting the residents of Brno. Would the people here believe that those men and women came all the way from their homes and loved ones and died for nothing? What did they gain from protecting a town and its defenceless people from the Nazis? A piece of history is always a piece to be preserved. Its serves as a reminder lest we forget history and are condemned to repeat it. The rest is all politics, absolute and absurd.

" ... the effect of what you say is minimizing the communism's responsibilities for repression and horror inflicted on millions of people."

Well, Jiri, I did say the same using different words, didn't I? :

"Yes, they were both totalitarian, and they both led to the deaths of many, many people; no gainsaying that."

I look forward to amplification from you as to how you think nazism and communism were different sides of the same coin, especially in relation to the Czechs, that would be even more interesting - the Poles, Russians, Ukrainians, Germans, Chinese, Angolans, Cubans can all go hang, at least for a while. How about it, Jiri? Your turn to do some work.

"Well, that's cleared up then Jiri. I take it it is "working " for you now."

No it is not.

"Trying to minimize"? What motive or motives would you impute to me for doing this. Please explain."

I do not know your motif or motives, however the effect of what you say is minimizing the communism's responsibilities for repression and horror inflicted on millions of people.



"It is you, Jiri, who repeatedly has been comparing nazism with communism on the world stage, not me. And, your saying that nazism and communism are two sides of the same coin is wrong; it is simplistic and lazy."

Yes I did and do and will.I do not agree with you reasoning that they are fundamentally different.They both advance their particular ideology and will stop at nothing to bring it to a fruitition. If their method of advancing their ideology will kill millions of humans in order to succeed then I will say that they are guilty as charged-both by myself and by hundreds of millions of other humans.
You can try to rationalize one part of this equation but I do not buy it.

"In your comment you were comparing two systems.Maybe you wanted to limit it within the context of this article in your mind but it did not work for me and I think perhaps for others."

Well, that's cleared up then Jiri. I take it it is "working " for you now.

But, will you please stop putting words in my mouth Jiri, eg - "You,in effect are trying to minimize "the shining star"(your analogy-magnitude)of repression of communist system versus the Nazism.
As I already said both of those political systems are two sides of the same coin."

"Trying to minimize"? What motive or motives would you impute to me for doing this. Please explain. Are you saying I am some sort of lefty, perhaps even a communist, when all the evidence in my comments points the other way? Come on Jiri, fess up!

It is you, Jiri, who repeatedly has been comparing nazism with communism on the world stage, not me. And, your saying that nazism and communism are two sides of the same coin is wrong; it is simplistic and lazy. Yes, they were both totalitarian, and they both led to the deaths of many, many people; no gainsaying that. But nazism was based on the idea of the tribe and the superiority of that tribe in comparison with others. Communism was not so, being based on a sophisticated, but deeply flawed, theory as you know. Communism was not centred on the idea of a Russian volk; it was internationalist. Nazism(hyper- Germanism) sought to conquer for conquest's sake, as well as to plunder resources and improve Germany's geopolitical position, in that order. Can we say the same about communism in Europe, which came with the Red Army as it was pushing back the Wehrmacht? And, by the way, Czechoslovakia did not have a communist government, as you well know, until 1948. What took them so long? Why didn't the Red Army just stay on and occupy the country after May, 1945? Why did the Soviets leave Austria in 1955, as they said they would? Why did the Soviets allow the Prague Spring to flourish for so long in 67/68? Why did they finally pack up and leave eastern Europe after 1990 when they didn't have to? I mean, can you truly imagine the nazi germans doing these things? It's troubling going deeper in comparing nazism with communism because of the fighting on the Eastern Front, and because nazism, outside of Germany, only reigned for six years, whereas communism, outside the USSR reigned for over forty years, which were not years consumed in unremitting warfare.

I think that you do a grave disservice to the future of the people of the Czech Republic by saying nazism and communism were the same Jiri, in the context of the CR, that is. The Czechs share a long border with a people who, mostly happily, and without any great revolution, gave their hearts and souls to Hitler and his nazis; the Czechs came to have a communist government for entirely different reasons, one of which was a perception, not entirely unfounded that the West was perfidious, unreliable. Only the Russians and the Red Army and their communism could be counted on to help protect the young Czechoslovak state from the German menace.

So says Karel Bures.

"Yes, well you shouldn't be selective Jiri. The words you have quoted back at me have a context and what I follow those words with in my comment makes that clear I would have thought."

In your comment you were comparing two systems.Maybe you wanted to limit it within the context of this article in your mind but it did not work for me and I think perhaps for others.

By the way,USSR worked in its satelite states by proxy and left all of its dirty work to its stooges in government of relevant country.It was by both overt and covert treat to these governments that they did their biddings.
If they did not,USSR attacked.In Hungary,in Czechoslovakia in Poland.There are treats by China against the Taiwan standing.It is only by implied warnings by USA that they did not attack Taiwan as yet.
Also,if communists did most of their "deeds" within their own countries,how is it of any comfort for the millions of dead(and their families?)A proxy army of USSR(a Cubans)about 10,000 strong was fighting in central Africa(Angola and Kongo)in seventies and eighties of last century to "promote" a freedom of communist type in those countries,bankrolled by USSR.I dobt that today's "liberals" in Europe that regularly covertly and overtly defend communism even remember those events.

You,in effect are trying to minimize "the shining star"(your analogy-magnitude)of repression of communist system versus the Nazism.
As I already said both of those political systems are two sides of the same coin.

"Karel,you never lived in communism.Anything you heard was only second hand and moderated by time."

Yes, Mr Hubacek, and what you remember has been distorted by your bitterness and by the 24/7 propaganda you have been soaking up ever since you left.

The difference between a totalitarian system and a democratic one is not just that the latter has more than one party: these parties have to be independent from each other and all political positions need to be allowed, without censorship. There needs to be a realistic way that a minority party can gain political power (not possible in a first-past-the-post system). There also needs to be freedom of speech, and a media which isn't dominated by a handful of powerful interests. If all of these conditions are met the parties will also represent a range of different views. If these parties can be elected through fair elections then one can say that the system is democratic. Finally, if the parties are funded by the state rather than through special-interest groups, there is some hope that their views and actions will represent the will of the people rather than the will of the people who fund them. A useful corollary is that the election should be a contract, which is annulled if a party breaks its election promises (otherwise, even if everything else is there, the election is meaningless).

The US looks, on the surface, like a democracy. In practice it is so far from that that it makes no difference whether there are elections or not.

"Cuban people are compulsed by their government to vote for the only choice that exist in their country."

And US voters have a choice between a puppet backed by big oil and a puppet backed by Wall Street. But no reliable health care, high taxes wasted on foreign wars and an educational system that leaves most people unable to locate their own country on a map of the world...

"Your own words,Karel."

Yes, well you shouldn't be selective Jiri. The words you have quoted back at me have a context and what I follow those words with in my comment makes that clear I would have thought. Mind you, the gulags, and atrocities committed under Stalin were limited to inside the borders of the USSR, Katyn notwithstanding; the Soviets did not behave with quite the same brutality to the populations outside the USSR as the Germans did to the populations outside Germany, particularly to the Slavs.

I think when you're talking about communism and nazism in the context of the article about the war memorial, it's no good justifying the removal of the hammer and sickle from the memorial by referring to the manifold crimes of the Soviets committed elsewhere and at different times.

"But this article is about the Czech Republic and my response, appropriately I would have thought, is limited to the effects of both nazism and communism on that country, nothing more."

Sorry Karel,it did not sound to me like you are talking just anout situation in Czechoslovakia.

"But these "political systems"(I would argue that nazism was less a political system than communism, that it was more hyper-Germanism - but that can wait for another day, perhaps) are not to be seen as equivalent, for to my mind, communism, as bad as it was, was nowhere near as bad as nazism."

Your own words,Karel.

Jiri, the burden of this article is a memorial in the Czech Republic. Nothing to do with something inside Russia or China. You're sounding like one or two others you yourself have criticised in these pages when you say I need to educate myself. Of course I am aware of gulags, etc. But this article is about the Czech Republic and my response, appropriately I would have thought, is limited to the effects of both nazism and communism on that country, nothing more.

" I'm talking orders of magnitude here, orders of magnitude as used in astronomy."

Karel,you never lived in communism.Anything you heard was only second hand and moderated by time.
Didn't you ever heard of Gulags-the Russian version of concentration camps?Do you know that millions of Ukrainians died of starvation at the hands of Stalin and his henchmen?(Communists all)
You too need to educate yourself.There was a massacre of over twenty millions of innocent Chinese in brutal "revolution"of Mao-Tze-Tung.

If you are talking about magnitude you can say that communist massacres are "shining even brighter" than Nazism-if you really want to put it that way.There is no difference in those political systems in final analysis.On top of that the anti-semitism was a core part of their phylosophy.The pogroms in USSR (and even in Russia prior to bolsheviks) was more a norm than individual event.
I don't think that I need to bring up Germany's holocaust ,do I?

"Cuba has a government which is supported by a far higher proportion of the population than any US president in living memory"."

Cuban people are compulsed by their government to vote for the only choice that exist in their country.That is the members of the ruling class(i.e.communists).The election is compulsory and those who do not vote will pay for it.(I know that I paid for it when I refused to vote in my only legal election while still living in Czechoslovakia.)The similar system was used in all former communist countries.The 99% participation was regular happenning.
This system of compulsory voting for the only"choice" of candidates can hardly be called democratic and used as counterweight to the democracy that exists in the west(now including former USSR satelite states of which Czechoslovakia also was.)

Pink heart liberals on this blog need to inform themselves a little bit.

William Smythe.

"Cuba has a government which is supported by a far higher proportion of the population than any US president in living memory".

How do you know this? How do we know this? Fidel Castro was president of Cuba from 1959 until 2008 - 49 years. The USA, with it's shambolic system which could hardly be described as democratic, has never had the same person as president for 49 years, let alone 49 consecutive years; FDR had 12. Must be something in the water over there, or perhaps it's in the sugar, or the cigars. But then, you were joking, weren't you?

"Both of these symbols are symbols of political system that practiced terror on its own citizens as well as on citizens of other countries."

Jiri, you'll have no argument from me there. But these "political systems"(I would argue that nazism was less a political system than communism, that it was more hyper-Germanism - but that can wait for another day, perhaps) are not to be seen as equivalent, for to my mind, communism, as bad as it was, was nowhere near as bad as nazism. I'm talking orders of magnitude here, orders of magnitude as used in astronomy. The nazis(Germans) had six years in the Czech lands, from 1939 through to 1945, the communists close to 42 years, from 1948 through to 1989. I mean, can you imagine a Prague Spring occurring under nazi(German) rule 20 years into the Protectorate, in 1959? You must be joking! God knows what havoc the nazis(Germans) would have wrought in the Czech lands after 42 years, but, I would submit, it would have been far, far, worse than anything the Soviets and their very many Czech accomplices would have wrought.

This proposal by the Brno officials is not only pettiness in the extreme, as I have already said, it would also constitute vandalism and desecration, this time legalised. The Czechs should concentrate more on expunging the baleful influences of communism in their own heads and look to the future instead of wallowing constantly in the recent past. And, lest they find themselves again "up shit creek without a paddle", as we say in Oz, in a squabble with a more traditional enemy, or enemies, than were the Soviets(ie, the Russians), they just might pause and reflect on the direction from which any possible assistance might come.

"Two countries which employed these systems were an allies prior to start WWII to allow them uncontested invasions of other countries.They were two sides of the same coin."

Um...I think you will find that your friends the Americans were the biggest chums of the USSR. As you say, they were "two sides of the same coin."

"What an incredible claptrap this is.Long live the loony left!!!"

Perhaps you could attempt to address my argument intelligently instead of writing a moronic sneer after it.

"if Russia wants to appear as a democratic country, it should not defend symbols of a totalitarian regime."

I could not agree more.
Both "Swastika" and "Hammer and Sickle" are symbols.Both of these symbols are symbols of political system that practiced terror on its own citizens as well as on citizens of other countries.It is inconsistent to ban one set of these symbols and defend or even promote the other one.
Two countries which employed these systems were an allies prior to start WWII to allow them uncontested invasions of other countries.They were two sides of the same coin.
It was only after Germany decided(to its eventual downfall)to end this Alliance by attacking USSR that they become enemies.

Nobody disputes that soldiers of former USSR(federation of many countries)contributed to freeing of former Czechoslovakia.Nobody should dispute that "Hammer and Sickle" symbol does not equate to this military action.

"It is this naive dichotomy between "democratic" and "totalitarian" which lies at the heart of the problem. The US has elections (of a sort); however it could hardly be described as "democratic". On the other hand, Cuba has a government which is supported by a far higher proportion of the population than any US president in living memory. Yet Cuba is still sometimes described by extremists as "totalitarian'. And in WW2 it was the US bankers who were funding Hitler and the "totalitarian" USSR which was fighting him (until the end, when the US needed an excuse to occupy Western Europe)."

What an incredible claptrap this is.Long live the loony left!!!

I can not believe what is written in the article.
My comment is that I honour those soldier who died in the 2nd World War. The problem is that Soviet army did not liberated us. They cast out Nazi to have influence over us and later on to support communism and occupy us. I honou those soldier not the regime which sends them. CCCP Stalin and Germany ( Hitler) at that time where same. Evil was fighting against evil. So do not celebrate evil and evil symbols but celebrate those pure soldiers who fought for real freedom.

Jan Novak

"if Russia wants to appear as a democratic country, it should not defend symbols of a totalitarian regime."

It is this naive dichotomy between "democratic" and "totalitarian" which lies at the heart of the problem. The US has elections (of a sort); however it could hardly be described as "democratic". On the other hand, Cuba has a government which is supported by a far higher proportion of the population than any US president in living memory. Yet Cuba is still sometimes described by extremists as "totalitarian'. And in WW2 it was the US bankers who were funding Hitler and the "totalitarian" USSR which was fighting him (until the end, when the US needed an excuse to occupy Western Europe).