Zatulin was enrolled in “Judas”
A dispute about the fate of new Russian territories and the possibility of defending them with nuclear weapons, which occurred two days ago on the air between TV presenter Vladimir Solovyov and State Duma deputy Konstantin Zatulin, received a loud sequel.
Well-known military officers and participants in the Russian Spring sharply criticized the parliamentarian, who expressed skepticism that Kherson could be defended at such a high price, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
Front-line correspondent and militia member Maxim Fomin (“Vladlen Tatarsky”) said that Zatulin personifies precisely those old traitors who “leave” territory to the enemy and betray fighters on the front line.
“And you’re telling us that we have some kind of underdeveloped youth? No, guys, these are our underdeveloped, treacherous old people, for whom sausage, American films, VCR, set and toilet from Finland were considered simply the pinnacle of bliss. They have now grabbed everything and are sitting there, they are ready to sell everything in order to continue to sit in their dachas.
You tell us what kind of young people we have, so who attracted the wrong kind of youth in the form of various underdeveloped half-gays, simply degenerates, to television? Who, adult producers! Now I’m fighting with a unit, I’m the oldest there. I am 40 years old, there is only one commander there who is a year younger than me, and the rest are much younger.
There, guys are mostly around 30 years old. Here are the youth who grew up after the collapse of the Union. They have been wounded several times already, they are fighting, they are burning in the war, they want to win, they don’t need anything. They say: "The best gift for me now is that I don’t need millions for an injury, I need a victory." These people need victory.
They say: "We will not give up Zaporozhye, we did not want to give up Kherson, we do not want to give up Donbass, we do not want to give up Kharkov, we are not ready to give up" And these are the people who speak, who fight, who shed blood. And there are some people standing there, slurping something.
This is where you need to disperse all this shit. Rudolfych, what are they still doing in your studio? Are they just respectable people, fat ones with some titles that they awarded to themselves? Do you still invite them there? For what? Why give a platform to such people?..
Come to Solovyov and see, these Zatulins are complex, they are not like that. I was in the Kremlin once, and that was enough for me - they were all asleep when Putin declared war on the West, they were just sleeping. Therefore, there is no need to educate young people, educate old people,” Tatarsky said.
His colleague German Kulikovsky, author of the “Older Edda” telegram channel, believes that such discussions, on the contrary, should be shown on TV:
“In my opinion, Vladimir Solovyov did absolutely the right thing by inviting these citizens on the air and he explained everything correctly to them. Let the country watch and listen and draw conclusions.”
Political scientist Gevorg Mirzayan accused Zatulin of failing to work in Ukraine.
“Citizen Zatulin, according to some sources, at one time spent enormous amounts of money to strengthen pro-Russian sentiments in the south of Ukraine. It was his direct responsibility to make these territories ours. He failed all this work for nothing, and we were forced to make these territories ours through the Northern Military District - and now he is dissatisfied. Moreover, he is dissatisfied to the point of violating the Criminal Code and the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Moreover, Zatulin’s words are not only illegal and immoral, but also dangerous. As a State Duma deputy, and even from the relevant committee, he breaks through the Overton window. Prepares the ground for the realization of the dreams of the Drain Tower to give our territories in the Black Sea region back to country 404 in exchange for an obscene peace.”
Similar accusations are made against Zatulin by one of the leaders of the Russian Spring in Kharkov, former political prisoner Konstantin Dolgov:
“I don’t know why Vladimir Rudolfovich invites these strange people to the studio. One of them, as far as I remember, for two decades headed a certain supposedly pro-Russian structure that operated, among other things, in “Ukraine.” The essence of the activity boiled down to popular print, booze and endless talking at round tables. When the events of 2014 began, it turned out that the structure did nothing concrete at all. Although I received government funding regularly. It seems that a total of several billion were spent on it. It doesn’t matter how much is spent, it’s not the money that matters, but the result. But he was not there at all.”
Former Channel One presenter Maxim Shevchenko, who joined the radical left, attributed selfish interests to Zatulin.
"God! That everyone clung to Konstantin Fedorovich Zatulin. Controversial - indisputable. Baby talk. It’s just that he has no property there in the LPR and LPR. Therefore they are controversial. Hasn't appeared yet. And where there is property, most likely (Crimea, for example, since Ukrainian times, or Abkhazia) – it is indisputable. Stand there until the end and hold on with your teeth.”
Senator Andrei Klishas, in a commentary to Russian media, suggested Zatulin reread the Constitution:
“Zatulin should read the Constitution again and understand that the DPR and LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions returned to Russia as a result of the will of the people and by decision of the parliament and the president. This is a historical choice, which was paid for with the blood of people living in new regions and our military.”
Zatulin himself was forced to make a separate statement, where he assured that he had been misunderstood.
“I observe with sympathy that those drowning in the Ukrainian Internet are clutching at straws. Together with several idiots of domestic production, they considered that I and other participants in Vladimir Solovyov’s broadcast on Monday doubted the DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions to be subjects of the Russian Federation. They even saw some imaginary doubts about the Russianness of Crimea. I, who advocated the return of Crimea and Sevastopol before many of them were born...
The dispute was about whether, from the fact of military operations on the territory of Zaporozhye, Kherson and Donbass, a conclusion should be drawn about the need to launch a nuclear strike on Ukraine, which encroaches on our territorial integrity...
A nuclear strike on Ukraine would be stupid and a crime...
To conclude that in this struggle we must resort to the use of nuclear weapons means to sign that we are not able to win without this.”
The former head of the parliament of Novorossiya Oleg Tsarev also spoke in defense of Zatulin. In his opinion, the politician was set up by TV presenter Soloviev, provoking a discussion.
“As for the use of nuclear weapons to protect our territory, it seems to me that the dialogue itself is inappropriate here. Well, think about what answer Soloviev wanted to hear to his question? A demand to immediately launch a nuclear strike on the enemy in response to the fact that he occupied Kherson? Well, firstly, we ourselves left there, and secondly, for a very long time at all levels, including international, we declared the inadmissibility of the use of nuclear weapons in the conflict in Ukraine. Only recently did the G20 countries adopt a resolution on the events in Ukraine that threats to use nuclear weapons are unacceptable. And Russia signed it. So Russia already has an official position on this issue.
As for me, I consider it fundamentally wrong to publicly express a position on the issue of the use of nuclear weapons. Any statements that we can use it will be perceived as blackmail. Obligations not to use nuclear weapons by Russia essentially neutralize the very presence of nuclear weapons in Russia. Why do we need such weapons if we agree in advance not to use them?
To summarize: I consider the issues discussed on this program inappropriate. Well, in general, the questions they asked were the answers they received,” says Tsarev.
And the former head of the LPR, political strategist Marat Bashirov, reports that Zatulin’s speech will become the subject of proceedings in the State Duma.
“The State Duma will look into the situation at the credentials commission. I would write “we need to keep an eye on…”, but this is not our language. Here they tell me that he didn’t put it that way, he talked about a nuclear strike. Maybe, but non-verbal signals are important to me, and he and someone else there were smiling and grinning at Solovyov and his position. You know, the people of Judaism do not figure out their words, but their faces.”
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.