Stairs. Entry group. Materials. Doors. Locks. Design

Know your limits! Society Know your limits! NOTES IN THE MARGINAL Russian measure. – M.: Publishing House “Economic Newspaper”, 2010. – 608 p. – (“Russian Classical Library. Economics and Spirituality”) Arshin, span, vershok, verst – how much is this in terms of the modern system of measures? Now

Measure for measure Measure for measure Valentin Kurbatov 02/13/2013

Meru

Meru Meru - also called grouper, rockfish - is a fairly common fish family! Their Latin name is serranidae, and in this family there are about a hundred species of fish living in different seas and oceans. Meru is deservedly considered “royal”

If someone had said to Yulia Latynina, “You sold yourself to the FSB for a ration of bread and turned your program into a means of molesting human rights activists and environmentalists,” she would have considered it outrageous.

Latynina herself, however, is not at all shy about such expressions, speaking about Grigory Yavlinsky and the Yabloko party, which she dislikes as much as those protesting against the development of copper-nickel deposits by the UMMC company in the Voronezh region. Perhaps she accuses the participants of the “anti-nickel” protest of fulfilling an “order”, and the Yabloko members of “selling out to the Kremlin” for “pennies from the federal budget.” Which they will receive only if they “behave well and love Putin”...

How was it with the classic? “Listen, lie, but know when to stop”?

The State Duma, elected in 2011, is made up of parties that “behave well and love Putin,” including “protest-minded” citizens who voted according to the well-known principle “for anyone other than United Russia.” True, it very quickly became clear that these “anyone” are confusingly indistinguishable from United Russia on an overwhelming number of issues - starting with the “law of scoundrels”, laws on “foreign agents”, on “insulting religious feelings” and on toughening punishments for participants “ uncoordinated” public actions, and ending with unconditional support for the annexation of Crimea and the military operation in Syria.
As for Yabloko, it publicly condemns the listed (and many other) legislative follies of Okhotny Ryad and does not recognize the legality of the annexation of Crimea (unlike, by the way, some prominent “oppositionists”). He opposes Russia's support for bandit rebels in eastern Ukraine and against permission to use the Russian army in Ukraine (which he states, among other things, from the rostrum of the St. Petersburg Legislative Assembly - receiving in response an explosion of collective hatred from the parliamentary majority). Calls the operation in Syria the most dangerous military adventure. And he opposes not only Putin, but also the “anti-European” course with which he is leading the country to a dead end.

For this position, Yabloko is subjected to pressure and persecution - and there have been no cases of any of the arrested Yabloko members being released the very next day at the request of the prosecutor...

Under these conditions, one can accuse Yabloko of “loving Putin” and “selling out to the Kremlin” either because of complete incompetence or because of deliberate meanness. Which of these hypotheses is more justified - let the reader judge.
As for receiving money from the federal budget, this should be discussed in more detail. Because critics of Yabloko love to say on all the resources available to them that Yabloko allegedly “depends on the Kremlin” because it is “afraid of losing government funding.”

In fact, what we have before us is a typical distortion of facts and lies.

According to the law (Article 33 of the Law on Political Parties), all parties that gained more than 3% in the last State Duma elections have the right to state funding. There are five such parties in Russia: four parliamentary ones and Yabloko, which gained 3.43% in the 2011 elections.

The entire “five” receives money from the budget during the term of office of the Duma, determined by law: 110 rubles per year for each voter’s vote received in the elections. Accordingly, Yabloko, for which 2.3 million voters voted, is entitled to about 250 million rubles a year. And not by the grace of the authorities, but by force of the law. Proportional to the level of support for the party by citizens.
One can see here “dependence on the Kremlin” to approximately the same extent as one can see the “dependence” of pensioners, students, “state employees” - everyone whose income is determined by law. Or all families with children receiving social benefits established by law. And so on.

The Parnassus party - to which Yabloko's staff critics are much more favorable, and which they praise in every possible way as the "real opposition" (some of them, we note, are members of this party) - does not receive state funding not because it is in out of favor with the Kremlin, but because she did not participate in the 2011 elections at all. “Parnas” is going to participate in the 2016 elections, including in order to receive government funding if it gains more than 3%. Should we understand our critics in such a way that after this Parnas will automatically move into the category of “dependent on the Kremlin” for fear of “losing state funding”? No? Why exactly? As Igor Yakovenko recently sarcastically remarked, “What else must be given up so that the political scientist Oreshkin is not accused of collaborating with the regime? Apparently, according to Brodsky’s formula, we need to stop going to the bakery.”

By the way, Parnas can participate in Duma elections without collecting signatures - the law provides such a “benefit” to parties that have factions in regional parliaments (Parnas has one deputy in Yaroslavl). However, critics of Yabloko for some reason do not draw the conclusion from this that Parnas, taking advantage of this benefit and being terrified of losing it, has “sold out to the Kremlin” and “loves Putin.”
So, maybe stop lying?

On Friday, March 2, the Petrozavodsk City Court sentenced the former director of the Kizhi Nature Reserve Museum (ex-governor of Karelia) Andrei Nelidov, who was accused of accepting bribes, and his adviser Ivan Romanov, who was accused of intermediary in bribery. The judge read only the operative part of the verdict. Nelidov was sentenced to 8 years of strict regime and a fine of 27 million 500 thousand rubles. And Romanov, who had previously been sentenced to 20 years under the article of pedophilia, was given a prison term of up to 21 years, in addition, he will have to pay a fine of 16 million 500 thousand rubles.

Judge Khromykh D.N.

photo from the site https://ptzgovorit.ru/news/andrey-nelidov-prigovoren

Reporting on the verdict, the author of the information, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper “Petrozavodsk” and the chief editor of the “news” section on the portal “Petrozavodsk says,” Alexey Smirnov, apparently at the suggestion of the judge, made the following statement: “According to the state prosecution, the former director of the Kizhi museum-reserve “Through the mediation of his adviser Ivan Romanov, he received a bribe in the amount of 4.6 million rubles from May 10 to September 23, 2015. He received this money from individual entrepreneur Tatyana Astratenok for granting the right to trade in souvenirs and other activities.

To this end, in the spring of 2015, Romanov proposed that Astratenok conclude sublease agreements with LLC LVK Petrovsky, controlled by him, for a retail pavilion, two kiosks and a bar in the entrance area of ​​Kizhi Island. For this, Astratenok had to hand over a bribe in the amount of 1.1 million rubles monthly through Romanov to Nelidov from May onwards - a total of 5.5 million rubles. The individual entrepreneur was promised that she and her employees would be given passes for unhindered stay on the island and a guarantee of non-termination of the sublease agreement.

After Romanov was arrested on April 30, 2015 for pedophilia, Nelidov continued to personally receive bribes from Asstratenok and confirmed the agreement during a personal meeting with the entrepreneur."

I have already analyzed the absurdity of the charges and now I want to draw the attention of both the judge, the prosecutor and the journalist to the obvious inconsistency of the facts. Who can explain how Romanov, who has been in custody since April 30, 2015, since May 10, 2015, could mediate the transfer and receipt of bribes between persons outside the walls of the pre-trial detention center? It will be interesting to see how this phenomenon will be reflected in the text of the verdict. This is not to mention the fact that the judicial investigation established that Astratenok transferred money to Nelidov that was owed to Romanov as rent, and in all the materials of the case there is not a single word that Romanov was going to transfer it to Nelidov in the form of a bribe. Well, let's wait until the judge prepares the reasons for the verdict.

“I hope that your soul is worse than mine. You cannot live with such justice. Today they imprisoned me, tomorrow they can imprison anyone,” he said.

According to him, in other countries they give rewards for investments, but in our country they imprison you.

When Nelidov was taken out of the courtroom, he managed to throw out one more phrase to the journalists:

"Tough times await us all!"

Alas, illiterate justice, which sacredly observes corporate operational-investigative-judicial solidarity, really does not bode well for our society. And how long can you lie and grossly distort established facts in the name of this very notorious solidarity? As they say, lie, but know when to stop!