Moscow Mayor goes on to evict families from their homes

Printable View

June 19th, 2006, 05:45 PM
mishau_

Moscow Mayor goes on to evict families from their homes

Moscow Mayor goes on to evict the retired from their private homes.
We've never had anything and hardly will, I think. Property seems too foreign a term for our country.

A retired old woman was taken to hospital due to a heart attack caused by the storm of fully equipped marins from a special riot squad. The marins came together with ushers to carry out the court decision inspired by the Moscow government about appropiation of those areas for the needs of the city.

http://lenta.ru/news/2006/06/19/butovo1/

And they're complaining of a lack of investment.

It's less important. The most important is that tomorrow you may find yourself in the similar situation, but everyone still keeps sielence.
June 20th, 2006, 07:42 AM
Scorpio

Re: Moscow Mayor goes on to evict families from their homes

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Moscow Mayor goes on to evict the retired from their private homes.

Although houses are private, they are standing on non-private land -- that's the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

We've never had anything and hardly will, I think. Property seems too foreign a term for our country.

My condolescences to *your* country...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

A retired old woman was taken to hospital due to a heart attack caused by the storm of fully equipped marins from a special riot squad. The marins came together with ushers to carry out the court decision inspired by the Moscow government about appropiation of those areas for the needs of the city.

If I remember correctly, this old women with her family refused to obey to court's decision for some time? And what the authories must do in this situation, what do you think? The law is the law.

(BTW, what are these mysterious "marins"? If you're are talking about OMON -- these are the special police forces -- maybe SWAT or somethink alike?)

Quote:

And they're complaining of a lack of investment.

*Who* are complaining? Moscow? I guess, it doesnt't. :)

Quote:

It's less important. The most important is that tomorrow you may find yourself in the similar situation, but everyone still keeps sielence.

Definitely, I can't find myself in similiar situation, because I'm not owning house nearby Moscow (built on municipal or belonging to oblast land). BTW, even if I had one, I'll do everything to get rid of it and move to the city. :)
June 20th, 2006, 08:39 AM
mishau_

Quote:

The law is the law.

No, court does not exists in Russia, you know. It's out of the law, just re-read that newsline attentively; besides officials themselves avoid abidance of it, look at plenty of cottages in and around Moscow. If I was born and grew up in the house and was allowed to buy it and have it as ptivate property, I'm not supposed to be deprivated it. I think munitipal ground exists for people to live on it, not for the officials to seize it and resell it again and again. My parents told me that in the Soviet times such things were done much fairer, not like unfair exchange a whole house for a tiny one-room apparment for people of different sexes.

Quote:

*Who* are complaining? Moscow? I guess, it doesnt't.

The country. It defenitely does. Moscow is now only a big purulent pimple on the body of whole Russia. People don't believe state officials.

Quote:

Definitely, I can't find myself in similiar situation, because I'm not owning house nearby Moscow (built on municipal or belonging to oblast land). BTW, even if I had one, I'll do everything to get rid of it and move to the city.

Slave mentality, not to have anything in order not to lose it. It doesn't mean that everyone must follow your idea like it's going on these days. You may be turned out of your apparment for a tiny compensation like many people I know. So, if you didn't like that newsline, here is another one:

http://www.vzglyad.ru/society/2006/6/1/35894.html

- kindergarten is to be demolished
- new kindergarten is in another munitipal area, 10 miles away
- new kindergarten it is packed
- new kindergarten is in bad conditions
- 150 kids are to wait in a 600 children queue.

the partents are still trying to save the cozy nook at the capital's outskirts in which their kids felt so nice.

http://dimarik.tushino.com/index.php?li ... 138&page=1
June 20th, 2006, 10:31 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

The law is the law.

No, court does not exists in Russia, you know.

As far as I know, it does. Believe me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

It's out of the law, just re-read that newsline attentively; besides officials themselves avoid abidance of it, look at plenty of cottages in and around Moscow.

-- And the cottages, constructed with violation of the existing laws (for example, in nature reservation areas) are now frequently due to be demolished.
(If you're watching news, this fact must not surprise you. ;) )

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

If I was born and grew up in the house and was allowed to buy it and have it as ptivate property, I'm not supposed to be deprivated it. I think munitipal ground exists for people to live on it, not for the officials to seize it and resell it again and again.

Consult ЖК РФ ("Жилищный кодекс Российской Федерации") for information concerning private property laws. If some articles of this code are violated in the case we are discussing, please point me to them. Otherwise, your complains are no more than pointless ranting.

Quote:

My parents told me that in the Soviet times such things were done much fairer, not like unfair exchange a whole house for a tiny one-room apparment for people of different sexes.

Ha-ha! From which times you became the advocate of "good Soviet times"?

Sorry, I must remind you, what in Soviet times there was not such concept as "private property for housing". At least, for city flats/apartments -- you *could not* buy them, sell them, lease them, etc. etc. (at least, legally).

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

*Who* are complaining? Moscow? I guess, it doesnt't.

The country. It defenitely does. Moscow is now only a big purulent pimple on the body of whole Russia. People don't believe state officials.

How pathetic. I guess, for residents of village Gadyukino the nearby 5,000 town is a "big purulent pimple" on their body. I wonder, where did you get this kind of village mentality?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

[quote:1eajr4b2]Definitely, I can't find myself in similiar situation, because I'm not owning house nearby Moscow (built on municipal or belonging to oblast land). BTW, even if I had one, I'll do everything to get rid of it and move to the city.

Slave mentality, not to have anything in order not to lose it.

You seem to be a bit of quick-minded on your suppositions.

Let me inform you: I *have* some property (precisely, 1-room apartment in Maryino), which costs roughly 10 times more than a house in village near South Butovo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

It doesn't mean that everyone must follow your idea like it's going on these days. You may be turned out of your apparment for a tiny compensation like many people I know.

Примерчики "многих известных тебе людей" -- в студию.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

So, if you didn't like that newsline, here is another one:

http://www.vzglyad.ru/society/2006/6/1/35894.html

- kindergarten is to be demolished
- new kindergarten is in another munitipal area, 10 miles away
- new kindergarten it is packed
- new kindergarten is in bad conditions
- 150 kids are to wait in a 600 children queue.

the partents are still trying to save the cozy nook at the capital's outskirts in which their kids felt so nice.

[/quote:1eajr4b2]

So? What does the kindergartens (which are the municipal property, I guess) do with the point of discussion? Yes, I know perfectly, what Moscow have a serious shortage of kindergartens -- but this looks like a different subject to me.
June 20th, 2006, 10:37 AM
igorfa100

Re: Moscow Mayor goes on to evict families from their homes

Quote:

If I remember correctly, this old women with her family refused to obey to court's decision for some time? And what the authories must do in this situation, what do you think? The law is the law.

if a law goes against the people then f.u.c.k the law and f.u.c.k the so called authorities. Any law is based on social contract, you can't pass laws that hurt people and just enforce them, this approach is totally evil. The more I live in this country the more I realize that Ronnie Raegan, R.I.P. had plentlt of good reasons to call our country the evil empire. These recent evictions is one more testimony to that.

Quote:

*Who* are complaining? Moscow? I guess, it doesnt't. :)

the "authorities" are, the gvtn, but how can anyone in their right mind invest in a country where at any time if Putin or Luzhkov like what you have, they can send in SWAT teams , snatch your property from you and lock you up in a God foresaken jail in siberia.

Quote:

Definitely, I can't find myself in similiar situation, because I'm not owning house nearby Moscow (built on municipal or belonging to oblast land). BTW, even if I had one, I'll do everything to get rid of it and move to the city. :)

you definately can, we are all vulnerable. As you so brilliantly put it "the law is the law" Supposed youy live in a city apartment that you bought for 50 or 100 thousand bucks, then Luzhkov, driving past your location, sees how nice it is and decides to have your apartment building torn down and have new office buildings constructed there. So what will you do then? Luzhkoff will just pass a law that you will be in breech of as soon as it's passed, then court marshals will show up and kick you out of your nice apartment and give you a one room Khrusthoba flat . I wonder what you'll be saying then
June 20th, 2006, 01:01 PM
mishau_

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... world.html

Hundreds of Muscovites have been ordered out of their homes so that they can be redeveloped by firms controlled by the city's mayor and his wife and handed to the KGB's successors.

Quote:

Ha-ha! From which times you became the advocate of "good Soviet times"?

That's not clever to think so. I just wanted to show the direction our country is moving - to the Soviet times and far behind.

Quote:

As far as I know, it does. Believe me.

Let me say I won't

Quote:

And the cottages, constructed with violation of the existing laws

existing? have they really existed before? If follow this idea, tomorrow a law may appear that will make your living in your appartament unlawul and according to the law you'll be ecivted. If the state sanctioned some privatization it can't have any retroactive force or else the state becomes no longer rerliable.

Quote:

I wonder what you'll be saying then

"The law is the the law" that's what will be said, I think :lol:
June 20th, 2006, 02:06 PM
Lampada

Такое не только в Москве.
http://www.barking-moonbat.com/index.ph ... _eviction/
June 20th, 2006, 04:27 PM
mishau_

Не удивительно, если на западе теперь живут Абрамович, Березовский, Закаев и т.п., но мне понравился заголовок:

WELCOME TO THE SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF KONNECTICUT!
June 20th, 2006, 05:07 PM
Ramil

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Не удивительно, если на западе теперь живут Абрамович, Березовский, Закаев и т.п., но мне понравился заголовок:

WELCOME TO THE SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF KONNECTICUT!

Рождённые в СССР меня поймут:
"Колхозники Техасщины, Оклахомщины и Примисиссипья перевыполнили план по сбору зерновых."
June 20th, 2006, 07:10 PM
mishau_

Quote:

Consult ЖК РФ ("Жилищный кодекс Российской Федерации") for information concerning private property laws. If some articles of this code are violated in the case we are discussing, please point me to them. Otherwise, your complains are no more than pointless ranting.

Paragraphs 2 and 35 of the Russian Constitution that are broken in some way
And actually I'm not complaining; I'm providing some information.

http://img.lenta.ru/news/2006/06/20/butovo/picture.jpg

- Что случилось? - спросил кавалер Помидор.
- Я уважаю закон, - с неудовольствием ответил пес. - Законные владельцы предъявили мне бесспорные документы, и мне пришлось уступить им домик.
Джанни Родари. "Приключения Чиполлино"

http://img.lenta.ru/articles/2006/06...vo/picture.jpg

Quote:

Рождённые в СССР меня поймут:

"Колхозники Техасщины, Оклахомщины и Примисиссипья перевыполнили план по сбору зерновых."

Не, вот как:

Все спокойно на канадско-мексиканской границе.
June 22nd, 2006, 09:07 AM
Scorpio

Let's take a look at the RF housing code.

http://pravonetwork.com.ru/content/Index22.htm

Выселение с предоставлением другого благоустроенного помещения является основным видом выселения.

Граждане выселяются из жилых домов государственного и муниципального жилищного фонда с предоставлением другого благоустроенного жилого помещения, если:

• дом, в котором находится жилое помещение, подлежит сносу;

• дом (жилое помещение) грозит обвалом;

• дом (жилое помещение) подлежит переоборудованию в нежилой.

Если дом, в котором находится жилое помещение, подлежит сносу в связи с отводом земельного участка для государственных или общественных нужд либо дом (жилое помещение) подлежит переоборудованию в нежилой, выселяемым из него гражданам другое благоустроенное жилое помещение предоставляется организацией, которой отводится земельный участок либо предназначается подлежащий переоборудованию дом (жилое помещение).

В иных случаях сноса дома гражданам, выселяемым из этого дома, другое благоустроенное жилое помещение предоставляется организацией, которой принадлежит дом, либо органом местного самоуправления.

Если дом (жилое помещение) грозит обвалом, гражданам, выселяемым из этого дома (жилого помещения), другое благоустроенное жилое помещение предоставляется по решению органа местного самоуправления за счет муниципального жилищного фонда либо за счет соответствующего предприятия, учреждения или организации.

Получаемое гражданином новое жилье должно быть благоустроенным,то есть отвечать установленным санитарным и техническим требованиям, быть по размеру не менее установленной нормы на одного человека и находиться в черте того же населенного пункта.

Если наниматель занимал отдельную квартиру или более одной комнаты, ему соответственно должна быть предоставлена отдельная квартира или помещение, состоящее из того же числа комнат.

Не допускается заселение одной комнаты лицами разного пола старше девяти лет, кроме супругов (ст. 41 ЖК РСФСР).

Помещение, предоставляемое выселяемому, должно быть указано в решении суда о выселении нанимателя, а при выселении в административном порядке - в постановлении прокурора.

So? Where are the violations?
June 22nd, 2006, 09:19 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/17/wmos17.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/12/17/ixworld.html
Hundreds of Muscovites have been ordered out of their homes so that they can be redeveloped by firms controlled by the city's mayor and his wife and handed to the KGB's successors.

"KGB's successors"? Oh, no. Another stinking piece of propaganda BS, I guess. Don't even bother to read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

Ha-ha! From which times you became the advocate of "good Soviet times"?

That's not clever to think so. I just wanted to show the direction our country is moving - to the Soviet times and far behind.

So, if you think the Soviet times were better, maybe the country is moving in the right direction? Or not? Please make yor position clear and consistent.
Frequently, I'm a advocate of Soviet times myself -- but *not* when we are discussing property laws (which were nearly absent at these times, and this wasn't good).

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

As far as I know, it does. Believe me.

Let me say I won't

"Не пра... Я не ве..."
(C) Фома неверующий в пасти у крокодила.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

And the cottages, constructed with violation of the existing laws

existing? have they really existed before? If follow this idea, tomorrow a law may appear that will make your living in your appartament unlawul and according to the law you'll be ecivted. If the state sanctioned some privatization it can't have any retroactive force or else the state becomes no longer rerliable.

As far as I know, the law existed perfectly when these cottages were built, they just were violated. Now they are enforced. Better later than never, right?
June 22nd, 2006, 09:26 AM
Scorpio

Re: Moscow Mayor goes on to evict families from their homes

Quote:

Originally Posted by igorfa100

you definately can, we are all vulnerable. As you so brilliantly put it "the law is the law" Supposed youy live in a city apartment that you bought for 50 or 100 thousand bucks, then Luzhkov, driving past your location, sees how nice it is and decides to have your apartment building torn down and have new office buildings constructed there. So what will you do then? Luzhkoff will just pass a law that you will be in breech of as soon as it's passed, then court marshals will show up and kick you out of your nice apartment and give you a one room Khrusthoba flat . I wonder what you'll be saying then

Laughable and pathetic. The "Khrusthoba"'s aren't build in Moscow for at least 30 years, I think. Instead, they are being demolished, and the residents are getting instead the apartments, which cost precisely 50-100 thousand bucks. Alas, the real situation is 100% opposite to the one you're describing.
June 22nd, 2006, 04:33 PM
mishau_

Единственный эффективный способ разрешения ситуации в Южном Бутове - приостановка судебного решения о выселении жильцов, заявила депутат ГД РФ Галина Хованская. По ее словам, "данное судебное решение противоречит статье 49 Земельного кодекса РФ, согласно которой изъятие недвижимости у граждан возможно только в исключительных случаях, для государственных нужд".

The only effective way to figure out the issue in Southern Butovo is an interruption of the court decision about the eviction of people as the deputy of the State Duma of Russian Federation Galina Khovanskaya said. By her words, "this court decision contradicts Paragraph 49 of the Russian Federation Land Code; according that paragraph, ejectment is alloed in only exceptional cases, for state needs". The Moscow authorities insist they can't be blamed, since it was not them, but court members who took that decision.

http://www.finmarket.ru/z/nws/hotnews.asp?id=500023
June 22nd, 2006, 05:03 PM
TATY

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpio

"KGB's successors"? Oh, no. Another stinking piece of propaganda BS, I guess. Don't even bother to read.

What? They said that because no-one in the UK knows what the FSB is, but people know what the KGB is. And the FSB is the successor to the KGB.

Funny how anything criticising Russia is propaganda. But yes there is no need to worry about housing in Russia. As the population plumets by 700,000 a year there will be plenty of empty places around
June 22nd, 2006, 05:37 PM
tdk2fe

I dunno - this type of thing happens in America all the time. Maybe not with all the theatrics, but if the Gov't wants to build a highway through your neighborhood, or decides that it is better for the city to rezone your neighborhood as 'commercial' and build a shopping mall, then there isn't much you can do about it. Actually, I'm pretty sure that the government can pretty much claim eminent domain over property whenever it wants.

tdk
June 22nd, 2006, 05:56 PM
Бармалей

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk2fe

I dunno - this type of thing happens in America all the time. Maybe not with all the theatrics, but if the Gov't wants to build a highway through your neighborhood, or decides that it is better for the city to rezone your neighborhood as 'commercial' and build a shopping mall, then there isn't much you can do about it. Actually, I'm pretty sure that the government can pretty much claim eminent domain over property whenever it wants.

tdk

See Lampada's post: the whole Kelo vs. New London thing. This IS a pretty exceptional case -- usually it's only applied in extreme cases where something actually important needs to come in (electricity/interstate/etc.). This case was a really flagrant abuse of eminent domain though. The argument was that the residents of the town would all benefit by some stupid mall -- which is a total crock of horsesh*t (coincidentally, it's a mall being built by the Pfizer (the Viagra-company) -- I guess they decided to use their product to rape some poor bastards who had land they coveted) Undoubtedly, it would bring some jobs and some tax revenue, but that wasn't the point of the law. It's all about the decision of some yokel-town council to make money at someone else's expense.
June 22nd, 2006, 06:05 PM
Layne

Quote:

Originally Posted by TATY

As the population plumets by 700,000 a year

Is this true? Are they selling that many russian brides? Maybe russians should go to india or china to take reproduction lessons. :lol:
June 22nd, 2006, 06:57 PM
mishau_

Quote:

Maybe russians should go to india or china to take reproduction lessons.

No, Indians and Chinese will be invited here for reproduction of the population.

Khovanskaya also remarked sarcastically in her radio interview that the city authorities first must evict their own wives and also families of the Russian goverment ministers from Rublevka and take that ground for the city's needs. It would be in full harmony with the law, she said.
June 23rd, 2006, 03:27 AM
Lampada

Quote:

Originally Posted by Бармалей

See Lampada's post: the whole Kelo vs. New London thing. This IS a pretty exceptional case -- usually it's only applied in extreme cases where something actually important needs to come in (electricity/interstate/etc.). This case was a really flagrant abuse of eminent domain though. The argument was that the residents of the town would all benefit by some stupid mall -- which is a total crock of horsesh*t (coincidentally, it's a mall being built by the Pfizer (the Viagra-company) -- I guess they decided to use their product to rape some poor bastards who had land they coveted) Undoubtedly, it would bring some jobs and some tax revenue, but that wasn't the point of the law. It's all about the decision of some yokel-town council to make money at someone else's expense.

:off: Бармалей, складно пишешь! :thumbs: Наверняка и по-русски так же будет получаться.
June 23rd, 2006, 07:38 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by TATY

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpio

"KGB's successors"? Oh, no. Another stinking piece of propaganda BS, I guess. Don't even bother to read.

What? They said that because no-one in the UK knows what the FSB is, but people know what the KGB is. And the FSB is the successor to the KGB.

In other words, this newspaper's comments aren't stupid and ignorant by themselves -- they are just adapted to stupidity and ignorance of target audience? Very well, this makes everything clear. Alas, my question remains: why I must waste my time reading such a nonsense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TATY

Funny how anything criticising Russia is propaganda.

"Criticising" and "brainwashing" are different things. A little hint: when, back in 1980's, Soviet TV showed poor unemployed americans living in the cardboard boxes, or european protesting against american missiles in Europe... was it "criticising" the West, or...?
June 23rd, 2006, 07:44 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Quote:

Maybe russians should go to india or china to take reproduction lessons.

No, Indians and Chinese will be invited here for reproduction of the population.

Why not? Or you prefer to invite the Turks, Algerians and North Africans, as the Europe does? Hmm, remembering some fresh newreports from France this doesn't look as a good idea... :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Khovanskaya also remarked sarcastically in her radio interview that the city authorities first must evict their own wives and also families of the Russian goverment ministers from Rublevka and take that ground for the city's needs. It would be in full harmony with the law, she said.

Yes, stangely she is right. It will be according to the law. So what?
June 23rd, 2006, 07:49 AM
scotcher

As far as I am aware, the FSB consider themselves the successor to the KGB. If they can, why can't anyone else?

Honestly Scorpio, your apparent need to defend the honour of your homeland is really quite hysterical sometimes.
June 23rd, 2006, 08:00 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Единственный эффективный способ разрешения ситуации в Южном Бутове - приостановка судебного решения о выселении жильцов, заявила депутат ГД РФ Галина Хованская. По ее словам, "данное судебное решение противоречит статье 49 Земельного кодекса РФ, согласно которой изъятие недвижимости у граждан возможно только в исключительных случаях, для государственных нужд".

Hmm-hmm, now we are appealing to RF Land Code? No problem, let's look at it, too:

http://www.garant.ru/main/12024624-007.htm#7000

Статья 49. Изъятие, в том числе путем выкупа, земельных участков для государственных или муниципальных нужд
1. Изъятие, в том числе путем выкупа, земельных участков для государственных или муниципальных нужд осуществляется в исключительных случаях, связанных с:
1) выполнением международных обязательств Российской Федерации;

2) размещением следующих объектов государственного или муниципального значения при отсутствии других вариантов возможного размещения этих объектов;
объекты федеральных энергетических систем и объекты энергетических систем регионального значения;
объекты использования атомной энергии;
объекты обороны и безопасности;
объекты федерального транспорта, путей сообщения, информатики и связи, а также объекты транспорта, путей сообщения, информатики и связи регионального значения;
объекты, обеспечивающие космическую деятельность;
объекты, обеспечивающие статус и защиту Государственной границы Российской Федерации;
линейные объекты федерального и регионального значения, обеспечивающие деятельность субъектов естественных монополий;
объекты электро-, газо-, тепло- и водоснабжения муниципального значения;
автомобильные дороги общего пользования в границах населенных пунктов и между населенными пунктами, мосты и иные транспортные инженерные сооружения местного значения в границах населенных пунктов и вне границ населенных пунктов;
3) иными обстоятельствами в установленных федеральными законами случаях, а применительно к изъятию, в том числе путем выкупа, земельных участков из земель, находящихся в собственности субъектов Российской Федерации или муниципальной собственности, в случаях, установленных законами субъектов Российской Федерации.
2. Утратил силу с 5 января 2005 г.

3. Условия и порядок изъятия, в том числе путем выкупа, земельных участков для государственных или муниципальных нужд устанавливаются статьей 55 настоящего Кодекса.

Take a look at the point 3, about "different circumstances"...
June 23rd, 2006, 08:42 AM
Theodor

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layne

Quote:

Originally Posted by TATY

As the population plumets by 700,000 a year

Is this true? Are they selling that many russian brides? Maybe russians should go to india or china to take reproduction lessons. :lol:

Yes it is true. But anyway more than 200 years needed to all people die. :)
Also linear forecasts are erroneous, because no one situation can be stable for long time.
June 23rd, 2006, 08:55 AM
Theodor

China has big population problem. China population ages, working population decrases.

P.S.: Good advice for all: listen mass media less, think more.
June 23rd, 2006, 10:02 AM
mishau_

The condition of compensation in this case is irrelevant. In fact they were left without any place to live. They need to get appropriatte compensation. I think Khovanskaya deserves more trust since she's experienced a lot. As for the paragraph, I paid attention to these lines

3) иными обстоятельствами в установленных федеральными законами случаях, а применительно к изъятию, в том числе путем выкупа, земельных участков из земель, находящихся в собственности субъектов Российской Федерации или муниципальной собственности, в случаях, установленных законами субъектов Российской Федерации.

I think the order of all those proceedings must be examined first. No one has a right to deprive people of their property wihtout essencial grounds. I think the officials must leave their cottages first in order to compensate all the expenses people invested into their property. The main idea I'm talking about is that people don't have protection if some one will come to approoriate their propertry.
June 27th, 2006, 08:02 AM
Scorpio

Процитировать что-ли ответ Лужкова всем турецким султанам, исключительно для равновесия:

"Мы с каждой семьей будем работать в режиме закона, будем работать в том числе и по этой семье в режиме судебного решения, будем работать в режиме справедливости, но жлобства мы не допустим, потому, что это жлобство касается других жителей, тех, которые стоят на очереди на жилье", - заявил Юрий Лужков, мэр Москвы.
June 27th, 2006, 08:23 AM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotcher

As far as I am aware, the FSB consider themselves the successor to the KGB. If they can, why can't anyone else?

Strictly speaking, FSB never officially stated, what it is successor of the KGB.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotcher

Honestly Scorpio, your apparent need to defend the honour of your homeland is really quite hysterical sometimes.

You don't realise my intents. This is not the question of "honour of your homeland"! I'm talking more about honor of poor western press readers, who are blatantly and shamelessly brainwashed by their own media. Do they realise, what it's their problem, not Russia's one?

I just found the new fresh example of the problem I'm talking about: article in International Herald Tribune (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/23/news/arussia.php):

"Before I moved here, I expected to queue for a week for some bread or a grotty potato," said Karen Hughes, a native of Scotland and a mother of four who has lived four years in Moscow.

When Hughes arrived, she had 17 kilograms, or about 37 pounds, of Weetabix cereal with her luggage. When she went to the supermarket, she found Cadbury chocolates and coffee and stacks of bread.

;)
June 27th, 2006, 09:16 AM
scotcher

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Strictly speaking, FSB never officially stated, what it is successor of the KGB.

You think so? Maybe you should have a look at the FSB's own website. Their History section traces their roots back all the way to the Checka, and their list of leaders goes all the way back to Iron Felix Dzerzhinskii.

http://www.fsb.ru/history/organi.html

http://www.fsb.ru/history/liders.html

It seems pretty clear to me that they value their roots and consider themselves the successor of the various Soviet services.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpio

You don't realise my intents. This is not the question of "honour of your homeland"! I'm talking more about honor of poor western press readers, who are blatantly and shamelessly brainwashed by their own media. Do they realise, what it's their problem, not Russia's one?

This is exactly what I mean Scorpio. Most 'poor western readers' are exactly as pig-ignorant of life in Russia as most Russians are of life in the UK or US, and both are fed as much horse-sh1t by their equally, in turns pig-ignorant, lazy, jingoistic, biased, and blickered press, as each other.

There simply doesn't need to be an anti-Russian consiracy or bias in the western press for this to occur, any more than there needs to be an anti-western consiracy in the Russian press for some of the chauvanistic drivel that passes for news over there to be written.

It's all a question of scale. You are quite right to question the motives and tone of articles written about your country when you feel they are innaccurate or unfair, but when you regularly get hysterical over a use of the tiniest marginally outdated stereotype in an op-ed piece it just detracts from whatever perfectly salient points you make elsewhere.
June 28th, 2006, 07:21 AM
mishau_

Quote:

"Мы с каждой семьей будем работать в режиме закона, будем работать в том числе и по этой семье в режиме судебного решения, будем работать в режиме справедливости, но жлобства мы не допустим, потому, что это жлобство касается других жителей, тех, которые стоят на очереди на жилье", - заявил Юрий Лужков, мэр Москвы.

That's mega-hypocritical, the compensation must be appropriate that's all or else he must leave his apparmetnt first for the sake of those queuing. Why do the other dwellers have to get new apparments on account of those evicted who invested their money and now are going to be deprivated of their property and land they were born and lived? What a load of noncence?

The laughable formal compensation that mayor offers to them mismatches tremendously. All of the officials have proved to be too cowardly or arrogent to get down to a direct dialog with the city dwellers. Governers who can't talk to people and find compromises are very unskillful and not worthy of being in power. I know that perfectly. In each department you will find either a revolving door or a turnstile and a few policemen as security just in order to hide from city dwellers. You know why? Because they all are wretched raiders and it's become a habit with them to use the unfriendly merging tactics in their governing and send marines to bludgeon innocent civillians. As that land has recently become part of Moscow it in no way means that the mayor at once have to evict all who live there. Over 70 villages in Moscow are going to be demolished. It's too big a sacrifice for "the needs of the city".

Scorpio, they may come to me and order me out at any moment and you're trying to convince me that it will be fine. What a sort of absurd!
June 30th, 2006, 12:27 PM
Scorpio

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

That's mega-hypocritical, the compensation must be appropriate that's all or else he must leave his apparmetnt first for the sake of those queuing. Why do the other dwellers have to get new apparments on account of those evicted who invested their money and now are going to be deprivated of their property and land they were born and lived? What a load of noncence?

If law isn't on your side, don't hesitate to resort to emotions: "land they were born and lived..."
Lots of villages were demolished since the beginning of 50's... they are now parts of Moscow, and so what? The former villagers are now residents of capital city. Do you really think they'll be happy still living in village conditions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

The laughable formal compensation that mayor offers to them mismatches tremendously.

Normal Moscow flat in exchange for wooden hovel. Does it look like a "laughable" compensation? (Flat costs 10 times more, at least.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

In each department you will find either a revolving door or a turnstile and a few policemen as security just in order to hide from city dwellers. You know why? Because they all are wretched raiders and it's become a habit with them to use the unfriendly merging tactics in their governing and send marines to bludgeon innocent civillians.

Another load of nonsence from your, which is a bit laughable to comment.
Yeah, some offices have revolving doors and police guards. Some commercial firms have a good security too... and even some private apartments have locks and keys... SO WHAT?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

As that land has recently become part of Moscow it in no way means that the mayor at once have to evict all who live there. Over 70 villages in Moscow are going to be demolished. It's too big a sacrifice for "the needs of the city".

Oh, these poor "sacrificed" villages -- with semi-rotten wooden huts nearly as comfortable as henhouses, nightmarish pebble roads, faulty electricity and outdoor water pumps and other services! Why aren't these villages in UNESCO cultural heritage list? This surely will stop Luzhkov from demolishing them! ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mishau_

Scorpio, they may come to me and order me out at any moment and you're trying to convince me that it will be fine. What a sort of absurd!

Really or kidding? So, may I ask, where do you live?
June 30th, 2006, 04:43 PM
mishau_

I live in a building the fate of which is still unclear, though the building is prefectly steady.

Quote:

If law isn't on your side,

Actually, we don't know on which side the law is. Any court decision does not stand for the law yet. In this country that's just it. There's a gap between the court and the law in this coutry. When the gab is too big the weak are being beaten. If all those evicted people had enough money to hire good lawyers, I think the police squard would never come to them. Courts here make so many mistakes and they are so unskillful and corrupted that every now and then the media are not too shy to decribe that, nothing to hide. The second part is how the executives use the law. When a law needs to be applied in some extraordinary cases (like borders demarcation), but the authorities use it here and there for their own puproses, I think such a law is too bad and must be improved. The law wasn't on the side of Jesus Christ whe he was executed nor was the law on the side of people burn on a stake by the Catholic church's suggestions. And the law did not support people who were evicted during Stalin's deportations. But we all understand that all those actions were too misanthropical. Under cover of the law today in Russia raider attacks and unfrieldly merging are beign commited everywhere. So I think the law must not be the pretext for any arbitrariness of the authorities or maybe some other raiders.

Quote:

Yeah, some offices have revolving doors and police guards. Some commercial firms have a good security too... and even some private apartments have locks and keys... SO WHAT?

Maybe you didn't see the situation as appropriate, but I mean to say it just too expensive for them, especially if only you saw what kind if system they install. Policemen that armed with guns have you seen that at any commercial office?

Quote:

Oh, these poor "sacrificed" villages -- with semi-rotten wooden huts nearly as comfortable as henhouses, nightmarish pebble roads, faulty electricity and outdoor water pumps and other services!

I don't know who made this assesment, but I saw people there that invested their money into cunstruction of brick nice cottages. All who wanted new flats got them indeed and their don't regrett, ok, but we're talking about the people who can't agrree that some one will decide what will be better for them and what will not. The rent may be inacceptable for those people after all. If my computer is outdated, no one is supposed to make me throw it and get a new one from him. It's against the law. I myself will decide what to buy and when.

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:37 AM.